Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 642 posts

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#281

Post by brookst »

ryandrake wrote: post #153
granzymes wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether the claim accrued before the statute of limitations expired is a question of fact, and is therefore reserved for the fact-finder which in this case was the jury.

It seems to me like justice should be about right vs wrong and illegal vs legal, and not “did you fill out form 27B/6 on time?” Dismissing a case on these kinds of trivial procedural grounds seems like the court just doesn’t want to do its job.

So you’d be OK if, say, a rental car sued you for putative damage to a car you rented 15 years ago?

Limiting time that an action can be brought is critical to having a fair trial.

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#282

Post by awesome_dude »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #245
hdndjsbbs wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone seriously still believe this? I thought as a society we had realized Musk is simply BSing whatever he feels like until it becomes untenable.

> Does anyone seriously still believe this? I do. It’s not his singular focus. But he continues to personally invest himself in pushing the boundaries of human spacefaring capability. That goal seems more meaningful to him that it does to e.g. Bezos, who seems to have a rocket company to look cool.

I know there's a risk when Musk's name comes up that everyone takes "all against" or "all for" approach - very polarising figure.

But I see a lot of that announcement, and the others someone else pointed to as his "aspirational, but ultimately never going to happen" goals - whether he believes the claims are achievable, or not, he says these things to energise people to working/paying for him to try

It costs him little to nothing to say, and other people's time, effort, and capital to try (and succeed/fail)

Tesla is falling to pieces now, and SpaceX is getting loaded up with completely unrelated projects (xAI) in order to try and make it look saleable (I guess) - it's very difficult to see the Mars announcement as anything but hype.

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#283

Post by KaiserPro »

robocat wrote: post #238
andrei_says_ wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sometimes wonder, what does one need a second 500 billion that the first 500 billion is not enough for?

Why did he need a second 250 billion after the first 250 billion? Makes me think of a inverted Zeno's paradox. Why do you need an extra dollar? I can answer for myself: New Zealand plans to tax the shit out of anyone that has more[A]. You need a fukton more than median wealth to be able to protect yourself against your own government. The type of person that enjoys chasing money doesn't stop. [A] via capital gains ta…

> I can answer for myself: New Zealand plans to tax the shit out of anyone that has more[A].

New Zeeland is an outlier in that it doesn't have capital gains tax.

Its not the end of the world to have captial gains tax.

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#284

Post by danaris »

robocat wrote: post #238
andrei_says_ wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sometimes wonder, what does one need a second 500 billion that the first 500 billion is not enough for?

Why did he need a second 250 billion after the first 250 billion? Makes me think of a inverted Zeno's paradox. Why do you need an extra dollar? I can answer for myself: New Zealand plans to tax the shit out of anyone that has more[A]. You need a fukton more than median wealth to be able to protect yourself against your own government. The type of person that enjoys chasing money doesn't stop. [A] via capital gains ta…

Yeah, no, this is bullshit.

You can't just apply One Simple Rule like this ("more money is always better" / "more money never makes a difference"). There is, objectively, an amount of money above which another dollar, or another billion, will never make a meaningful difference in your overall lifestyle[0].

The amount isn't a single bright line, but like with so many things, there's an area below it where extra money unquestionably improves your quality of life, and an area above it where it unquestionably doesn't.

[0] unless "your lifestyle" involves manipulating major governments and controlling the way people the world over think, which I wouldn't consider a legitimate part of "lifestyle"

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#285

Post by eukara »

moralestapia wrote: post #181

You can hate Musk all you want but between him and Scam I'd pick Musk any day. What they did to him was unfair, he put in all the money, office and initial push, he deserves a piece of the pie he created . This is quite unfair towards him.

Should have done it sooner. He took his time. He should know timing is important: That's why he frequently skips getting approval for his construction work, dumps drilling fluids (while feigning compliance!)... or builds an illegal power plant. He usually seems to have little patience.

We're all supposed to play by the same rules.

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#286

Post by pfdietz »

tombert wrote: post #240
peterfirefly wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a lot less dumb if you can drastically reduce the launch costs AND drastically increase the launch mass and size. If the Starship thing works out, he will have achieved that. It's also a lot less dumb if you can make your chips work well at higher temperatures. It's also a lot less dumb if you can space harden your chips better than anybody else can at the moment. This is what the Terafab thing is about (for now…

> It's a lot less dumb if you can drastically reduce the launch costs AND drastically increase the launch mass and size. If the Starship thing works out, he will have achieved that. No, it's still dumb. No matter how cheap they manage to make SpaceX launches realistically, there's really no situation that a space datacenter makes any sense compared to putting datacenters in, for example, Antarctica. If they built in…

> No matter how cheap they manage to make SpaceX launches realistically, there's really no situation that a space datacenter makes any sense compared to putting datacenters in, for example, Antarctica.

Solar energy is going to expensive in Antarctica.

We can imagine a situation where the server hardware becomes so cheap that the energy cost dominates. In that case, sticking the things in space could make sense, particularly if extremely low mass space PV (just a few microns thick) can be made to work and also work cheaply.

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#287

Post by johneth »

peterfirefly wrote: post #183
tombert wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced he's all that smart. Space datacenters seems like an unbelievably stupid idea to me, and I cannot imagine anyone who is ostensibly surrounded by tech seriously considering it. Well, no one sober anyway.

It's a lot less dumb if you can drastically reduce the launch costs AND drastically increase the launch mass and size. If the Starship thing works out, he will have achieved that. It's also a lot less dumb if you can make your chips work well at higher temperatures. It's also a lot less dumb if you can space harden your chips better than anybody else can at the moment. This is what the Terafab thing is about (for now…

So it's a lot less dumb if 50 really difficult and borderline physically impossible things happen. On the word of a conman. Right.

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#288

Post by danso »

ryandrake wrote: post #153
granzymes wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether the claim accrued before the statute of limitations expired is a question of fact, and is therefore reserved for the fact-finder which in this case was the jury.

It seems to me like justice should be about right vs wrong and illegal vs legal, and not “did you fill out form 27B/6 on time?” Dismissing a case on these kinds of trivial procedural grounds seems like the court just doesn’t want to do its job.

How do you imagine justice functioning in a system that lacks a statute of limitations?

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#289

Post by thesdev »

mrhottakes wrote: post #208
thesdev wrote: post #95

I hope he appeals. Not cheering for Musk, cheering for the fight.

It would just burn more cash unless he can somehow go back in time and change the facts.

If anyone can afford burning cash for his ego it's the richest man in the world with the biggest ego in the world.

Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI

#290

Post by johneth »

baggy_trough wrote: post #243
tombert wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a lot less dumb if you can drastically reduce the launch costs AND drastically increase the launch mass and size. If the Starship thing works out, he will have achieved that. No, it's still dumb. No matter how cheap they manage to make SpaceX launches realistically, there's really no situation that a space datacenter makes any sense compared to putting datacenters in, for example, Antarctica. If they built in…

It gets you out of the reach of the suffocating regulatory states here on Earth.

Are you forgetting that you need to launch from one of those "suffocating regulatory states"?
Post reply on HN