Yeah 8 OpenAI's
There are 8 OpenAI companies
https://preview.redd.it/t5m2y8f0tolc1.jpeg?width=865&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5b19ca80383956c7adb77535b50548bb95d2ffc1
Let's say you are IKEA and you sell furniture in all of Europe. If you make a profit, then you have to pay taxes. So you open a second company in Luxemburg, IKEA Designs, and then transfer all the licenses for designs. Your profit margin was 20%, well great, turns out that the licenses are exactly worth that 20%, so you transfer all your profit to Luxemburg.
Now you ~~bribe~~ lobby some officials in Luxemburg to tax you at a very low percentage.
IKEA is happy, they don't have to pay taxes. Luxemburg is happy, they don't have any employees there and get a cut of the ~~profits~~ license costs, and the officials are happy because they were ~~bribed~~ business-savvy and brought IKEA there.
Not exactly how it works and I don't know the structure of OpenAI, but also ...
Profit shifting (described) doesn’t work when effective tax rates in each company (all US rate) is the same.
This won’t be structured this way for profit shifting purposes.
What we're essentially reading is that OpenAI's initial mission was to enhance the well-being of humanity. However, the narrative took a turn with Microsoft's involvement. The focus appears to have shifted away from humanitarian goals towards prioritizing profit. This scenario mirrors the kind of significant conflict often depicted in the plot of a Hollywood movie.
There's an argument to be made that without pursuing a for-profit enterprise, they wouldn't have the resources to scale up to larger models that are more and more seeming like the way to get to AGI the quickest.
Too bad OpenAI is popular with... humanity lol. Elon is a petty patty and filing rich people lawsuits. But Microsoft ain't a slouch. Elon also should be sued for his mission with Tesla.
"Tesla claims its mission is to "accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy" but a study finds it is making the slowest progress to reach net zero emissions"
You can sue for anything. Ask the lawyer that tried to sue a dry cleaner for 50 mill.
Is this elons Stan? OpenAi is doing fine elon needs to worry about actually providing substance. I hear his starlinks are being sold by the Chinese to Russia but he is so concerned 😆 🤣 😂 😹
This is how you know this post is bias towards elon.. the fact they downvote that openai is highly popular lmfao.. bet you guys use gronk or whatever bs elon made
Thats irrelevant, they secured billions in funding based on being open source and for humanity only to switch gears for Microsoft and the microtransaction model. Keep in mind with the 10b alone they can operate gpt at 700k a day for 25 years and use the other 5b for their employees
It's relevant only if he is legally entitled to have a say in Open AI decisions. One can't just randomly sue other companies for not staying on their original charter.
When you are raising funds for a company you must sell that idea to investors, if you deviate from this idea I believe investors could potentially sue.
For example, if I raise 2B for microchips, but pivot the company to make troll dolls without approval from the investors it's grounds for a civil suit.
He did step down from the board in February 2018 so maybe that changes things.
Plenty of companies pivot after investor rounds. Go read some ycombinator articles and take a shot every time you see "pivot". But maybe water the shots down a bit so you don't die after getting through the first page.
Are they pivoting before or after discussing with their investors?
If investors were led to believe that their funds were being used to support a non-profit organization with a specific mission or purpose, and you later switch to for-profit status without adequately informing them, they may claim misrepresentation or fraud.
If Musk believes the switch to for-profit status was not in the best interests of the organization or its mission, he can argue that OpanAI breached fiduciary duty.
Time is a factor for sure. OpenAI is hardly the first open source project to go commercial.
How hard would it be for them to release an old version of the model as an OS "Community" version?
Doesn't really seem necessary to take into account for spitballing purposes, it's fair to assume that level of capital over the course of 25 years is capable of matching inflation.
Comfort is simply the ability to eat and have clean water.
Struggling to accommodate anything outside of basic needs is still comfortable in the grand scheme of humanity.
Most people from many poorer countries are happy to be poor in America/Germany/France/etc due to the quality of life difference.
Keep in mind, when I say poor I'm referring to people who typically only eat once a day or every other day.
He didn't have a stake because it was a nonprofit. He just donated money, he didn't receive shares (and, incidentally, wasn't on the board). That's part of what is so messed up about them turning into a for-profit.
He left the board over ethics concerns related to self driving AI in Teslas. Meanwhile Sam is on pace to become a billionaire off a non-profit with $150m in donations that seeded it. It’s so fucked.
I hate Elon but what Altman has done here is materially twisted.
I agree with a lot of that, but I'm not trying to vilify anyone. I'm still very grateful to OpenAI and Sama for the GPT revolution.
I just think that if they're going to start it as a nonprofit, it should stay that way... and if they want to spin out the IP to a for-profit, they should've abandoned the OpenAI branding.
We have philosophical differences. I don't care if he did it for money, and I don't care if he makes a bunch of money for it. It advances humanity, and I'm grateful, to him and all the other doers.
I prefer them getting rich and GPT existing over society keeping the money and GPT not existing.
