Sam Altmans Stunning Statment On Elon Musk "He Is A BULLY!" (OpenAI Vs XAI)

So Sam Altman has actually fired back against Elon Musk and he's actually dropped some new receipts talking about how Elon Musk, you can't sue your way to AGI. So this is something that I've covered previously where we do have a situation between these two influential individuals in the AI space. Now you can see right here that this is something that is being covered in the news. And it's really important because it will actually affect the future of AI development. And as you know, as these companies start to get more powerful and as their models start to get more smarter, this is going to impact a lot more than just these two individuals. Now, the statement OpenAI have said is that, look, you can't sue your way to AGI. And they're essentially referring to the fact that Elon Musk has filed several lawsuits basically claiming that what OpenAI is doing is just outright false. And just like they can't be doing what they're doing, considering when they initially created the company as essentially a charity and they're now trying to turn it into a profitable company. That was never the original mission to begin with. And OpenAI are basically responding, saying, look, we get that, but you can't sue your way to AGI. They state that we have great respect for Elon's accomplishments and his gratitude for his early contributions to OpenAI, but he should be competing in the marketplace rather than the courtroom, which is, you know, throwing shots in a very snarky way. You can see they say it is critical for the US to remain the global leader in AI. And our mission is to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity. And we have and will remain a mission driven organization. And we hope Elon shares that goal and will uphold the values of innovation and free market competition that have driven his own success. So you can see here from this statement, they're basically saying that, look, rather than suing us, you should just make your product better. Which is a very direct shot at Elon Musk's current company, X AI. Now, you can see they also managed to release the timeline. And I think they've kind of, I don't want to say spun the timeline into their favor, but of course, this is going to be presented in OpenAI's best light. And they do actually have some kind of defenses. You can, you can see it says OpenAI started as a nonprofit in 2015, which Elon questioned. In 2015, OpenAI was publicly announced. Then their progress led to realize that they're going to need billions of dollars for the computers to build AGI. Then they agreed that a for profit was the next step. Then Elon demanded majority equity, absolute control, and to be the CEO. And then of course, Elon created the Public Benefit Corporation called Open Artificial Intelligence technologies. And then OpenAI rejected Elon's terms because they didn't want to give him unilateral control. And then Elon, of course, tried to merge it with Tesla. And in 2018, this is when Elon Musk Musk retired. And in 2018, that same year, Elon Musk said, raise billions of dollars a year per year or forget it. And then 2019, they announced the cap profit and 2013. And then of course, March 2023, Elon Musk started his competitor, X AI. Now, you can see here that OpenAI are basically stating that Elon Musk's latest legal filings against OpenAI marks his fourth attempt in less than a year to reframe his claims. But in his own words and actions, they speak for themselves. Because in 2017, Elon Musk actually wanted created a for profit as OpenAI's new structure. And when he didn't get majority equity and control, he walked away and told us that we would fail. And now that OpenAI is the leading AI research lab and Elon Musk runs a competing AI company, he's asking the court to effectively stop us from pursuing our mission. And the crazy thing about all of this is that Sam Altman recently said in an interview that he thinks that Elon Musk is somewhat of a bully. You see that statement here where he's basically stating that, look, perhaps maybe Elon Musk's newfound political influence might be used for the wrong reasons.

Elon definitely did a lot to help OpenAI in the early days. And in spite of all of this, I'm very grateful. And I think he's just a sort of legendary entrepreneur. He's also clearly a bully and he's also someone who clearly likes to get in fights. You know, right now it's me, it's been Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, lots of other people. And I think fundamentally this is about OpenAI is doing really well. Elon cares about doing really well. Elon started and now runs a very direct competitor that's trying to do exactly what OpenAI does. And I'll point out, is a structure. It's like a public benefit Corp. And I heard Elon has majority ownership and control and seems like a reasonable thing. He would do. Everything we're doing, I believe Elon would be happy about if he weren't in control of the company. He left when he thought we were like on a trajectory to certainly fail and also wouldn't do something where he had like total control over OpenAI. But I think it's like a little bit of a sideshow and the right thing for us to do is just keep doing incredible research, keep shipping products people love, and most importantly like keep.

Pursuing this mission of now, crazily we've seen that Mark Zuckerberg and Meta have decided to jump in on this as well. You can see here that we have a situation on our hands. It says that Meta asks the government to block OpenAI's switch to a for profit and Mark Zuckerberg sides with Elon Musk in his battle with the maker of ChatGPT. So Meta are actually agreeing with Elon Musk that OpenAI shouldn't become a for profit. You can see that in a letter to Attorney General Rob Bonta dated Thursday. It says Meta said allowing the ChatGPT maker to become a for profit company would set a dangerous precedent of allowing startups to enjoy the advantages of non profit status until they are poised to become profitable. And I got to be honest, they do have a point. Because one of the things that is a risk of starting a company is that when you're investing in a company, you don't know whether or not that company is going to succeed. So they're wondering, is this going to be something that all these new companies do, just start as a charity and then once they're profitable they can literally just start raking it in. Now you can see it says OpenAI's conduct could have seismic implications for Silicon Valley, meta wrote in the letter. If OpenAI's new business model is valid, nonprofit investors would get the same profit upside as those who invest in the conventional way for profit companies, while also benefiting from tax write offs bestowed by the government. And I got to be honest, that is one of the things that I actually wasn't thinking about. Because when you invest into a charity, it is actually a tax write off. So essentially you're not going to get any money back from that. But it is a complete tax write off. So you can reduce your taxes through that. But of course, imagine you could reduce your taxes whilst also investing in something that gave you a 10x or an 100x upside. That would be a significant loophole. So I'm guessing that they are trying to prevent OpenAI from doing this. Now I got to be honest, one thing that I always think about is that I always think about the incentives for what these individuals are doing. Meta, of course, is in fierce competition with the ChatGPT maker OpenAI. So they would have every incentive in order to stop them from becoming a public company. Of course, that would have them to stop needing to raise money if they would be able to become a public company. They could have stocks and stuff that they could just sell if they needed more money. So this is something that you have to understand, whilst they do have a point, there's no real incentive for people like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk to actually help Sam Altman in this scenario. They'd actually be better off if ChatGPT were out of the race because it means a lot more customers for them. Whilst they are right that you can't sue your way to AGI, I do think all of this is competition and competition is usually good. So it will be interesting to see where this case does go because it will mark one of the most interesting things because it's probably going to be make or break for OpenAI. Now, I personally do believe that somehow OpenAI are going to be able to get this done, but I think it's going to be a situation where they have to fight like hell to get there. So it will be interesting to see how the influence of Mark Zuckerberg and of course the influence of Elon Musk managed to shape the final. So now, of course, one of the things that Elon Musk might actually do is of course, use his new Department of Government efficiency role to. To eliminate the government hurdles facing X AI and of course, you know, just make things better for his own company. I do think that that is a 200 IQ by Elon Musk and it seems like a pretty delicate situation because of the position that OpenAI is in. Crazily enough, we also got to see that when Trump anointed Sachs as the AI czar on Thursday evening, Altman quickly posted a congratulatory message on Twitter and apparently the intent was to make a gesture of goodwill, but. But it had the opposite effect and only further confirmed Altman's predicament, which is where Elon Musk actually replied with a laughing emoji, which is of course not the kind of thing you do want when you're the CEO of an AI company. And of course, some very, very influential people in the AI government, or so you could call it, are now doing laughing emojis. So definitely a very, very interesting predicament for AI in terms of OpenAI and what they're trying to achieve. And I do wonder if this situation will ever get resolved between the two.