robert

@VraserX Correct

Musk’s lawyer told the jury they are “not asking for money.” Then the judge reminded him there is literally a hearing about billions of dollars in disgorgement. So yes, this lawsuit is about money. It is also about damaging a competitor Musk failed to control. Elon will lose this.

being misunderstood by mediocre people is a form of progress

@SlumpBusterLock @grok @ns123abc Crux of the case is whether the for profit conversion was legal, and it was. The rest is fan fare trying to make them look bad to sway a jury to believe the contrary.

Feels like to me he was saying Microsoft is not being litigated - yet they are, considering they are a named co-defendant (even if not at the center of the case) and Elon’s attorneys are trying to prove Microsoft knowingly funded, induced and benefited from a corporate transition.

@gailalfaratx “On the for-profit shift that lies at the center of Elon’s lawsuit, Ilya pushed back hard against the original mission narrative. He testified he made no such promise to Elon that OpenAI would remain a nonprofit forever.” End of story.

Founders are basically professional overthinkers with high risk tolerance

@rumilyrics Super high IQ ppl are often a lot dumber at everything else that matters. They get in their own way.

How do you deal with a person smarter than you?

@CourtsideAura problem-solver for sure

@RobxInfa Plus he’ll actually do something to try to help solve your problems

I call and yell at my lawyer at 3x a therapist’s rate because he has context so it works better.

@Nate_Esparza In a bad way

The vibes at SpaceXAI are insane right now

@3gpmh Lmao

i once tried journaling but it looked like i was writing a suicide note

@yacineMTB Dorks fr

Anthropic employees are what happens when you stop bullying nerds

@flowersslop @khushkhushkhush correct

@khushkhushkhush dude wanted OpenAI folded into his Tesla dream and unilateral control over OpenAI. Both got denied. Then he said they would fail unless they went for profit, left, stayed quiet for years, praised GPT-3, and only started crying about the for profit turn once ChatGPT blew up

how can you not be team elon in all of this?

@khushkhushkhush very easily

@ns123abc I’ll give you a B- for effort. You know how this ends, sir.

🚨 GREG BROCKMAN CLAIMED UNDER OATH TODAY HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE'S BEING SUED FOR The most damaging single exchange in the entire day's testimony came at the end of Brockman's testimony: Today on cross-examination: Q: Did this lawsuit prevent you from publishing the new charter? Brockman: "I've honestly never really been certain what I'm being sued for." Q: You're not? Did you read the complaint? Brockman: "In great detail." Q: They hired some really well-known lawyers, well-known law firms — and they never explained to you what you're being sued for? Brockman: "I understand the claims. I've seen how they've changed over time too. But —" Q: So you do understand? Brockman: "I do stand by my testimony." Q: I thought you said that you didn't understand what you were being sued for. Brockman: "Those are the words I used. Yes." Q: And you stand by that testimony? Brockman: "Yes." Then Musk's lawyer stated the claim directly: Q: You are being sued for breaching your fiduciary duty to the charity, to follow the mission you proclaimed as recently as right now to the world on the website. Understand? Brockman: "Oh, I just disagree with that." Q: You don't get to disagree. I'm asking. You said you didn't know what you're being sued for, and I'm telling you, YOU ARE BEING SUED FOR BREACHING THE CHARITABLE MISSION OF OPENAI, which was to DEVELOP SAFE AI ON AN OPEN SOURCE BASIS FOR THE BENEFIT OF HUMANITY AND NO ONE PERSON IS TO PROFIT INDIVIDUALLY BY IT. Understand that's what you're being sued for? Brockman: "That's not what we did." On the same day, also under oath, Brockman testified to: - Holds $30 billion in personal OpenAI equity, with $0 invested to acquire it - Received a secret $10 million side-payment from Sam Altman in 2017, concealed from co-founder Musk - Wrote in his August 2017 diary: "This is the only chance we have to get out of Elon... take me to $1 billion" - Wrote in his November 2017 diary: >"If three months later we're doing b-corp then it was a lie." >"I would actually be warm to steal the nonprofit from him to convert to b corp without him." >"His story will correctly be that we weren't honest with him in the end about still wanting to do for profit just without him." - Has four undisclosed financial conflicts with OpenAI counterparties (Cerebras, Stripe, CoreWeave, Helion) - Testified that the OpenAI Foundation had ZERO full-time employees until this lawsuit was filed - Never delivered the $100,000 he publicly pledged in charitable donations to OpenAI eight years ago - Drafted a new charter in December 2023 removing "Our primary duty is to humanity" and adding "capitalism as a positive force" - Agreed he had a fiduciary duty to OpenAI as a 501(c)(3) Charity and to Humanity - Then testified he is not sure any conversation explaining his fiduciary duties ever occurred in his nine years as a charity fiduciary. Greg Brockman has been in the courtroom throughout this trial. He spent five hours confessing every element of unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of charitable trust. Then he played dumb in front of the jury when asked what he was being sued for — because the answer is everything he just confessed. The bench reads behavior. The contradiction is itself the record. The witness already made the case for Musk.