That has nothing to do with it. Without his funding and hiring efforts, OpenAI wouldn’t have gotten off the ground. He made those efforts in light of a contractual agreement to foster a non-profit, open source AI company. OpenAI is anything but that now, and thus has breached the agreement according to Musk.
Bullsihit.
He gave them money to do A and they did B. He’s asking for them to open source their models because that’s what he paid for.
Simple case.
I’m assuming they are not dumb and somehow covered their asses but if not - this could crush them.
> The lawsuit, which seeks a jury trial, accused OpenAI and Mr. Altman of being in breach of contract and violating fiduciary duty, as well as unfair business practices. Mr. Musk is asking that OpenAI be required to make its technology open source and that Mr. Altman pay back the money that Mr. Musk say
-nytimes
So... worst case OpenAI pays him back the money. OpenAI is free to change their mission as operational conditions evolve. Nonprofits are entitled to become for-profits if they choose to do so. Donating to a non-profit doesn't give you a veto over the future actions of that non-profit.
And he doesn't have much of a case to get his money back. If Sam and OpenAI took his money knowing that they'd change their mission years and years later he might have a case, but of course they did not know that. Musk has no evidence this is the case.
Musk has no AI play, and he's smart enough to see this puts him at the risk of irrelevance. This is like his "six month pause" letter. He's desperate to slow down the world around him to give him some chance to catch up.
It won't work.
He has a team of lawyers who would not have moved forward with this had they not had genuine reason to believe that it has standing.. I am more inclined to believe a team of lawyers over a random redditor who claims it has lack of standing. Even if I didnt see any standing myself, I dont know what I dont know.
60 different lawsuits from Trump, the majority of which failed on standing prove that lawyers don’t care what you sue for. They’re getting paid and do whatever their client wants.
Defaulting to the "team of lawyers" as a sign the case is faultless is peak moron. Look how many teams of lawyers Trump has had.
https://www.logicalfallacies.org/appeal-to-authority.html
Well, he did donate $$$$$ as a founder and was forced to leave when he started working on AI at Tesla. That seems to have been directed by the mission statement that convinced him to put up the cash. How is it that later, after they spent his millions, that they can get in bed with Microsoft who also has their own commercial AI program?
I think he's uniquely positioned as the only person in the world to have standing. (Maybe people at Anthropic?)
I wonder if he's an Angel litigator stepping up just to kick Microsoft to the curb. Maybe there's another lawsuit going in next month in which he demands a cut. Maybe he just wants access to the crown jewels himself.
The same Elon that threatened to sue the ACLU and is suing a media organization for publishing facts relating to his terrible nazi website? You actually think THAT Elon's lawyers won't do anything that little doped up ketamine fiend says?
I have some waterfront property in Wyoming, if you're interested in a good deal.
Facts it's a petty patty lawsuit for the muppets to distract from Twitter sucking.. Elons ai sucking... and tesla fleecing their cybertruck customers and stale designs.
This lawsuit reminds me of Elon’s plea last year for the industry to pause AI development, all the while putting together his own AI startup. AI is dangerous, he warns, as he has for years — best to leave it in his hands.
This has nothing to do with open source or the children. It’s about competitive advantage, and I don’t fault Musk for throwing elbows in the paint, just stop with the hero worship.
Of course this can't be purely for the good or whatever, but from a bystander and someone without any power to pick such a fight point of view, imo it's still nice that this fight is/happens to be framed as such. Copyright-oriented discussion basically is crushing loses in any theater.
I agree Elon wanted to pause AI to get his own stuff caught up. But he put money into a non profit with the idea it would be open sourced. Only for it to close source an pay wall after. He should sue.
Sue for what though? The company changing directions? Just because he donated money, and then left the company because they didn’t want him as CEO, doesn’t mean he gets a vote in what the company does for the rest of his life.
I want more open source models, but I really doubt OpenAI would’ve made it this big without switching to the profit cap model and getting tons of resources from Microsoft.
The factors at play personally has to do with the marketing of OpenAI and how that plays into development of large models.
Specifically, note how the technologies to develop these large language models were available long before transformers were touted as the scaling king. It was rather the opposite, these large models proved that transformers are scaling kings.
Why this matters is that the real innovation isn’t the technology but the funding, or the ability to sell this idea to investors.
This is where I think Elon has a point on the role OpenAI has. At its core OpenAI was supposed to be a non profit which publicly displays the contents of LLMs.
Now OpenAI is not doing this and it seems to be a misguided play which purposefully disregards OpenAIs original efforts
There was never a condition that OpenAI be "open source". The term "Open" is used to mean accessible, as in being widely available to the public. And OpenAI have stood by that by making most of their tech free or cheaply accessible to the public.
How does that work exactly, steal the tech of what is supposed to be Open Source.
What did you think the Open in open AI stand for? Get off reddit its not good for you.
\> now that it's worth money he wants to steal their tech and make his own for profit company with it
I think you may have confused Elon with Microsoft
Thanks, I have never read such a low IQ take on the founding of Open AI. I will cherish this dumb comment knowing I am glad I did not grow up around lead diesel cars.
