BREAKING: OpenAI Reveals the TRUTH About Elon Musk's Lawsuit 🔥

Join My Newsletter for Regular AI Updates 👇🏼

My Links 🔗

Media/Sponsorship Inquiries 📈

Links:

[matthew_berman]

WIth this new information, do you think Elon or OpenAI is right?

[markksantos]

they definitely used gpt 5 to write this

[TRXST.ISSUES]

You misinterpreted the letter, TESLA is the cash cow that would have fed OpenAI with its cash.

[richardthomas]

I think you have misunderstood what is being said at 7:26. You interpret the "its" in "attach to Tesla as its cash cow" to mean "Tesla's, " but I think "Its" means "OpenAI's." OpenAI needed lots of money. The letter says there was discussion of how to get lots of money. Elon suggests that OpenAI should "attach to Tesla as OpenAI's cash cow." That is, Tesla would be the business that would provide a steady income to Open AI. I don't know why you think the "its" means the authors of the letter are claiming Elon suggested to OpenAI--which needed a lot of money--that the way to do that was for OpenAI to "attach to Tesla as Tesla's cash cow." That interpretation doesn't fit the context.

[BlimeyMCOC]

There’s no way this story isn’t in a movie one day

[damien]

Musk main points were Microsoft outsized influence/ GPT4 design, they totally avoided the questions. BShitters

[leoloebs]

I think the 'its' in "its cash cow' refers to OpenAI. So Tesla would be the cash cow for OpenAI.

[nexys]

I was waiting for the part where they addressed Microsoft, but that part didn't come...

[SebKrogh]

It's interesting that they don't really dispute having reached AGI internally here 😅

[archvaldor]

"Do you agree with OpenAI or Elon Musk?". Did it occur to you that might distrust both?

[JacoduPlooy]

The larger argument here is whether AGI should be open source or not. I'm actually surprised that the majority of people aren't defaulting to "yes" and that there is such a big debate on this.
Yes, open sourcing AGI possibly puts it in the hands of bad actors, but it also puts it in the hands of good ones.

Are you guys really keen to have "The tool that can build itself", i.e possibly the last tool humans will ever need to create, be exclusively in the hands of a single company... what could go wrong, right?

Decentralization is the answer.

[veqv]

It still feels very crappy that they "clarify" the name to mean "open" in a way that is not open at all, in a way that does not align with what even their early investors considered. In a way that is literally not open at all.

"The regular operation of a business" needs no distinction. This is a gross retcon of the only reason most people invested.

[thetruthhurts]

I think you are asking the wrong question. The question should be - should Microsoft be allowed to steal OpenAI?

[sigret]

So if the best argument from openai is the fact that Elon said "yup", then it looks bad for them

[JohnLewis-old]

Two points I want to make:

1. I'm willing to bet that whatever OpenAI has built internally was used to fish through all the old emails and find the one's most supportive of their argument. In other words, I think they used AI to craft this post and that's fascinating to me for some reason.

2. The lawsuit from Elon feels more like a public relations move than an actual legally fruitful action. The wording is for public consumption and crafted to maximize quotability, not to maximize the odds that it succeeds on the merits of the law.

I hope Sam and Elon find a way to work together because they have more in common than they disagree with.

[Ċÿḅëṛẅïżäṛḋs]

Elon put out more information in his law suite. Seems like we are missing a lot of emails.

[Baleur]

7:45 i read this the complete other way.
That OpenAI should attach to Tesla as "its" (OpenAI's) cash cow.
Meaning since OpenAI struggled with funding, it should attach to Tesla to be able to siphon funds FROM Tesla as needed.
Whenever you have subject verb subject then "its", you often refer to the first subject.

"a car need to attach engines as its power source"
How can you read this as "its" refering to the engine? It makes no grammatical sense.
Elon meant Tesla would funnel funds into OpenAI, not that OpenAI would be the cash cow.

[miscellaneous]

I'm running a company, a small sized company, with just over 80 employees.
And I gave a fair amount of "yup" responses.
That yup is "I kind of read what you said, but we'll discuss the actual steps during the process, because I don't have time to breakdown each paragraph into a separate discussion that will end up going back and forth".

[lancemarchetti]

At the end of the day Sam is not fighting for his GPT models to be freely available to humanity.

[jim-i-am]

In context, I read "attach to Tesla as its cash cow" as Tesla being the cash cow. Why would the 'cash cow' merge into another company rather than the other way around. This is further enforced by his comment that OpenAI needs to be well funded.