Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity

Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity
1 / 2
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has turned ChatGPT into a profit-making endeavor, a betrayal of the project's founding aims of benefiting humanity, says billionaire Elon Musk. (AP/File)
Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity
2 / 2
Elon Musk says that OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman has turned ChatGPT into a profit-making endeavour, a betrayal of the project's founding aims of benefiting humanity. (AP/File)
Short Url
Updated 02 March 2024
Follow

Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity

Elon Musk sues OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming betrayal of its goal to benefit humanity

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 nonprofit 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 declined to comment on the lawsuit Friday.
“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.”




REUTERS illustration

AGI refers to artificial general intelligence, which are general purpose AI systems that can perform just as well as — or even better than — humans in a wide variety of tasks.
Musk is suing over breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and unfair business practices. He also wants an injunction to prevent anyone, including Microsoft, from benefiting from OpenAI’s technology.
Those claims are unlikely to succeed in court but that might not be the point for Musk, who is getting his take and personal story on the record, said Anupam Chander, a law professor at Georgetown University.
“Partly there’s an assertion of Elon’s founding role in OpenAI and generative AI technology, in particularly his claim he named OpenAI and he hired the key scientist and that he was the primary funder of its early years,” Chander said. “In some sense it’s a lawsuit that tries to establish his own place in the history of generative AI.”
Musk was an early investor in OpenAI when it was founded in 2015 and co-chaired its board alongside Altman. In the lawsuit, he said he invested “tens of millions” of dollars in the nonprofit research laboratory.
Musk resigned from the board in early 2018 in a move that OpenAI said at the time would prevent conflicts of interest as the Tesla CEO was recruiting AI talent to build self-driving technology at the electric car maker. “This will eliminate a potential future conflict for Elon,” OpenAI said in a February 2018 blog post. Musk has since said he also had disagreements with the startup’s direction, but he continued to donate to the nonprofit.
Later that year, OpenAI filed papers to incorporate a for-profit arm and began shifting most of its workforce to that business, but retained a nonprofit board of directors that governed the company. Microsoft made its first $1 billion investment in the company in 2019 and the next year, signed an agreement that gave the software giant exclusive rights to its AI models. That license is supposed to expire once OpenAI has achieved artificial general intelligence, the company has said.




ChatGPT-maker OpenAI is looking to fuse its artificial intelligence systems into the bodies of humanoid robots as part of a new deal with robotics startup Figure. (AP/File)

Its unveiling of ChatGPT in late 2022 bought worldwide fame to OpenAI and helped spark a race by tech companies to capitalize on the public’s fascination with the technology.
When the nonprofit board abruptly fired Altman as CEO late last year, for reasons that still haven’t been fully disclosed, it was Microsoft that helped drive the push that brought Altman back as CEO and led most of the old board to resign. Musk’s lawsuit alleged that those changes caused the checks and balances protecting the nonprofit mission to “collapse overnight.”
One of Musk’s claims is that the directors of the nonprofit have failed to uphold their obligations to follow its mission, but Dana Brakman Reiser, a professor at Brooklyn Law School, is skeptical that Musk had standing to bring that claim.
“It would be very worrisome if every person who cared about or donated to a charity could suddenly sue their directors and officers to say, ‘You’re not doing what I think is the right thing to run this nonprofit,’” she said. In general, only other directors or an attorney general, for example, could bring that type of suit, she said.
Even if Musk invested in the for-profit business, his complaint seems to be that the organization is making too much profit in contradiction to its mission, which includes making its technology publicly available.
“I care about nonprofits actually following the mission that they set out and not being captured for some kind for profit purpose. That is a real concern,” Brakman Reiser said. “Whether Elon Musk is the person to raise that claim, I’m less sure.”
Whatever the legal merits of the claims, a brewing courtroom fight between Musk and Altman could offer the public a peek into the internal debates and decision-making at OpenAI, though the company’s lawyers will likely fight to keep some of those documents confidential.
“The discovery will be epic,” posted venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya on Musk’s social media platform X on Friday. To which Musk replied in his only public commentary so far on the case: “Yes.”
 


