551–560 of 642 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, he had a secret plan to file his lawsuit late. Real n-dimensional chess here.
I don't say this in a "what a brilliant tactician he is" sense. I think AI in general caught him off guard and he was upset they didn't let him run OpenAI. I'm sure his lawyers told him he wasn't likely to win, so have to assume embarrassment of OpenAI was the goal.
Why do you have to assume that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Musk should have just made another company and then he’d have another 500 billion but he had that mistake and now it’s over. Then again we’ll see how well open ai does over the long term
I sometimes wonder, what does one need a second 500 billion that the first 500 billion is not enough for?
"Greediest man in the world Elon Musk..." "Captains of Greed" instead of "Captains of Industry" "Larry Ellison, notable for his legendary greed,"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have we colonized Mars yet? Asking for a friend.
I don't understand this thinking at all. I share all the disillusionment and cynicism about Musk, shared here by others. But he has also done amazing things. When someone declares they are going to create a Martian colony, something literally "out of this world", and against all odds makes unbelievable progress for years, including re-usable rockets that return and land vertically, more efficient powerful engines, an…
How are robotaxis coming along, versus the promises?
How are Optimus robots coming along, versus the promises?
How is the 2nd edition Roadster coming along, versus the promises?
You need to stop thinking of Musk in terms of a person who has "done amazing things" and letting that lead you to a belief that he has some kind of special ability in this space.
He's the money guy. He's occasionally managed to acquire talent that has done amazing things. This does not give him an innate "make amazing things happen" ability. He can throw money at bad ideas and ineffectual people. He can make something happen given the size of his wealth, but whether that actually achieves any of the stated goals is largely independent of his own actions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the Statute of Limitations isn't just on when he filed the claim, but when he found out or should have found out, by reasonable diligence that he had a claim at all. So the question before the jury has a significant component of "Should he have found out by this time?" Which is a question of fact, and facts are typically decided by juries, in the US at least. The two parties can agree together to let a judge…
Also, it's worth pointing out that the jury was obviously correct. Musk was lying his ass off. There is no possible way to imagine that Elon Musk, the hyper-online dude obsessed with news, AI, and AI news, would not be aware of the well-publicized events of a company he was personally massively invested in.
It seems to have been widely reported from the start[1] and throughout[2] that the statute of limitations was a key thing Musk's team had to prove. If it was so clear, why did people think this case had legs?
[0] https://polymarket.com/event/will-elon-musk-win-his-case-aga... [1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/musk-lawsuit-over-o... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/05/14/technology/openai-tr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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?
My suspicion is that winning might have been a secondary goal. When OpenAI goes to IPO, all the testimony of former executives about Altman's behavior is going to be in the public record. A lot of that testimony makes OpenAI sound very chaotic and poorly run. That could prevent large institutional investors from wanting to take the risk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People don’t look at the complexity of a human character. They take the easiest extreme and run with it. I was on another HN thread where practically everyone was calling Elon a psychopath. If you think objectively Elon is not a psychopath.
You’re right. Sociopath is probably a better fit.
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.
I genuinely believe he wants to go to Mars. Desperately. He's fundamentally a very smart socially inept largely sociopathic emotionally immature obsessively driven boy who read a lot of Heinlein as a kid. Everything about him indicates he sees himself as a saviour of humanity and the only person who has their priorities right and everybody should appreciate and adore him and it's so darn frustrating when they don't,…
It features a leader called the Elon who Musk may have been partly named after. (https://www.mind-war.com/p/the-elon-how-a-nazi-rocket-scient...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> something that was already pretty much dead You keep saying that, but prior to the acquisition Twitter had finally managed to start turning a profit.
> You keep saying that, but prior to the acquisition Twitter had finally managed to start turning a profit. Profit isn't the only thing that matters in this world ffs. Genuine content that was not relating to politics, the news and nerd topics had long since gone off to Tiktok, Snapchat, Instagram and the likes. Those of us who had been on Twitter since the early days 'member what we lost.
Which is not the argument. At all. You’re preaching to the choir, I very much argue against the relentless pursuit of profit and my comment history backs up that assertion.
But turning a profit does mean it wasn’t close to death. It was in fact starting to turn itself around to become sustainable (and thus not die for lack of resources). Whether you liked their direction is orthogonal. Change does not imply death.
> Genuine content that was not relating to politics
An emphasis on politics was not Twitter’s fault, it was a consequence of the world changing in a such a way discussing politics more actively became a necessity.
> Those of us who had been on Twitter since the early days 'member what we lost.
I had been on Twitter since the early days, and I disagree with you. I also disagree that Musk “gave it a final shot”, he pretty much started destroying it with obvious bad decisions from the start. He took a ship which was finally becoming able to remove more water than it was taking in and shot all its cannons at the hull.
I feel like there still needs to be a penalty to OpenAI here even if that doesn't favor Musk (even though he funded the whole thing). It is still a theft.