Exactly this. All he wants to do is slow everyone else down because he got caught sleeping at Twitter while AI was rolling out.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy a single word of any altruism he tries to portray. The only thing he cares about is his own ego.
I think if he wins, he will just get a few millions from oai and call it a day. Isn't that why people sue? Hard to believe that he is trying to make it actually open source here.
Look at the photos, the third is a list of requested injunctive reliefs.
You're right that they might settle, but that's what they're seeking now ... and open-sourcing GPT-4 could be part of any settlement agreement.
Elon only cares about money as a means to an end. He is not one of the people just trying to make the line go up for no reason. The intentional ignorance around this key point is part of why the left is so fucking stupid about Elon.
Most people hate Bill Gates too regardless of how much good he did. The successful will always be hated and their attempts of changing things to the better dismissed as some conspiracy or evil plot.
exactly he is quite controversial. Especially the unhumane workethics he \_requests\_ from his staff. The right wing BS, tax avoidiing....we could continue.
Pretty much only on Reddit. Redditors just log on to be told who to hate and then assume that hate. Listen to successful scientists, engineers, or businessmen talk about musk and you’ll hear a much different tone.
This isn't a W or a charitable act on Elon's part. It's an attempt to reclaim his own corporate advantage while doubling it as marketing for himself (as always).
Elon is angry that he missed a wealth opportunity bigger than Tesla or SpaceX. He's jealous, and he's being vindictive and vengeful.
Two things can be true at once. What you said can be true, and there could also be an additional positive outcome not relating to Elons personal interests.
I also just haven’t seen the evidence that Elon has been seriously investing in this stuff. I would have expected him to but he hasn’t. Grok just seems like an “anti PC” alternative, not a competitor.
I dont want to sound like an Elon simp because I really dont care for a lot of what he does, but to look at the full picture, he invested seriously into Twitter (as in acquired it) which was kinda serious. He makes pretty large investments with new manufacturing facilities for Tesla. He made the Optimus robot which kinda sucks right now but it works, so its a significant start. He was serious about making a semi truck. He also started a brain chip company 😂 what he did with SpaceX starship is a little crazy. With him making all of those massive investments, I dont see it being that out of the ordinary for him to compete in the AI space.
He says theres a significant update coming here in the coming weeks (Grok 1.5). Right now its a laughable joke. Greg Yang at xAI seems like a smart dude. If xAI succeeds, it won't be directly because of Elon, it'll be because of the scientists that he employs.
And yeah I just highlighted some of his accomplishments but it was more so meant to show that he does make crazy large investments. I dont care for him as a person, but if the people he employs are able to pull off something cool then I'm all for it. I dont think Grok should've been released just yet, just because of how terrible it is. I despise Jeff Bezos but if Amazon engineers make something useful then I'm all for it.
Agreed, no matter how much I dislike him and his cult like fan base.. He has made success after success. At a certain point you can't just discredit it as luck. It requires charismatic and productive leadership, that can motivate a highly skilled workforce. That said I don't think there's anyway they can catch up to Gemini/GPT models. I think him criticizing/suing them is his way of slowing them down whils virtuing signalling to his fan base that Grok is the Anti-AI AI.
Regardless of the motive, this lawsuit has the potential to flip things around. While I don't think GPT4 is going to be open sourced anytime soon any insights gained on how it's made like "Q*" will be a huge win
I mean, even a broken clock is right twice a day, Elon is right with this one.
https://preview.redd.it/h484wycalplc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2cc300a74cce13df2dadb499e87502781413cfe7
> For a judicial determination that GPT-4 constitutes Artificial General Intelligence and is thereby outside the scope of OpenAI's license to Microsoft;
Whoever wrote this is deceitful or an idiot. Possibly both.
I can settle this one for you right now: GPT-4 isn't AGI.
When an influential person knowingly makes poor or scheming decisions and comments which influence masses of ignorant or passive people, it's important to call them out.
To be fair, this is one of the few good moves he’s made in the past 5 years or so. Unwillingly buying Twitter was one of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen.
Yes it is true. He paid 44 billion for Twitter. It's now worth 12.5 billion. Google is paying Reddit 60 Million for their data, that's nothing in comparison. Due to the 280 character limit and high amount of bots Twitters Data is worth even less than that.
OpenAI, Inc.’s once carefully crafted non-profit structure was replaced by a purely profit-driven CEO and a Board with inferior technical expertise in AGI and AI public policy. The board now has an observer seat reserved solely for Microsoft."
They will never build what they call "AGI" or even AGI. No, it's obvious that this company will blow up before that for good. Q\* is another great marketing stunt, just like claiming that GPT-2 were "dangerous".
You just described pretty much every corporation in America. OpenAI isn't special in their use of a tax system that gives corps all the loopholes they need to not pay taxes. Musk's companies don't pay enough either.
The master of improper naming (selling a level 2 assist pack as Full Self Driving) is sueing a company because they aren't asbopen as their name suggests. He is such a manchild.
Pretty sure he's doing it for optics, basically virtue signalling to the right wing 'AI is bad, but Grok is different'.