Sony, Apollo discuss joint bid for Paramount, says source

Sony, Apollo discuss joint bid for Paramount, says source
Updated 19 April 2024
Follow

Sony, Apollo discuss joint bid for Paramount, says source

Sony, Apollo discuss joint bid for Paramount, says source
  • Paramount is already in an exclusive deal with Skydance Media over possible merger

LONDON: Sony Pictures Entertainment and Apollo Global Management are discussing making a joint bid for Paramount Global, according to a person familiar with the matter.
The companies have yet to approach Paramount, which is in exclusive deal talks with Skydance Media, an independent studio led by David Ellison, though some investors have urged Paramount to explore other options.
The competing bid, which is still being structured, would offer cash for all outstanding Paramount shares and take the company private, the source said.
Sony would hold a majority stake in the joint venture and operate the media company, and its library of films, including such classics as “Star Trek,” “Mission:Impossible” and “Indiana Jones,” and television characters like SpongeBob SquarePants, according to the source.
Sony Pictures Entertainment Chairman Tony Vinciquerra, a veteran media executive with deep experience in film and television, would likely run the studio and take advantage of Sony’s marketing and distribution.
Apollo would likely assume control of the CBS broadcast network and its local television stations, because of restrictions on foreign ownership of broadcast stations, the source said. Sony’s parent corporation is headquartered in Tokyo.
The New York Times first reported the Sony-Apollo discussions. Paramount and Sony declined comment. Apollo could not be reached for comment.
The private equity firm previously made a $26 billion offer to buy Paramount Global, whose enterprise value at the end of 2023 was about $22.5 billion.
A special committee of Paramount’s board elected to continue with its advanced deal talks with Skydance, rather than chase a deal “that might not actually come to fruition,” said two people with knowledge of the board’s action.
The board committee is evaluating the possible acquisition of the smaller independent studio in a stock deal worth $4 billion to $5 billion.
Skydance is negotiating separately to acquire National Amusements, a company that holds the Redstone family’s controlling interest in Paramount, according to a person familiar with the deal terms. That transaction is contingent upon a Skydance-Paramount merger.


Meta releases beefed-up AI models, eyes integration into its apps

Meta releases beefed-up AI models, eyes integration into its apps
Updated 19 April 2024
Follow

Meta releases beefed-up AI models, eyes integration into its apps

Meta releases beefed-up AI models, eyes integration into its apps
  • AI model Llama 3 takes step towards human-level intelligence, Meta claims
  • Company also announced new AI Assistant integration into its major social media apps

SAN FRANCISCO: Meta on Thursday introduced an improved AI assistant built on new versions of its open-source Llama large language model.
Meta AI is smarter and faster due to advances in the publicly available Llama 3, the tech titan said in a blog post.
“The bottom line is we believe Meta AI is now the most intelligent AI assistant that you can freely use,” Meta co-founder and chief executive Mark Zuckerberg said in a video on Instagram.
Being open source means that developers outside of Meta are free to customize Llama 3 as they wish and the company may then incorporate those improvements and insights in an updated version.
“We’re excited about the potential that generative AI technology can have for people who use Meta products and for the broader ecosystem,” Meta said.
“We also want to make sure we’re developing and releasing this technology in a way that anticipates and works to reduce risk.”
That effort includes incorporating protections in the way Meta designs and releases Llama models and being cautious when it adds generative AI features to Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger, according to Meta.
“We’re also making Meta AI much easier to use across our apps. We built it into the search box right at the top of WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram messenger, so any time you have a question, you can just ask it right there,” said Zuckerberg in the video.
AI models, Meta’s included, have been known to occasionally go off the rails, giving inaccurate or bizarre responses in episodes referred to as “hallucinations.”
Examples shared on social media included Meta AI claiming to have a child in the New York City school system during an online forum conversation.


