Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Head To Court (apnews.com) 125
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Associated Press: Technology tycoons Elon Musk and Sam Altman are poised to face off in a high-stakes trial revolving around the alleged betrayal, deceit and unbridled ambition that blurred the bickering billionaires' once-shared vision for the development of artificial intelligence. The trial, which started Monday with jury selection, centers on the 2015 birth of ChatGPT maker OpenAI as a nonprofit startup primarily funded by Musk before evolving into a capitalistic venture now valued at $852 billion. The trial's outcome could sway the balance of power in AI -- breakthrough technology that is increasingly being feared as a potential job killer and an existential threat to humanity's survival. Those perceived risks are among the reasons that Musk, the world's richest person, cites for filing an August 2024 lawsuit that will now be decided by a jury and U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California.
The civil lawsuit accuses Altman, OpenAI's CEO, and his top lieutenant, Greg Brockman, of double-crossing Musk by straying from the San Francisco company's founding mission to be an altruistic steward of a revolutionary technology. The lawsuit alleges they shifted into a moneymaking mode behind his back. OpenAI has brushed off Musk's allegations as an unfounded case of sour grapes that's aimed at undercutting its rapid growth and bolstering Musk's own xAI, which he launched in 2023 as a competitor. Gonzalez Rogers questioned potential jurors Monday about their views on Musk, Altman and artificial intelligence. Some jurors said they had negative views of Musk, but most said they would still be able to treat him fairly and focus on the facts of the case. [...] "Part of this is about whether a jury believes the people who will testify and whether they are credible," Gonzalez Rogers said during a court hearing earlier this year while explaining why she believe the case merited a trial. The judge will make the final decision on the case, with the jury serving in an advisory role. The latest development is that a jury has been seated. During selection, several prospective jurors expressed negative views of Elon Musk, but Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected attempts by Musk's lawyer to remove some of them solely on that basis, saying dislike of Musk does not automatically mean someone can't be fair.
The court is selecting nine jurors, and the case is expected to wrap by May 21, when it would go to the jury. Tomorrow, April 28th, will feature opening statements.
The civil lawsuit accuses Altman, OpenAI's CEO, and his top lieutenant, Greg Brockman, of double-crossing Musk by straying from the San Francisco company's founding mission to be an altruistic steward of a revolutionary technology. The lawsuit alleges they shifted into a moneymaking mode behind his back. OpenAI has brushed off Musk's allegations as an unfounded case of sour grapes that's aimed at undercutting its rapid growth and bolstering Musk's own xAI, which he launched in 2023 as a competitor. Gonzalez Rogers questioned potential jurors Monday about their views on Musk, Altman and artificial intelligence. Some jurors said they had negative views of Musk, but most said they would still be able to treat him fairly and focus on the facts of the case. [...] "Part of this is about whether a jury believes the people who will testify and whether they are credible," Gonzalez Rogers said during a court hearing earlier this year while explaining why she believe the case merited a trial. The judge will make the final decision on the case, with the jury serving in an advisory role. The latest development is that a jury has been seated. During selection, several prospective jurors expressed negative views of Elon Musk, but Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected attempts by Musk's lawyer to remove some of them solely on that basis, saying dislike of Musk does not automatically mean someone can't be fair.
The court is selecting nine jurors, and the case is expected to wrap by May 21, when it would go to the jury. Tomorrow, April 28th, will feature opening statements.
This should be interesting (Score:4, Funny)
Can't wait for when Musk and Altman have to swear to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." :-)
Re:This should be interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This should be interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
I think Altman tells whatever will get him what he wants, from that person, at that time:
"[...] most of the people we spoke to shared the judgment of Sutskever and Amodei: Altman has a relentless will to power that, even among industrialists who put their names on spaceships, sets him apart. "He's unconstrained by truth," the board member told us. "He has two traits that are almost never seen in the same person. The first is a strong desire to please people, to be liked in any given interaction. The second is almost a sociopathic lack of concern for the consequences that may come from deceiving someone.""
https://archive.ph/QMf3Y#selection-2501.4-2501.519
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> I think Musk does that
There's so much obviously bad faith nonsense coming from him these days, combined with his history of... dubious statements that appear to have no basis in reality, it's really hard to tell.