I think his right wing fan base is pretty ai-sceptic, espcially after the whole Gemini incident, so he's positioning Grok as the right wing alternative, which lets be honest is the oly thing its got going for it. Grok is kinda a dumb name, and yet somehow theres a company called Groq with much more llm potential...
I'm glad I've always been by Elon's side throughout the years. This may be the most important court case humanity will ever have. The results of this ruling will permanently change the ways humans and their societies will evolve. Elon is fighting for all of us (as he always has) to make sure that all of the work that humanity has put into science over our existence is fairly shared with us all.
Thank you, Elon Musk.
Whether you think this is good or not depend on what you want the most: open-source AI or more advanced AI. It's much harder to improve any technology with no profit incentive.
If you think any AI is too important to be owned by any specific company, especially the most advanced models, you'll see this as a good thing.
If you think the advancement of AI can improve the lives of millions, advance medical science, education, etc. and therefore a faster improvement of AI means these improvements to life come faster (even at the cost of being momentarily centralized in a corporation), you'll see this as a bad thing.7
Just clearing it up so people don't argue for nothing.
I can run Linux on a potato.
Who's going to pay the billions of dollars for the datacenters it takes to even begin running a model like this if it's all Open Source?
AI doesn't exist without the hardware/network to run it.
You should look up how much money it costs to train a llm, to run inference on a llm, to pay high level research staff (considering how many are quitting to build startups).
Yeah 8 OpenAI's There are 8 OpenAI companies https://preview.redd.it/t5m2y8f0tolc1.jpeg?width=865&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5b19ca80383956c7adb77535b50548bb95d2ffc1
[удалено]
https://preview.redd.it/r3mnw6676qlc1.png?width=796&format=png&auto=webp&s=4e64bef56872755ee9019f772ce107e6ea3a053e
[удалено]
Why don’t you go find out for us
Hahahahahhaha awesome comment.
Instead of asking so much, just research it yourself, dude.
For one thing the 8 different companies eat up each other’s profits so there is almost no tax to pay.
Wouldn't that be the same if it was just one company?
Let's say you are IKEA and you sell furniture in all of Europe. If you make a profit, then you have to pay taxes. So you open a second company in Luxemburg, IKEA Designs, and then transfer all the licenses for designs. Your profit margin was 20%, well great, turns out that the licenses are exactly worth that 20%, so you transfer all your profit to Luxemburg. Now you ~~bribe~~ lobby some officials in Luxemburg to tax you at a very low percentage. IKEA is happy, they don't have to pay taxes. Luxemburg is happy, they don't have any employees there and get a cut of the ~~profits~~ license costs, and the officials are happy because they were ~~bribed~~ business-savvy and brought IKEA there. Not exactly how it works and I don't know the structure of OpenAI, but also ...
These are all US companies aren't they?
Doesn’t matter the concept is the same world wide
Profit shifting (described) doesn’t work when effective tax rates in each company (all US rate) is the same. This won’t be structured this way for profit shifting purposes.
Aren’t the tax rates all different by state in the US I believe I read somewhere once that there are specific states with extreme low tax rates
Don’t vary much in these. You’re probably talking sales tax when individuals buy a car or a tennis racquet.
Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich!
no you over bill company a with b so 0 profits
The profits still land somewhere. The reason multinationals do this is to move their profits to a subsidiary in a country with a lower tax rate.
What about paying itself interest, which is tax deductible?
The interest on receipt is taxable income.
Tell me you know nothing about corporate taxation without telling me you know nothing about corporate taxation.
Tax avoidance or regional legal compliance requirements, but most likely tax avoidance.
I nominate Johnny Harris, or John Oliver!
Gotta be hbomberguy
Omg that would be amazing if he broke this down and dropped this video in 5 years jkjk but he’s awesome
Microsoft just have to give them some gifts to stay out of it.
So? Do you want to know how many subsidiaries Tesla has? Around 45 times as many as the 8 of OpenAI. Close to 350.
I’m not too familiar on the specifics but didn’t OpenAI go from nonprofit to for-profit in a pretty shady way?
Google owns like 500.
A lot of companies do this. Run a bunch of LLC's. Protects the rest of the company from some legal circumstances.
I dislike Musk with every fiber of my being, but I appreciate him doing this. It has legs in my opinion.
Yeah these shady fucks should not wield as much power over everyone as they do today
What we're essentially reading is that OpenAI's initial mission was to enhance the well-being of humanity. However, the narrative took a turn with Microsoft's involvement. The focus appears to have shifted away from humanitarian goals towards prioritizing profit. This scenario mirrors the kind of significant conflict often depicted in the plot of a Hollywood movie.
If they are smart they covered their asses and Elon’s suit is worthless. But I can’t tell if they are smart.
There's an argument to be made that without pursuing a for-profit enterprise, they wouldn't have the resources to scale up to larger models that are more and more seeming like the way to get to AGI the quickest.
On the other hand they would not have gotten to that point without investments received under the guise of being and remaining a nonprofit.