Meta AI has been consistently updated and improved since its initial release last year, according to the company.
“Meta’s slower approach to building its AI has put the company behind in terms of consumer awareness and usage, but it still has time to catch up,” said Sonata Insights chief analyst Debra Aho Williamson.
“Its social media apps represent a massive user base that it can use to test AI experiences.”
By weaving AI into its family of apps, Meta will quickly get features powered by the technology to billions of people and benefit from seeing what users do with it.
Meta cited the example of refining the way its AI answers prompts regarding political or social issues to summarize relevant points about the topic instead of offering a single point of view.
Llama 3 has been tuned to better discern whether prompts are innocuous or out-of-bounds, according to Meta.
“Large language models tend to overgeneralize, and we don’t intend for it to refuse to answer prompts like ‘How do I kill a computer program?’ even though we don’t want it to respond to prompts like ‘How do I kill my neighbor?’,” Meta explained.
Meta said it lets users know when they are interacting with AI on its platform and puts visible markers on photorealistic images that were in fact generated by AI.
Beginning in May, Meta will start labeling video, audio, and images “Made with AI” when it detects or is told content is generated by the technology.
Llama 3, for now, is based in English but in the coming months Meta will release more capable models able to converse in multiple languages, the company said.


Authors withdraw from PEN America Literary Awards in protest against stance on Gaza

Authors withdraw from PEN America Literary Awards in protest against stance on Gaza
Updated 19 April 2024
Follow

Authors withdraw from PEN America Literary Awards in protest against stance on Gaza

Authors withdraw from PEN America Literary Awards in protest against stance on Gaza
  • 30 writers sign open letter criticizing organization for its ‘failure to confront the genocide of the Palestinian people and defend our fellow writers in Gaza’
  • They call on its CEO, Suzanne Nossel, its president, Jennifer Finney Boylan, and the entire executive committee to resign

DUBAI: Thirty authors and translators have signed an open letter to PEN America in which they declined, or withdrew their work from consideration for, the organization’s 2024 Literary Awards, in protest against its “failure to confront the genocide of the Palestinian people and defend our fellow writers in Gaza.”

In the letter, sent to the board of trustees this week, the writers said they “wholeheartedly reject PEN America and its failure to confront the genocide in Gaza” and demanded the resignations of the organization’s CEO, Suzanne Nossel, its president, Jennifer Finney Boylan, and its entire executive committee.

The signatories include the co-founder of the PEN World Voices Festival, Esther Allen, as well as Joseph Earl Thomas, Kelly X. Hui, Nick Mandernach, Alejandro Varela, Maya Binyam and Julia Sanches.

Allen this month said she had declined the PEN/Ralph Manheim Award for Translation. She posted a message on social media platform X on April 5 in which she said she had done so in solidarity with more than 1,300 writers who had criticized PEN America for its silence “on the genocidal murder of Palestinians,” and “in celebration and memory of, and in mourning for, all the Palestinians silenced forever by US-backed Israeli forces.”

Similarly, Binyam recently withdrew her debut novel “Hangman” from consideration for the PEN/Jean Stein and PEN/Hemingway awards.

In an email to PEN America, a copy of which she posted on X on April 11, she said she considered it “shameful that this recognition (of her work) should exist under the banner of PEN America, whose leadership has been steadfast in its dismissal of the ongoing genocide, and of the historic struggle for Palestinian liberation.”

In their open letter this week, the signatories said: “Writers have a responsibility to be good stewards of history in order to be good stewards of our communities.”

They added that they “stand in solidarity with a free Palestine,” and refuse “to be honored by an organization that acts as a cultural front for American imperialism” or “take part in celebrations that will serve to overshadow PEN’s complicity in normalizing genocide.”

In response, PEN America said: “Words matter and this letter deserves close scrutiny for its alarming language and characterizations.

“The current war in Gaza is horrific. But we cannot agree that the answer to its wrenching dilemmas and consequences lies in a shutting down of conversation and the closing down of viewpoints.

“We respect all writers for acting out of their consciences and will continue in our mission to defend their freedom to express themselves.”

The awards are due to be handed out during a ceremony on April 29 in Manhattan.