Genuinely, I think Musk is a fraud, among other things. Altman? There's a certain degree to which he seems to believe the Roko's basilisk crap, and even a degree to which he appears to believe OpenAI has built something actually something close to AGI. The people around him seem to believe he b
Re: (Score:2)
So you think Musk is deeply delusional and Altman is an accomplished liar? Possibly.
I hear they have firehoses outside the courthouse (Score:1)
After people have been in the same courtroom with those two bozos, it's expected many of them will request to be hosed down under as high pressure as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Plus someone's going to have to hose down both Musk and Altman's pants on a regular basis or else both will suffer extreme burns after giving testimony.
Scam Artman vs Felon Husk (Score:2, Insightful)
I wish they could both lose
Re: Scam Artman vs Felon Husk (Score:5, Interesting)
They will be both losing thanks to discovery and the fact that a lot of the evidence will become public.
Both of them are pretty well known for rejecting reality and substituting their own. We should be able to witness multiple parallel realities during this trial.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everything has to be made public -- when trade secrets are involved, you can request a sealed courtroom. By the way, this is the same judge who threw the book at apple after they decided to fuck around in the epic lawsuit. Fucking around on anybody's part is only asking to find out, especially considering the jury doesn't even decide the ultimate outcome.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What makes you think the inner workings of the AI will be used as evidence in court at all? The entire thing hinges on financial decisions made by Altman and whether they violate the non-profit structure as agreed upon during OpenAIs founding.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Elon is a sleazeball because he can't be bothered to pay his share for the support of several children he fathered. That's a deadbeat right there.
Whereas Altman looks like some kid from That 70s show, minus the afro.... You just know he's up to something.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you not realize how that sounds?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Elon is a sleazeball because he had USAID funding haphazardly slashed for things that were already delivered or underway, causing unnecessary harm and some number of excess deaths to people who desperately needed help.
Not to mention waste as much of what was impacted was perishable.
Never been a particular fan of Bill Gates but he was right to say "The picture of the world's richest man killing the world's poorest children is not a pretty one,"
Re: (Score:2)
Never been a particular fan of Bill Gates but he was right to say "The picture of the world's richest man killing the world's poorest children is not a pretty one,"
He had firsthand knowledge, since the Gates foundation won't provide vaccinations to nations which don't adopt IP protections for big pharma so strong that even if their whole nation is dying, they can't produce a patented vaccine themselves without winding up owned through the WTO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
*was but I'm okay with a reunion
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
was that meant as a defense of Elon?
I hope not, given that there's proof he was pestering Epstein on XMAS MORNING to find out when he could attend "the wildest party on your island"
Re: (Score:2)
"Gates foundation won't provide vaccinations to nations which don't adopt IP protections for big pharma so strong that even if their whole nation is dying, they can't produce a patented vaccine themselves without winding up owned through the WTO"
fairly certain this is NOT accurate
Re: (Score:2)
there are good ways and bad ways to do anything.
how DOGE handled USAID was definitely one of the worst ways.
there was no attempt made to examine what was critical, just to light it all on fire. and Elon straight up ****ing lied about it.
i know that a lot of people look at aid to Africa as just handing pallets of cash over to "Nigerian princes" but a lot of what they do is to pay AMERICAN farmers to grow crops that are sent to aid sites overseas.
do i need to state that stuff is all perishable?
what good is se
Re: (Score:2)
ffs learn about soft power. the work USAID was doing, apart from it being humanitarian was earning the USA a lot of goodwill in many countries which is a good thing given all the harmful stuff it's done.
"Our debt will be 200% of GDP in just a few more years. THIS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE"
well here's a headline for you:
THAT WASN'T CAUSED BY FOREIGN AID.
one very large contributing factor has been the astonishing amount spent on the military.
it wasn't enough for America merely to spend the most?
was is really necessa
Re: (Score:2)
cry me a river. fucking con-cucks have been bitching for decades about the debt when a Dem holds power but blow it up like frat boys partying like it's their last night on Earth.
if you think you're going to get sympathy or agreement whining about relatively small sums spent on the poorest, then please FOAD & DIAF
Re: (Score:2)
"Now go find a tranny and suck her dick"
don't project your fantasies on me, concuck.