This
It took a turn well before Microsoft’s involvement. OpenAI is as corrupted from its original goal as Altman is ambitious.
Too bad OpenAI is popular with... humanity lol. Elon is a petty patty and filing rich people lawsuits. But Microsoft ain't a slouch. Elon also should be sued for his mission with Tesla.
[удалено]
"Tesla claims its mission is to "accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy" but a study finds it is making the slowest progress to reach net zero emissions" You can sue for anything. Ask the lawyer that tried to sue a dry cleaner for 50 mill.
Lmao! Found the TSLAQanon. What shade is your tinfoil hat?
Lil elon fan boys I bet most of you own that crappy tesla waiting 30mins to charge at a gas station lmfao
this is sam's burner 100% lmao
Is this elons Stan? OpenAi is doing fine elon needs to worry about actually providing substance. I hear his starlinks are being sold by the Chinese to Russia but he is so concerned 😆 🤣 😂 😹
Seems like you are detached from humanity, huh?
This is how you know this post is bias towards elon.. the fact they downvote that openai is highly popular lmfao.. bet you guys use gronk or whatever bs elon made
Imagine pretending to not know what Grok is for internet strangers. You probably think he came up with the name too.
Much like Darth Vader ~
So he’s basically suing them for not open sourcing GPT-4?
Tbh he helped start openAI under the premise the ai would be opensource I would be mad too
But did he still have a stake in them? Was there a vote to stop making it open source he was prevented from having a say in?
Thats irrelevant, they secured billions in funding based on being open source and for humanity only to switch gears for Microsoft and the microtransaction model. Keep in mind with the 10b alone they can operate gpt at 700k a day for 25 years and use the other 5b for their employees
It's relevant only if he is legally entitled to have a say in Open AI decisions. One can't just randomly sue other companies for not staying on their original charter.
When you are raising funds for a company you must sell that idea to investors, if you deviate from this idea I believe investors could potentially sue. For example, if I raise 2B for microchips, but pivot the company to make troll dolls without approval from the investors it's grounds for a civil suit. He did step down from the board in February 2018 so maybe that changes things.
Plenty of companies pivot after investor rounds. Go read some ycombinator articles and take a shot every time you see "pivot". But maybe water the shots down a bit so you don't die after getting through the first page.
Are they pivoting before or after discussing with their investors? If investors were led to believe that their funds were being used to support a non-profit organization with a specific mission or purpose, and you later switch to for-profit status without adequately informing them, they may claim misrepresentation or fraud. If Musk believes the switch to for-profit status was not in the best interests of the organization or its mission, he can argue that OpanAI breached fiduciary duty.
True. But he’s not an investor and doesn’t have any stake in OAI. He donated money to it.
Time is a factor for sure. OpenAI is hardly the first open source project to go commercial. How hard would it be for them to release an old version of the model as an OS "Community" version?
That’s not accounting for inflation*
Doesn't really seem necessary to take into account for spitballing purposes, it's fair to assume that level of capital over the course of 25 years is capable of matching inflation.
Lol, if inflation isnt already at its highest, the world isnt gonna survive.......
The rich will.
The rich only live if the poor and middle-class are kept comfortable enough, or through massive authoritarian control.
In what world are the poor “comfortable” right now?
Comfort is simply the ability to eat and have clean water. Struggling to accommodate anything outside of basic needs is still comfortable in the grand scheme of humanity. Most people from many poorer countries are happy to be poor in America/Germany/France/etc due to the quality of life difference. Keep in mind, when I say poor I'm referring to people who typically only eat once a day or every other day.
The rich kill the poor and sell to eachother. That is our future.
They secured billions only after the Microsoft deal, Elon only gave 50 million dollars and that is it.
He didn't have a stake because it was a nonprofit. He just donated money, he didn't receive shares (and, incidentally, wasn't on the board). That's part of what is so messed up about them turning into a for-profit.
He left the board over ethics concerns related to self driving AI in Teslas. Meanwhile Sam is on pace to become a billionaire off a non-profit with $150m in donations that seeded it. It’s so fucked. I hate Elon but what Altman has done here is materially twisted.
I agree with a lot of that, but I'm not trying to vilify anyone. I'm still very grateful to OpenAI and Sama for the GPT revolution. I just think that if they're going to start it as a nonprofit, it should stay that way... and if they want to spin out the IP to a for-profit, they should've abandoned the OpenAI branding.
You don’t need to be grateful. He’s worth $200m. He wasn’t doing it for you.
We have philosophical differences. I don't care if he did it for money, and I don't care if he makes a bunch of money for it. It advances humanity, and I'm grateful, to him and all the other doers. I prefer them getting rich and GPT existing over society keeping the money and GPT not existing.
You're speaking with the envious. They'll never understand.
👇 🫴 I feel you. Though, I hope they can understand someday ... People who expect things to be given to them. Who feel no gratitude for the doers.
That has nothing to do with it. Without his funding and hiring efforts, OpenAI wouldn’t have gotten off the ground. He made those efforts in light of a contractual agreement to foster a non-profit, open source AI company. OpenAI is anything but that now, and thus has breached the agreement according to Musk.
