Associated Press (AP) — Elon Musk is suing OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman over what he says is a betrayal of the ChatGPT maker’s founding aims of benefiting humanity rather than pursuing profits.
In a lawsuit filed at San Francisco Superior Court, billionaire Musk said that when he bankrolled OpenAI’s creation, he secured an agreement with Altman and Greg Brockman, the president, to keep the AI company as a non-profit that would develop technology for the benefit of the public.
Under its founding agreement, OpenAI would also make its code open to the public instead of walling it off for any private company’s gains, the lawsuit says.
However, by embracing a close relationship with Microsoft, OpenAI and its top executives have set that pact “aflame” and are “perverting” the company’s mission, Musk alleges in the lawsuit.
“OpenAI, Inc. has been transformed into a closed-source de facto subsidiary of the largest technology company in the world: Microsoft,” the lawsuit filed Thursday says.
“Under its new Board, it is not just developing but is actually refining an AGI to maximize profits for Microsoft, rather than for the benefit of humanity.”
The original article contains 251 words, the summary contains 189 words. Saved 25%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
yay yay Musk is bad… BUT, and hear me for a second, I kinda agree that OpenAI has betrayed its goal to benefit humanity. Ulterior motive or not, I hope this gets somewhere.
His complaint is hinged on the idea that GPT-4 is an AGI, so… I don’t think this is going anywhere. It’ll be interesting to hear what each side says constitutes an AGI though.
A lot of companies claim to plan on open sourcing their products but never do. They get the positive headlines but none of the obligation. It’s a very modern form of greenwashing.
You can if the company is a non-profit like open AI. Basically when you take on investments for a company you declare what the goal/purpose of a company is, either to make money (for profit) or for some other nebulous cause (non-profit) eg. Ending hunger or saving humanity from AI. If an investor thinks you aren’t following that goal and are pursuing some other goal then they can sue the company.
Sadly most companies are for profit so they can only be sued if they’re trying to do something that doesn’t optimally make money. So a fossil fuel company can’t be sued for legally dumping poison into the air if it’s the most cost efficient method, but they can be sued if they do a less cost efficient solution that would make air quality better because improving people’s health isnt there goal, making money is.
Oh sick, does that mean we can sue Elongated Muskrat for the exact same thing? Pretty sure he abandoned “benefiting humanity” goal as well with SpaceX, Tesla, PayPal (formerly X.com), and Twitter.
Literally any subject matter expert on the subject of transportation can spell out a half a dozen things that make no sense/are actively harmful about all the attention and investment these projects got. Well There's Your Problem has a 3 hour slideshow on the subject, for example. Musk was even caught on the record admitting one of its motivations was to fuck with real transportation projects like California HSR. The whole thing was all-but-provably an elaborate con.
I believe he’s even showing up in Alex Jone’s spaces on Twitter too. I have no proof and only a gut feeling alongside the participant sounds just like Elon, speaks in vague tech bullshit just like the man, and only espouses goals and a world view that just so happens to align with Elon and his goals.