Re: (Score:2)
"It's all hypocrisy with you assholes. None of you fucktards really believe any of your own bullshit"
WTF is wrong with you?
Sounds like your insurance has stopped paying for your meds.
For the sake of anyone who has to live or work with you i hope they change their mind.
"I dunno why you're react negatively to the mental image of having a woman's cock in your throat"
It's clear that you react somewhat....interestingly...to that mental image, enough to bring it into a discussion that wasn't about sex or gender.
T
Re: Scam Artman vs Felon Husk (Score:2)
Musks white replacement theory white nationalism bullshit, the FSD safety lies, the way he treats anyone involved in a Tesla accident, the DOGE lies, making babies with subordinates, just fucking weird and that ain't the half of it.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish they could both lose
I hope it runs forever, at least until both of them run out of money.
Re: (Score:2)
Can the Tesla robots make popcorn yet? (Score:5, Funny)
Technology tycoons Elon Musk and Sam Altman are poised to face off in a high-stakes trial
Can the Tesla robots make popcorn yet?
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly, but would you trust anything cooked up by a Tesla robot?
Based on Musk's track record, I'm sure 95% of the time the popcorn would be perfectly edible, and perhaps even extra tasty ... but you DO NOT want to eat popcorn from one of those 5% batches.
Alien vs Predator (Score:2)
love (Score:3)
Your honor.. (Score:2)
...I'm Elon and I'm a rube who doesn't understand how business works.
Incorrect and biased wording (Score:3)
No, "for-profit", not "capitalistic venture". Non-profits exist just fine in the free market.
Hey, the AP - stop trying to make the political-economy that made you possible look bad.
joke (Score:2)
If Musk has a case, pray he gets what he wants (Score:3)
If Musk is correct, Altman carried out probably the worst case of fraud against a non-profit and its donors in American history. If he has a case, we should all hope Musk not only flays Altman's finances alive in court, but gets something rolling where Altman faces serious criminal charges for doing a bait-and-switch.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
If Musk is correct, Altman carried out probably the worst case of fraud against a non-profit and its donors in American history.
Great, now do DOGE.
The fact is that not only are there no heroes in this story, there are only the worst pieces of shit imaginable.
Re: (Score:2)
If Musk is correct, Altman carried out probably the worst case of fraud against a non-profit and its donors in American history.
Great, now do DOGE.
Whataboutism is not actually an argument.
Legal briefs (Score:2)
I hear it's popular these days to generate legal briefs with AI.
My question is, will Musk's lawyers use Grok for this, and will Altman's lawyers use GPT?
I mean, put your mouth where your money is!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:we'll finally know (Score:5, Funny)
We will all learn, by official measure of the court, which one of these guys has a bigger dick.
"Has a" or "is the"?
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I do think the slashdot crowd which is generally anti-Musk is rooting for a can of worms here. Do we really want to set Sam Altman's precedent which is that you can found a company as a non-profit and then decide way down the line to convert to for-profit? Because unlike S Cor
Re: (Score:3)
I do think the slashdot crowd which is generally anti-Musk
You should've seen this place back in the day. Some folks here actually believed Musk's schtick about how they'd eventually make an affordable Tesla.
Do we really want to set Sam Altman's precedent which is that you can found a company as a non-profit and then decide way down the line to convert to for-profit?
Musk can't resist monetizing the fuck out of everything he touches, either. Last time I opened the app for the social media network formerly known as Twitter, a big nag popped up asking "why u no subscribe?!" I think he's just jealous he didn't get to do it first with OpenAI.
Re: (Score:2)
Some folks here actually believed Musk's schtick about how they'd eventually make an affordable Tesla.
Heck, some people still believed (and parroted) Musk's schtick after he pulled a 180 on the Hyperloop and claimed the plan was ALWAYS to just use Tesla cars in the tunnels.
Re: (Score:2)
You should've seen this place back in the day. Some folks here actually believed Musk's schtick about how they'd eventually make an affordable Tesla.
I was willing to believe it up until the point it was obvious it wasn't going to happen, i.e. when they raised prices instead of dropping them.
Not hating Elon before he demonstrated himself to be a massive piece of shit is actually a mark of a rational person, just like hating Elon once he did is.
Re: (Score:2)
"I was willing to believe it up until the point it was obvious it wasn't going to happen, i.e. when they raised prices instead of dropping them."