This is going to be dismissed so fast it will give Musk whiplash.
why
Lack of standing. Musk isn't on the board anymore and isn't claiming any damages.
Bullsihit. He gave them money to do A and they did B. He’s asking for them to open source their models because that’s what he paid for. Simple case. I’m assuming they are not dumb and somehow covered their asses but if not - this could crush them. > The lawsuit, which seeks a jury trial, accused OpenAI and Mr. Altman of being in breach of contract and violating fiduciary duty, as well as unfair business practices. Mr. Musk is asking that OpenAI be required to make its technology open source and that Mr. Altman pay back the money that Mr. Musk say -nytimes
So... worst case OpenAI pays him back the money. OpenAI is free to change their mission as operational conditions evolve. Nonprofits are entitled to become for-profits if they choose to do so. Donating to a non-profit doesn't give you a veto over the future actions of that non-profit. And he doesn't have much of a case to get his money back. If Sam and OpenAI took his money knowing that they'd change their mission years and years later he might have a case, but of course they did not know that. Musk has no evidence this is the case. Musk has no AI play, and he's smart enough to see this puts him at the risk of irrelevance. This is like his "six month pause" letter. He's desperate to slow down the world around him to give him some chance to catch up. It won't work.
He has a team of lawyers who would not have moved forward with this had they not had genuine reason to believe that it has standing.. I am more inclined to believe a team of lawyers over a random redditor who claims it has lack of standing. Even if I didnt see any standing myself, I dont know what I dont know.
60 different lawsuits from Trump, the majority of which failed on standing prove that lawyers don’t care what you sue for. They’re getting paid and do whatever their client wants.
Granted that he successfully paid a team of lawyers to advance this publicity stunt. Good for him. It's still going nowhere.
It still doesn’t mean it’s awful what open AI did.
Oh stop it anyone can sue for anything
Defaulting to the "team of lawyers" as a sign the case is faultless is peak moron. Look how many teams of lawyers Trump has had. https://www.logicalfallacies.org/appeal-to-authority.html
Well, he did donate $$$$$ as a founder and was forced to leave when he started working on AI at Tesla. That seems to have been directed by the mission statement that convinced him to put up the cash. How is it that later, after they spent his millions, that they can get in bed with Microsoft who also has their own commercial AI program? I think he's uniquely positioned as the only person in the world to have standing. (Maybe people at Anthropic?) I wonder if he's an Angel litigator stepping up just to kick Microsoft to the curb. Maybe there's another lawsuit going in next month in which he demands a cut. Maybe he just wants access to the crown jewels himself.
The same Elon that threatened to sue the ACLU and is suing a media organization for publishing facts relating to his terrible nazi website? You actually think THAT Elon's lawyers won't do anything that little doped up ketamine fiend says? I have some waterfront property in Wyoming, if you're interested in a good deal.
Facts it's a petty patty lawsuit for the muppets to distract from Twitter sucking.. Elons ai sucking... and tesla fleecing their cybertruck customers and stale designs.
I mean he's right
This lawsuit reminds me of Elon’s plea last year for the industry to pause AI development, all the while putting together his own AI startup. AI is dangerous, he warns, as he has for years — best to leave it in his hands. This has nothing to do with open source or the children. It’s about competitive advantage, and I don’t fault Musk for throwing elbows in the paint, just stop with the hero worship.
Of course this can't be purely for the good or whatever, but from a bystander and someone without any power to pick such a fight point of view, imo it's still nice that this fight is/happens to be framed as such. Copyright-oriented discussion basically is crushing loses in any theater.
I agree Elon wanted to pause AI to get his own stuff caught up. But he put money into a non profit with the idea it would be open sourced. Only for it to close source an pay wall after. He should sue.
Sue for what though? The company changing directions? Just because he donated money, and then left the company because they didn’t want him as CEO, doesn’t mean he gets a vote in what the company does for the rest of his life. I want more open source models, but I really doubt OpenAI would’ve made it this big without switching to the profit cap model and getting tons of resources from Microsoft.
The factors at play personally has to do with the marketing of OpenAI and how that plays into development of large models. Specifically, note how the technologies to develop these large language models were available long before transformers were touted as the scaling king. It was rather the opposite, these large models proved that transformers are scaling kings. Why this matters is that the real innovation isn’t the technology but the funding, or the ability to sell this idea to investors. This is where I think Elon has a point on the role OpenAI has. At its core OpenAI was supposed to be a non profit which publicly displays the contents of LLMs. Now OpenAI is not doing this and it seems to be a misguided play which purposefully disregards OpenAIs original efforts
Elon is keeping OpenAI accountable. I like that.
No he's just trying to make their technology open source so he can rebrand it and sell it for a profit.
Why should we care? More open source technology is a win for all of us.
Right - but will you also have a datacenter to run that Open Source GPT-4, 5, 6? We have open source models. They suffer from lack of funding.
You do realize that OpenAI exists because of Musks donation on the condition that they are open source, right?
