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

Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 1001 posts

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#401

Post by zozbot234 »

scarface_74 wrote: post #389
zozbot234 wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla and the Chinese manufacturers are not playing in anything near the same league. Making cheap EV's is in no way "outcompeting" Tesla. Rather, Tesla has shown that it can handily outcompete traditional luxury auto companies, beating them at their own game.

Someone hasn’t heard of the “Innovator’s Dilemma”. Tesla is far from the most profitable automaker and doesn’t even have the largest margins. Compare thier place in the automaker to say Apple’s place in the phone market

The Innovator's Dilemma is about new, disruptive technologies causing large, established, incumbent firms to fail. Are the Chinese EV makers developing new technologies?

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#402

Post by ben_w »

yodsanklai wrote: post #381
alpha_squared wrote: post #102

It feels like Musk is single-handedly making a great case for why unlimited accumulation of wealth is a bad idea. It's pretty colorful language, but my mind immediately jumps to "financial terrorist". He's using his enormous amount of wealth and influence as a weapon to bludgeon anyone and anything in his way.

> "financial terrorist" As a thought experiment, I like to wonder what would be the maximal amount of damage to humanity an extremely wealthy person could do entirely legally. Or if not damage, just trolling. For instance, writing X on the moon or something like that.

> entirely legally.

Hypothetically, would it be legal to fund a president whose policy was "let's nuke everyone"?

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#403

Post by ks2048 »

nostrademons wrote: post #165
artursapek wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sam gives off incredibly strong “pride cometh before the fall” energy.

So does Musk, and Trump, and Bernie, and AOC, and basically everyone who is a "personality" in today's America. ...which is probably accurate. I remember reading a r/AskHistorians question on why Robespierre was unable to maintain control of the Committee for Public Safety, and the answer was basically that in revolutionary France, everybody who stuck their neck out got it cut off. Within 10 years of the revolution's…

I don't think Bernie fits here. You can disagree with him, but he basically makes political / policy comments (the same ones he's made for decades too.

AOC falls a bit into the twitter-feud commentary, but Musk and Trump are on another level of embarrassing, lie-filled, garbage (also at all hours of the night, I think which tells you something too)

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#404

Post by senordevnyc »

yodsanklai wrote: post #386
dustingetz wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

was looking for a musk margin call in 2023, no such luck, now he’s VP and markets are still fake

My hope is that he'll eventually make some big mistakes that will send him to jail. Or does presidential grace give him total immunity?

More likely: Trump lets him slash and burn, then turns on him and throws him under the bus to the American public. Very typical Trump playbook.

Maybe he also takes a page from Putin’s playbook and puts him on trial in a very public and humiliating way, sending a clear message to all the other oligarchs.

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#405

Post by standardUser »

Xcelerate wrote: post #224
tqi wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely hate how much CEOs acting like children / influencers has become the norm. Maybe they were always like this, and twitter has just given us a window into it, but I for one would wholeheartedly welcome a return to "respectability" norms for business and civic leaders.

The name-calling in public discourse wears on me. Ad-hominems, bad faith arguments. I’ve gotten to where I avoid the news altogether because of this seemingly accelerating trend.

I can handle some name-calling, but not the bad faith arguments. They can be whiny man-children all they want so long as they act like rational adults when it matters. But they can't even muster that anymore. It's all self-indulgent performance all the time. And just enough people are willing eat it up that it keeps reinforcing the behavior.

We are being shitty parents to our billionaire class. Billionaires need boundaries if we want them to grow up and turn into respectable adults.

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#406

Post by easton »

kLADh232Ha wrote: post #369
_2d30 wrote: post #279

A lot of people are unsurprisingly throwing shade on Musk being involved here but I think it's really important to understand what this is fundamentally about: stopping or fundamentally changing OpenAI's plans to be spun off. The issue at hand is that OpenAI (the private, currently "capped profit" entity, henceforth in this post referred to as OpenAI-P) is trying to get spun out of control of the OpenAI non-profit (h…

I think Musk (probably using his Saudi admirers yet again) wants to buy OpenAI because he needs a working chatbot right now . For example, he is gutting the General Services Administration and wants to install a GSAi chatbot to replace the workers: https://www.wired.com/story/doge-chatbot-ai-first-agenda/ Perhaps "big balls" and the other geniuses he hired haven't managed to come up with a working solution. Musk need…

Putting aside that LLMs can’t replace people that way, it would be infinitely cheaper to just license one vs buying OpenAI. And you could say “but Elon wants government money”, but it’d take so long to make it back because inference is so cheap (and probably running at a loss if you’re OpenAI).

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#407

Post by [deleted] »

h0l0cube wrote: post #318
KerrAvon wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Trump was always this, but my theory is Musk cooked his brain on various drugs during COVID lockdown and is now incapable of feeling fear.

Both Musk and Trump have "fuck you money". That is, enough to not care about consequences and to attract leeching sycophants. At best this leads to arrested development, at worst the lack of any need for introspection or grounding reality checks by others regresses their decision making.

[deleted]

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#408

Post by scarface_74 »

zozbot234 wrote: post #401
scarface_74 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone hasn’t heard of the “Innovator’s Dilemma”. Tesla is far from the most profitable automaker and doesn’t even have the largest margins. Compare thier place in the automaker to say Apple’s place in the phone market

The Innovator's Dilemma is about new, disruptive technologies causing large, established, incumbent firms to fail. Are the Chinese EV makers developing new technologies?

That’s exactly the opposite of the Innovator’s Dilemna. That’s the startup bros definition they use in pitch decks. But not Clay Christenson’s definition

It’s about products coming into the market at the low end that are “good enough” when the current leaders “over serve” the market - “low end disruption”. Examples are PCs -> mainframes, Linux x86 servers -> Unix boxes, digital cameras/phones -> regular cameras and even smart phones to PCs

Surprisingly enough, another facet of the Innovator’s dilemma is that low end disruption partially happens because the companies involved are not vertically integrated like Tesla and each part of the supply chain focuses on optimizing their components and have scale efficiencies because the low end market has more volume.

We see that now with Chinese ODMs in the EV space. We saw that before with x86 PCs vs Macs and to an extent with smart phones. Apple is kind of unique as a vertically integrated company. But even they don’t make their own processors or manufacturer their own devices

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#409

Post by [deleted] »

yodsanklai wrote: post #381
alpha_squared wrote: post #102

It feels like Musk is single-handedly making a great case for why unlimited accumulation of wealth is a bad idea. It's pretty colorful language, but my mind immediately jumps to "financial terrorist". He's using his enormous amount of wealth and influence as a weapon to bludgeon anyone and anything in his way.

> "financial terrorist" As a thought experiment, I like to wonder what would be the maximal amount of damage to humanity an extremely wealthy person could do entirely legally. Or if not damage, just trolling. For instance, writing X on the moon or something like that.

[deleted]

Re: Musk-led group makes $97B bid for control of OpenAI

#410

Post by margalabargala »

delfinom wrote: post #303
margalabargala wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'll see. After throwing out a few Nazi salutes, Tesla sales have been tanking in Europe.

September 2025: President Musk announces all new federal vehicles will be Teslas.

September? It's early February. You really think it'll take 7 months?
Post reply on HN