He released the $35k Tesla 3. If you don't think that's affordable then fine but it's what he said wanted to do. It's hardly his fault that things couldn't stay that way in the face of Bidenomics blowing up prices.
"Not hating Elon before he demonstrated himself to be a massive piece of shit is actually a mark of a rational person, just like hating Elon once he did
Re: (Score:2)
One of the traits of today's left wing is that they have no problem with actions that harm people if it advances one of their nutty beliefs:
- Pro-trans: damn women's rights.
- Pro-pal: damn gay rights.
- Anti-nuclear: damn global warming.
- Pro-DEI: damn Asians' rights, men's rights.
So:
Anti-Musk: Fuck Open Source and Non-Profit organizations.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the hallmarks of the right is it cannot understand nuance:
Believing trans people have rights and should receive the only treatment psychiatry has found to work? Perfectly fine. Also not in conflict with women's rights at all, there is literally not a single woman hurt by treating trans men as men in the majority of cases and trans women as women in the majority of cases.
Believing civilians shouldn't be mass murdered just because a terrorist group claims to speak for them? Perfectly fine, has nothing
Re: (Score:2)
Would that be the kind of nuance currently being exhibited by some of you lefties in claiming that the Butler PA assassination attempt was faked, notwithstanding the fact that someone was shot and killed?
Re: (Score:2)
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_White_case
2. "Study finds nearly 45% of trans-women inmates convicted of sex crimes" https://torontosun.com/news/national/study-finds-nearly-45-of-trans-women-inmates-convicted-of-sex-crimes
Trans people have the same rights and restrictions as the rest of us. One of which is that male sex offenders (!) do not have the right to be in women's prisons, for fucking (sic) obvious
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
Your post is one dramatic anecdote and one paywalled tabloid. Neither with any context. A majority of the people who end up in a Canadian jail have committed one violent crime or another. Next you're going to tell us that most imprisoned trans people have broken the law. I hope you never do any kind of science.
Re: (Score:2)
They even call this man "a her" to pander to you fucking lunatics.
The lunatic left response: "one dramatic anecdote"
And, oh, the clincher "without any context".
BWHAHAHAHA !
Todays' left are literally demented.
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
What happened with Karen White is indeed dramatic. It is also one isolated story. So it is not data, just one data point. Feel free to take issue with the word "anecdote", it seems like you are jumping on this to avoid addressing the lack of substance of your argument. I don't see why political partisanship needs to be a part of this discussion btw, this seems like another distraction to me.
The lack of substance of your argument is that you ignore context: otherwise you would have made a comparison of the r
Re: (Score:2)
The facts show that men do not belong in women's prison, or other spaces, whether they dress up as women or not.
You seem to think you are writing something reasonable, but it is obvious to everyone else that you are being pathetically disingenuous.
Show some fucking respect to the rape victims.
Re: (Score:2)
Drama is fiction or an artificial/inflated appearance of something being striking or alarming. Karen White's case is innately and legitimately alarming with no embellishment. It is also an EXAMPLE of a policy being applied which is public and applied consistently and the majority PREDICTED outcome of that policy.
"Believing trans people have rights and should receive the only treatment psychiatry has found to work"
It hasn't been found to work or arrest the social contagion at all, if anything it has drastica
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
Okay, so *you* tell *us* how many inmate male-female rapes there have been in women's prisons.
This is not how this works. You are the one making a claim, the burden of proof is on you.
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily the policy has now changed, leaving only the most demented to defend it. Like you.
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
You're so focused on making a point that you are making shit up. I have not defended the policy. Your point is poorly made and you have not provided evidence. I have already explained why. Either provide evidence or move on, but please do not make things up about what I express or not, and do not assume that you know what I think, because so far all you have shown is that you are eager to believe things without evidence
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
His claim is the default, men are men whether they pretend to be women or not. He doesn't need to provide the support anymore than someone claiming an apple will fall if you let go of it. These things are already the current well known and established state, already proven and well supported by the current publicly known evidence.
It is you; claiming gravity does not apply to apples who identify as helium filled balloons; who are making an extraordinary claim which requires not only new evidence but extraord
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, he disregards that the outcome was predicted and the simple fact that there is no contrasting benefit to outweigh even one case of this policy going wrong. Even it were 'extremely rare' there is no downside to putting men in men's prisons and preventing 100% of those 'isolated' stories.