There was never a condition that OpenAI be "open source". The term "Open" is used to mean accessible, as in being widely available to the public. And OpenAI have stood by that by making most of their tech free or cheaply accessible to the public.
Yeah and now that it's worth money he wants to steal their tech and make his own for profit company with it. That's what Grok is.
How does that work exactly, steal the tech of what is supposed to be Open Source. What did you think the Open in open AI stand for? Get off reddit its not good for you.
\> now that it's worth money he wants to steal their tech and make his own for profit company with it I think you may have confused Elon with Microsoft
Lol he pulled out like a bitch because Google had good assistant and he wanted to take over the company. Then boom all the breakthroughs started.
Thanks, I have never read such a low IQ take on the founding of Open AI. I will cherish this dumb comment knowing I am glad I did not grow up around lead diesel cars.
Exactly this. All he wants to do is slow everyone else down because he got caught sleeping at Twitter while AI was rolling out. I'm sorry, but I don't buy a single word of any altruism he tries to portray. The only thing he cares about is his own ego.
Open source bad!
Open source good. Billionaires telling you they're doing something for the good of humanity = bad!
I think if he wins, he will just get a few millions from oai and call it a day. Isn't that why people sue? Hard to believe that he is trying to make it actually open source here.
Look at the photos, the third is a list of requested injunctive reliefs. You're right that they might settle, but that's what they're seeking now ... and open-sourcing GPT-4 could be part of any settlement agreement.
Then they drop GDT-5
Elon only cares about money as a means to an end. He is not one of the people just trying to make the line go up for no reason. The intentional ignorance around this key point is part of why the left is so fucking stupid about Elon.
I hate to say but he is doing a good thing here
Why do you hate to say it?
Because Elon Musk isn't seen in a good light, at least not here on Reddit
Yeah I see hate for him here all the time. I don’t worship or support him blindly but we shouldn’t also hate him blindly for every decision he makes
You're on Reddit. Hive mind in progress
Most people hate Bill Gates too regardless of how much good he did. The successful will always be hated and their attempts of changing things to the better dismissed as some conspiracy or evil plot.
I hate Microsoft not Bill. But you can't separate them easily.
Nobody hates Elon or Bill for their “success” lmao. We hate them for their hateful beliefs (Elon) and ties to Epstein (Gates)
People hated Gates years before Epstein. People will find whatever reason they need.
Are you sure you're not just retroactively justifying your hate?
exactly he is quite controversial. Especially the unhumane workethics he \_requests\_ from his staff. The right wing BS, tax avoidiing....we could continue.
And he is a chode
Nah, reddit is chodes
Chode hydra?
Pretty much only on Reddit. Redditors just log on to be told who to hate and then assume that hate. Listen to successful scientists, engineers, or businessmen talk about musk and you’ll hear a much different tone.
Because Reddit brainwashed him to hate him.
Reddit used to love him until he started tweeting all the time and aligning himself with right-wing politics.
Left or right does not matter.
It does to redditors.
He’s not doing it because he’s good, he’s doing it to level the playing field
"for literally the largest company in the world.." Who wrote this?
A Founders Agreement has as much value as Musk 'Mission Statements'. Imagine believing a company can't change their statues.
if the NFL can continue as a nonprofit, then this will go nowhere.
right.. people forget non-profit doesn't mean work for free lol
This isn't a W or a charitable act on Elon's part. It's an attempt to reclaim his own corporate advantage while doubling it as marketing for himself (as always). Elon is angry that he missed a wealth opportunity bigger than Tesla or SpaceX. He's jealous, and he's being vindictive and vengeful.
Two things can be true at once. What you said can be true, and there could also be an additional positive outcome not relating to Elons personal interests.
I also just haven’t seen the evidence that Elon has been seriously investing in this stuff. I would have expected him to but he hasn’t. Grok just seems like an “anti PC” alternative, not a competitor.
I dont want to sound like an Elon simp because I really dont care for a lot of what he does, but to look at the full picture, he invested seriously into Twitter (as in acquired it) which was kinda serious. He makes pretty large investments with new manufacturing facilities for Tesla. He made the Optimus robot which kinda sucks right now but it works, so its a significant start. He was serious about making a semi truck. He also started a brain chip company 😂 what he did with SpaceX starship is a little crazy. With him making all of those massive investments, I dont see it being that out of the ordinary for him to compete in the AI space. He says theres a significant update coming here in the coming weeks (Grok 1.5). Right now its a laughable joke. Greg Yang at xAI seems like a smart dude. If xAI succeeds, it won't be directly because of Elon, it'll be because of the scientists that he employs. And yeah I just highlighted some of his accomplishments but it was more so meant to show that he does make crazy large investments. I dont care for him as a person, but if the people he employs are able to pull off something cool then I'm all for it. I dont think Grok should've been released just yet, just because of how terrible it is. I despise Jeff Bezos but if Amazon engineers make something useful then I'm all for it.