@bilalfarooqui Amplify

Lots of DMs asking “who is a tier 1 VC” so in no particular order: - a16z - thrive - general catalyst - accel - benchmark - sequoia - founders fund - kleiner - first round - lightspeed - bessemer Who did I miss?

@SawyerMerritt If you actually know anything about this case, you know it’s a complete sham and Elon will lose.

Here's a rough summary of Elon Musk’s 1 hour and 40 minute long testimony today during the OpenAI trial. He will resume his testimony tomorrow. • Argues the case has huge implications: "It is not ok to steal a charity. If the defendants are found not guilty, this case will become caselaw. It’ll give license to looting every charity in America. The consequences of this case go far beyond me or everyone here. The entire foundation of charitable giving in America will be destroyed." • Says OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit, open-source counterweight to Google, focused on AI safety. • Claims the shift to a for-profit structure violated that mission. • Says his AI concerns date back to conversations with Larry Page, who he felt wasn’t taking AI risk seriously. • Elon says he tried to warn Obama about AI, but that Obama felt AI was not good enough (back then) to seem scary smart. "Here we are in 2026, AI is very smart." • Believes AI could surpass human intelligence as soon as next year and poses existential risk in the hands of the wrong people: “If you have someone who’s not very trustworthy in charge of AI, that’s very dangerous for the whole world.” • Elon framed his companies (SpaceX, Neuralink, xAI) as part of a broader mission to protect humanity’s future. • Emphasized OpenAI’s original goal: AI for the good of humanity, not profit-driven control. • Elon's main argument is that OpenAI abandoned its founding principles, and that precedent could reshape both AI governance and charitable trust. • Larry Page refused to speak to Elon Musk again after Elon recruited Ilya Sutskever to join OpenAI. Elon viewed Ilya as the “number one” most valuable member at Google. • Elon thought in the early days, OpenAI's corporate structure would be a nonprofit funded initially with donations, but there could potentially be a parallel for-profit that is owned by the nonprofit and funds the nonprofit: “We (Sam Altman and Elon) were in agreement that OpenAI would be a 501c3 charity. • Elon was not opposed to there being a small for-profit that provided funding to the nonprofit, as long as "the tail didn’t wag the dog." • Elon: “there are very few people who understand venture capital in Silicon Valley like I do."

@aki_ranin @SawyerMerritt @zerohedge Or Anthropic, who spun out and conveniently structured as a PBC from the outset, despite positioning themselves as the safety-pilled alternative

@SawyerMerritt @zerohedge This argument would be soooo much more compelling if xAI had become a non-profit.

@ns123abc Now show where he wanted to roll it under Tesla and said they couldn’t succeed without funding

🚨An email exchange from September 2017 was just shown to jurors Musk: “Either go do something on your own or continue with OpenAI as a nonprofit.” Altman: “I remain enthusiastic about the non-profit structure!” The same month Brockman wrote in his diary: "i cannot believe that we committed to non-profit if three months later we're doing b-corp then it was a lie"