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
Musk owns a direct competitor to OpenAI that is *checks notes* ...
Not a charity.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
I think the disagreement is on the definition of fairness. Say we judge a dictator for his crimes, should we find jurors who don't have a negative view of that dictator? If someone knows the dictator and his crimes, and doesn't have a negative view of him, can that person judge him fairly, or are they biased in favour of the dictator?
Re: (Score:2)
Faulty analogy. Musk is not a dictator and has not been found to have done anything illegal, immoral, or harmful. He is a politically polarized figure in the sense that half the political spectrum hates him while the other half is neutral to him. Even if your 'for or against' reasoning applied, in a criminal case "for" would be required if we must choose. But this isn't, there is a large population of polarized people who hate Musk... the majority of the population is neutral or mildly approving of him whil
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
has not been found to have done anything illegal, immoral, or harmful
Circular reasoning. Also verifiably false, and it is well known to all, including you. Made-up accusations of pedophilia are one small example. Should we worry that people have a negative image of someone who makes up accusations of pedophilia?
Re: (Score:2)
It is a jury of your peers. If all your peers hate you, that is a you problem.
The solution often applied is to move to a different venue where the locals do not know the parties involved. In this case that is not helpful, as both parties are known globally.
An alternative solution is to delay trial until the parties are out of the headlines -this one is common in criminal trials: wait until the crime is no longer headline news. Again, I doubt it would help with these two.
But back to the original point...
Re: (Score:2)
"It is a jury of your peers. If all your peers hate you, that is a you problem."
Musk doesn't have that problem. A large but vocal minority hates him which is highly concentrated in the place where they are holding the trial and apparently includes the judge.
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
Isn't right to a fair trial for the accused?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's for everyone. In a criminal trial, the People are equally deserving of fairness. In a small-claims hearing, both sides are entitled to a fair and objective hearing.
So this isn't a criminal trial, and the bar to find the defendant liable is much lower than it would be in a criminal trial right? More likely than not, as opposed to beyond reasonable doubt. 51% sure, instead of 90 something right. In other words, easier on Musk than it would be on a federal prosecutor.
The question was how many people have to hate a public figure for them to effectively lose their due process rights, when the defendant requests a jury (because a well hated plaintiff can opt not to request
Re: (Score:2)
like? No. But not dislike either. If they dislike you then it isn't neutral... or since this is a civil matter it should at least be an even spread. Most people are neutral or positive on Musk but not in a heavy blue zone like that. Altman isn't really a public figure outside of tech.
Re: (Score:3)
Whether or not the juror can be unbiased is exactly what the judge looks for. Simple dislike does not automatically equate to bias. Plus, as others have pointed out, even if the Jurors who dislike Musk don't know Altman, discovery will probably make them dislike him too. In the end, if the jurors hate both of them, balance is restored and they can deliberate on the facts.
Re: (Score:2)
"Simple dislike does not automatically equate to bias."
No, it to doesn't automatically equate to a failure to overcome bias. Dislike is a bias. He's entitled to a jury who is neutral at worst.
Musk has an undeserved negative reputation among a radical political faction which dominates the location. This suggests the judge is likely among that faction. Discovery wouldn't make any moderate or apolitical person dislike him, his actions are generally altruistic... including his basis for suing Altman. Altman on
Re: (Score:2)
No, it to doesn't automatically equate to a failure to overcome bias.
While technically true it's not really meaningful here. What matters is the legal point of view.
Dislike is a bias.
From a cognitive point of view, yes. From a legal point of view, no. For example, for judges, dislike of a party in a trial is not a basis for recusal. They are expected to exercise professional detachment and impartiality. The same basic principle applies for juror selection. Dislike is a potential red flag and, ideally, a judge can get around the problem by simply selecting jurors who have no existing dislike f
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"If you had to not dislike someone to give them a fair trial then every child rapist, murder and other scumbags would walk free every day."
First scumbags do walk free every day and it's better than imprisoning a bunch of innocent people. If you disagree... tough shit, that's our system in the US. Otherwise the people need fear the state when it is the state which should fear the people.