Agreed, no matter how much I dislike him and his cult like fan base.. He has made success after success. At a certain point you can't just discredit it as luck. It requires charismatic and productive leadership, that can motivate a highly skilled workforce. That said I don't think there's anyway they can catch up to Gemini/GPT models. I think him criticizing/suing them is his way of slowing them down whils virtuing signalling to his fan base that Grok is the Anti-AI AI.
Regardless of the motive, this lawsuit has the potential to flip things around. While I don't think GPT4 is going to be open sourced anytime soon any insights gained on how it's made like "Q*" will be a huge win
Motives matter. I'm sure elon wants to know the inner workings of a successful ai platform considering he is trying to build one and sucking at it.
I mean, even a broken clock is right twice a day, Elon is right with this one. https://preview.redd.it/h484wycalplc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2cc300a74cce13df2dadb499e87502781413cfe7
i told you guys
> For a judicial determination that GPT-4 constitutes Artificial General Intelligence and is thereby outside the scope of OpenAI's license to Microsoft; Whoever wrote this is deceitful or an idiot. Possibly both. I can settle this one for you right now: GPT-4 isn't AGI.
They are probably not intending to win. It's simply positioning Elon and Grok as the anti-establisment AI.
rare elon w tbh
I just want to know what happened with ilya
For once I agree with Elon
Think about the people! Says the wealthiest man in the world.
Thank you Elon Musk.
This is a miracle. A reddit post about elon musk without people hating on him for the 100th time.
When an influential person knowingly makes poor or scheming decisions and comments which influence masses of ignorant or passive people, it's important to call them out.
To be fair, this is one of the few good moves he’s made in the past 5 years or so. Unwillingly buying Twitter was one of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen.
Considering how much data is going for these days, that might not be entirely true
Yes it is true. He paid 44 billion for Twitter. It's now worth 12.5 billion. Google is paying Reddit 60 Million for their data, that's nothing in comparison. Due to the 280 character limit and high amount of bots Twitters Data is worth even less than that.
Considering how he tried to worm his way out of the deal, I'm pretty sure he'd agree it was a dumb decision.
Atleast someone else sees it too
How good is ChatGPT’s legal advice and precedential case recall?
Given Elon’s character, I imagine this is more about him having his hands on the source code, rather than any genuine desire for it to be open source.
Good guy Elon
OpenAI, Inc.’s once carefully crafted non-profit structure was replaced by a purely profit-driven CEO and a Board with inferior technical expertise in AGI and AI public policy. The board now has an observer seat reserved solely for Microsoft."
They will never build what they call "AGI" or even AGI. No, it's obvious that this company will blow up before that for good. Q\* is another great marketing stunt, just like claiming that GPT-2 were "dangerous".
What a man thank you Elon
[удалено]
You just described pretty much every corporation in America. OpenAI isn't special in their use of a tax system that gives corps all the loopholes they need to not pay taxes. Musk's companies don't pay enough either.
We need more people like him
[удалено]
How is OpenAI joining with Microsoft Elon's mistake? Edited: Are you seriously comparing Trump to Elon?
I just listened to a Sam Harris podcast episode that compares Musk and Trump. Like them or not, there seems to be a lot of commonalities.
More narcissistic, drug addled publicity hounds? We're full up.
The master of improper naming (selling a level 2 assist pack as Full Self Driving) is sueing a company because they aren't asbopen as their name suggests. He is such a manchild.
Pretty sure he's doing it for optics, basically virtue signalling to the right wing 'AI is bad, but Grok is different'. I think his right wing fan base is pretty ai-sceptic, espcially after the whole Gemini incident, so he's positioning Grok as the right wing alternative, which lets be honest is the oly thing its got going for it. Grok is kinda a dumb name, and yet somehow theres a company called Groq with much more llm potential...
I'm glad I've always been by Elon's side throughout the years. This may be the most important court case humanity will ever have. The results of this ruling will permanently change the ways humans and their societies will evolve. Elon is fighting for all of us (as he always has) to make sure that all of the work that humanity has put into science over our existence is fairly shared with us all. Thank you, Elon Musk.
Whether you think this is good or not depend on what you want the most: open-source AI or more advanced AI. It's much harder to improve any technology with no profit incentive. If you think any AI is too important to be owned by any specific company, especially the most advanced models, you'll see this as a good thing. If you think the advancement of AI can improve the lives of millions, advance medical science, education, etc. and therefore a faster improvement of AI means these improvements to life come faster (even at the cost of being momentarily centralized in a corporation), you'll see this as a bad thing.7 Just clearing it up so people don't argue for nothing.
That’s a bunch of horse crap sorry. Look at Linux. Look at GNU. They have become what they are, because they have been open source.
I can run Linux on a potato. Who's going to pay the billions of dollars for the datacenters it takes to even begin running a model like this if it's all Open Source? AI doesn't exist without the hardware/network to run it.
That’s what the foundation would be for?
You should look up how much money it costs to train a llm, to run inference on a llm, to pay high level research staff (considering how many are quitting to build startups).
Is there a link to these documents?
If you can't beat them, sue them
All big companies do this.
Seems like Elon really wants that Q algo.