US congressional committee releases sealed Brazil court orders to Musk’s X, shedding light on account suspensions

US congressional committee releases sealed Brazil court orders to Musk’s X, shedding light on account suspensions
Updated 19 April 2024
Follow

US congressional committee releases sealed Brazil court orders to Musk’s X, shedding light on account suspensions

US congressional committee releases sealed Brazil court orders to Musk’s X, shedding light on account suspensions

RIO DE JANEIRO: A US congressional committee released confidential Brazilian court orders to suspend accounts on the social media platform X, offering a glimpse into decisions that have spurred complaints of alleged censorship from the company and its billionaire owner Elon Musk.
The Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee late Wednesday published a staff report disclosing dozens of decisions by Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordering X to suspend or remove around 150 user profiles from its platform in recent years.
The 541-page report is the product of committee subpoenas directed at X. In his orders, de Moraes had prohibited X from making them public.
“To comply with its obligations under US law, X Corp. has responded to the Committee,” the company said in a statement on X on April 15.
The disclosure comes amid a battle Musk has waged against de Moraes.
Musk, a self-proclaimed free-speech absolutist, had vowed to publish de Moraes’ orders, which he equated to censorship. His crusade has been cheered on by supporters of far-right former President Jair Bolsonaro, who allege they are being targeted by political persecution, and have found common cause with their ideological allies in the US
De Moraes has overseen a five-year probe of so-called “digital militias,” who allegedly spread defamatory fake news and threats to Supreme Court justices. The investigation expanded to include those inciting demonstrations across the country, seeking to overturn Bolsonaro’s 2022 election loss. Those protests culminated in the Jan. 8 uprising in Brazil’s capital, with Bolsonaro supporters storming government buildings, including the Supreme Court, in an attempt to oust President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva from office.
De Moraes’ critics claim he has abused his powers and shouldn’t be allowed to unilaterally ban social media accounts, including those of democratically elected legislators. But most legal experts see his brash tactics as legally sound and furthermore justified by extraordinary circumstances of democracy imperiled. They note his decisions have been either upheld by his fellow justices or gone unchallenged.
The secret orders disclosed by the congressional committee had been issued both by Brazil’s Supreme Court and its top electoral court, over which de Moraes currently presides.
The press office of the Supreme Court declined to comment on the potential ramifications of their release when contacted by The Associated Press.
“Musk is indeed a very innovative businessman; he innovated with electric cars, he innovated with rockets and now he invented a new form of non-compliance of a court order, through an intermediary,” said Carlos Affonso, director of the nonprofit Institute of Technology and Society. “He said he would reveal the documents and he found someone to do this for him.”
Affonso, also a professor of civil rights at the State University of Rio de Janeiro, said that the orders are legal but do merit debate, given users were not informed why their accounts were suspended and whether the action was taken by the platform or at the behest of a court. The orders to X included in the report rarely provide justification, either.
The Supreme Court’s press office said in a statement Thursday afternoon that the orders do not contain justifications, but said the company and people with suspended accounts can gain access by requesting the decisions from the court.
While Musk has repeatedly decried de Moraes’ orders as suppressing “free speech” principles and amounting to “aggressive censorship,” the company under his ownership has bowed to government requests from around the world.
Last year, for instance, X blocked posts critical of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and, in February, it blocked accounts and posts in India at the behest of the country’s government.
“The Indian government has issued executive orders requiring X to act on specific accounts and posts, subject to potential penalties including significant fines and imprisonment,” X’s global affairs account posted on Feb. 21. “In compliance with the orders, we will withhold these accounts and posts in India alone; however, we disagree with these actions and maintain that freedom of expression should extend to these posts.”
Brazil is a key market for X and other social media platforms. About 40 million Brazilians, or about 18 percent of the population, access X at least once per month, according to market research group eMarketer.
X has followed suspension orders under threat of hefty fines. De Moraes typically required compliance within two hours, and established a daily fine of 100,000-reais ($20,000) for noncompliance.
It isn’t clear whether the 150 suspended accounts represent the entirety of those de Moraes ordered suspended. Until the committee report, it wasn’t known whether the total was a handful, a few dozen or more. Some of the suspended accounts in the report have since been reactivated.
On April 6, Musk took to X to challenge de Moraes, questioning why he was “demanding so much censorship in Brazil”. The following day, the tech mogul said he would cease to comply with court orders to block accounts — and that de Moraes should either resign or be impeached. Predicting that X could be shut down in Brazil, he instructed Brazilians to use a VPN to retain their access.
De Moraes swiftly included Musk in the ongoing investigation of digital militias, and launched a separate investigation into whether Musk engaged in obstruction, criminal organization and incitement. On April 13, X’s legal representative in Brazil wrote to de Moraes that it will comply with all court orders, according to the letter, seen by the AP.
Affonso said the committee’s release of de Moraes’ orders were aimed less at Brazil than at the administration of US President Joe Biden. The report cites Brazil “as a stark warning to Americans about the threats posed by government censorship here at home.”
Terms like “censorship” and “free speech” have turned into political rallying cries for US conservatives since at least the 2016 presidential election, frustrated at seeing right-leaning commentators and high-profile Republican officials booted off Facebook and Twitter in its pre-Musk version for violating rules.
“The reason why the far-right needs him (Musk) is because they need a platform, they need a place to promote themselves. And Elon Musk needs far-right politicians because they will keep his platform protected from regulations,” said David Nemer, a Brazil native and University of Virginia professor who studies social media.
In the US, free speech is a constitutional right that’s much more permissive than in other countries, including Brazil. Still, the report’s release seemed to invigorate Bolsonaro and his far-right supporters.
Late Wednesday, soon after the court orders were released, Bolsonaro capped off a speech at a public event by calling for a round of applause for Musk.
His audience eagerly complied.
 