"You only have to show you can provide a view based on the facts not on whether you like the person."
There is no way to sho
Re: (Score:1)
Ridiculous.
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
You can absolutely hate a murderer and still be expected to make a fair decision on all the charges, like the robbery and the gun possession and the accomplices roles and so on. What's hard to understand about that?
You know how I know you don't really think Musk is a victim? Because you all keep making the examples backwards as if he was the accused.
Re: (Score:3)
"several prospective jurors expressed negative views of Elon Musk, but Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected attempts by Musk's lawyer to remove some of them solely on that basis, saying dislike of Musk does not automatically mean someone can't be fair."
Fair? What they can't be is unbiased and that should disqualify them.
Good luck finding a full jury of people that don't have a negative view of one or both of these yahoos. The only way you wouldn't have a negative view of them would be if you've completely disconnected from society, or if you happen to be one of the very, very lucky few to have made a massive pile of cash off of their self-aggrandizing ways. And something tells me even the later wouldn't be exempt from an unfavorable view of them.
Re: (Score:2)
What idiot modded down as off-topic this obviously on-topic post?
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
How so? Having a negative view of someone based on their track record seems fair to me. It's not the same as being prejudiced against someone. I have zero knowledge of what the law says here, but in terms of ethics I don't see an issue. Anyone who knows about Elon Musk and doesn't have a negative image of him is either an asshole or an idiot at this point, and most people know about him. Do you want a jury of assholes and idiots?
Re: (Score:2)
Musk is credited with exposing a huge amount of government fraud, and even stopping a small amount of it.
Credited by who? Himself? Is the Trump administration bothering to pretend on any of that anymore?
Re: (Score:2)
There was never any credible reason to doubt it nor any motive for lying in the first place. A subset of it was codified but definitely not all of it.
"The only way you wouldn't have a negative view of them would be if you've completely disconnected from society"
The only people with a negative view of Musk are left wingers and they are a shrinking minority despite the sad echo-chamber that has grown here on Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
There was never any credible reason to doubt it nor any motive for lying in the first place. A subset of it was codified but definitely not all of it.
There were plenty of very credible reasons to doubt it and lots of motive for lying in the first place. I admit that maybe I am not giving teenage script kiddies who call themselves things like "Big Balls" and are affiliated with cybercrime groups and white supremacist organizations the benefit of the doubt. Must be my personal biases against complete unqualified people doing professional work.
"The only way you wouldn't have a negative view of them would be if you've completely disconnected from society"
That's a nice quote. Where did it come from?
The only people with a negative view of Musk are left wingers and they are a shrinking minority despite the sad echo-chamber that has grown here on Slashdot.
While it is true that, if you divide things up by political party affil
Re: Bad out of the gate... (Score:2)
The fraud we have to take a ketamine trip to Mars to find right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Weighted Bench. (Score:2)
Musk isn't the accused, and do explain how he's a victim.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
[...] the PhD-educated biology teacher trying to explain why it's called BI-ology is somehow the 'evil' one spreading goose-stepping hate speech?
That PhD-educated biology teacher would do well to talk to a linguist with knowledge of Proto-Indo-European roots and their respective Greek and Latin derivatives.
Re: (Score:2)
You know that "dislike of Musk does not automatically mean someone can't be fair" and "remove some of them solely on that basis" are also factors here, right?
People are capable of being fair to people they dislike. Most of us are. We can't actually get through our days most of the time without dealing with people we dislike.
The judge is 100% right that dislike doesn't mean can't be fair. The lawyers certainly should be demonstrating more than "This person doesn't like Musk" as a reason to reject them.
Also I
Re: (Score:2)
If anyone listens to Sam Altman croak on lazily about his brilliant ideas for 2 minutes they'll hate him just as much. A jury can hear arguments from two equally despicable people and make unbiased judgements about the case.
They should have Grok argue Musk's case, GPT argue Altman's. Let Claude be the judge.
Re: Weighted Bench. (Score:2)
Musk isn't the defendant, and you didn't even try to pretend he's a victim in this, which says a lot. He has his own for-profit AI company and it's not competitive. That's all this is about.
If there was fraud there was fraud. If they narrow the jury pool down to people that don't know Musk is a white nationalist how are the remaining dildos supposed to understand corporate legal structures? Can you even explain that?