Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the Trump thing, which cratered his car business
Yeah but he was able to personally make the call to kill millions of people around the world, he's just going back to his roots.
[flagged]
Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
121–130 of 642 posts
Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
You speak as if Elon Musk didn't buy tons of AI chips for full self driving (Dojo) and COMPLETELY flub it. It's the same as always. Musk himself is an awful business man. He relies upon buying the success of others and taking over. Outside of that, he's kind of awful. Initiatives started by Musk himself almost inevitably fail.
10 years returns S&P 500 (index of all those better than Musk): 261% Tesla: 2700% Disclaimer: My portfolio is 65% Tesla.
[deleted]
Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. This has always been, and will always be, the case. It's the same in things like copyright law - you can violate any software license if the copyright holder doesn't know you're doing it, or doesn't want to sue you, or doesn't sue you in time. It's the same with taxi medallions or hotel regulations if you're trying to start Uber or AirBNB.
What Altman and Brockman did still seems highly unethical.
That shouldn’t surprise anyone.
Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#124Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
The statute of limitations exists to prevent unreasonable delay, to protect defendants from prejudice due to loss of evidence to the passage of time, and to recognize that people who are injured tend to complain immediately and not sit on their claims. This case demonstrates why. Musk only complained after OpenAI was commercially successful with ChatGPT and after he started a competing effort. He repeatedly said “I d…
I know why statutes of limitation exist. I was wondering why it applied here. Apparently it wasn't completely straightforward, as nine jurors were needed to reach a decision on that point, instead of a single judge or even clerk.
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.
Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#126Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#127I think a lot about how there's a very plausible alternate history where Elon Musk controls most of the frontier of AI.
why would he run Anthropic?
As I understand it, Anthropic exists in part as a quirk of how Dario Amodei's experience at OpenAI went. In the world where Musk controls OpenAI, I don't think you can assume Anthropic splinters off the same way (for overdetermined reasons! I'm not saying Musk is a better manager.)
Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a business transaction: Twitters acquisition is among the worst deals in human history. As means to buy an election an Presidency: highly efficient use of capital with an undeniable short and long-term ROI.
> Twitters acquisition is among the worst deals in human history. That he won't have to pay for. Shareholders will, as part of the SpaceX IPO.
If shareholders have to pay the debt, then the shares will be less valuable, and Musk (whose wealth is measured in shares) will be less wealthy, no?
Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Musk could have brought the same lawsuit in 2019 or 2021, meaning his claims were untimely for the 3 year statute of limitations. Why is a hypothetical ground for this decision? "You didn't complain immediately the first time you got robbed, therefore all the robbing since then is covered by a statute of limitation".
Because there has to be some point. It's unjust to allow someone to sue 30 years later, as everyone would have a sword of Damocles hanging over their head waiting for the right moment to strike. And in general, if you didn't realize you were robbed for 3 years, perhaps it's the case that you weren't actually robbed.
So if I exchange your Rolex with a fake one and then you try to sell after 3 years and you notice it’s fake, it’s fine for you?
Re: Elon Musk has lost his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
He lost on the grounds of a statue of limitations defense which is exactly the kind of thing which is easily appealable.
In this case, I think it is a jury's finding of fact re: the statute of limitations. Unless the appellate court finds that the trial court and jury is clearly erroneous, it will usually give significant deference to that finding.
It's even harder than "clearly erroneous" (the standard applied when a judge makes fact findings without a jury). Under the Seventh Amendment, if a hypothetical reasonable jury could have reached the result that the actual jury did, then that's the ball game [0], even if the trial judge or appellate-court judges would have reached a different result.
[0] Assuming that the trial judge didn't materially screw up in admitting or excluding evidence, or in instructing the jury about the law, and also assuming no proof of juror bias or improper influence.