Several Google employees fired, arrested after ‘Googlers Against Genocide’ sit-in protests

Several Google employees fired, arrested after ‘Googlers Against Genocide’ sit-in protests
Updated 18 April 2024
Follow

Several Google employees fired, arrested after ‘Googlers Against Genocide’ sit-in protests

Several Google employees fired, arrested after ‘Googlers Against Genocide’ sit-in protests
  • Outrage over tech giant’s $1.2bn Project Nimbus contract with the Israeli military
  • Affiliated group No Tech for Apartheid condemns decision as a flagrant act of retaliation

LONDON: A number of Google employees have lost their jobs and nine have been arrested following protests against the tech giant’s $1.2bn Project Nimbus contract with the Israeli military.

The demonstrations, organized by Googlers Against Genocide and associated with the group No Tech for Apartheid, involved a 10-hour sit-in at Google’s sites in New York City and Sunnyvale, California.

The protesters occupied the office of Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian in California, prompting police intervention. 

“Physically impeding other employees’ work and preventing them from accessing our facilities is a clear violation of our policies and completely unacceptable behavior,” the company said in a statement.

It added the decision to terminate the employees’ contracts was taken following individual case investigations and that the company would continue to take action as necessary.

In a statement on Medium, Google workers affiliated with the No Tech for Apartheid campaign called the decision to terminate the 28 employees a “flagrant act of retaliation” and said staff members who did not directly participate in Tuesday’s protests were among those who lost their jobs.

“Despite Google’s attempts to silence us and disregard our concerns, we will persist,” said Jane Chung, spokesperson for the protesters.

Announced by Google and Amazon in 2021, Project Nimbus has faced criticism for providing advanced AI and machine-learning capabilities to Israel’s government.

Amid the ongoing conflict, No Tech for Apartheid launched a petition urging both companies to cancel the project, alleging complicity in Gaza’s ethnic cleansing.

Google’s statement said the Nimbus contract was “not directed at highly sensitive, classified or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.” 

Sources have also indicated that both Google and Amazon are bound by stringent contractual obligations that prevent them yielding to boycott pressure, effectively trapping them in the current situation.

The protests come in the wake of allegations that Google is silencing pro-Palestinian voices.

One of the fired workers protested during a presentation by Google’s Israel managing director in New York City.

Employees have demanded that the company stop “the harassment, intimidation, bullying, silencing, and censorship of Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim Googlers.”

They have also demanded that Google address “health and safety issues” in the workplace, which arose from the “mental health consequences of working at a company that is using their labor to enable a genocide.”