Posts

elon musk

Elon Musk Could Become World’s First Trillionaire As SpaceX Enters Wall Street 

/in , /by

Elon Musk’s company SpaceX made its debut on Wall Street this week with both institutional and retail investors expected to grab the 555.6 million shares on sale for $135 each. This move could propel Musk to become the world’s first trillionaire.

Read more
open ai

OpenAI Chief Sam Altman Appears In Court Against Elon Musk 

/in , , /by

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman took the witness stand this week to defend his business records in a trial that’s putting him up against fellow tech giant Elon Musk. Musk is looking for Altman to be dismissed from his leadership position as a part of a civil lawsuit that accuses the CEO of “betraying” the two’s shared vision for OpenAI.

Read more
open ai

Musk vs. OpenAI: Court Battle Over AI’s Founding Mission Begins

/in , /by

A closely watched courtroom fight over the direction of artificial intelligence kicked off Tuesday, as Elon Musk appeared in federal court to press his case against OpenAI.

Even before proceedings began, Musk was waging a parallel battle online. On Monday, he posted more than 2 dozen times on X, the social media platform he owns, criticizing OpenAI and its leadership while framing the dispute for his nearly 240 million followers.

The dispute, playing out in Oakland, goes beyond a typical business disagreement. At its core is a fundamental question. Should advanced AI be developed as a public good, or is a profit-driven model inevitable in a field that demands staggering levels of capital?

Musk argues that OpenAI has drifted far from the principles that defined its founding. When the organization launched in 2015, it was framed as a nonprofit research lab committed to advancing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. According to court filings, that vision and the promise that its technology “would belong to the world” were central to convincing Musk to invest millions and lend his name as a co-founder.

Today, OpenAI operates under a hybrid structure in which a nonprofit entity oversees a for-profit arm, an arrangement the company says was necessary to compete in a sector that requires massive spending on data centers, talent, and computing power.

Musk sees that shift differently. In his lawsuit, he claims he was misled about the company’s long-term intentions and that the pivot toward commercialization amounts to a betrayal of its original mission. He is expected to take the stand during the trial, which could unfold over the coming weeks.

Embed from Getty Images

The case also highlights Musk’s increasingly direct competition with OpenAI. Through his company xAI, he has entered the race to build next-generation AI systems, including the chatbot Grok, positioning himself against one of the field’s most influential players.

Across the aisle is Sam Altman, OpenAI’s chief executive and once a collaborator of Musk’s. Their relationship has since deteriorated into a high-profile rivalry that blends personal tension with competing visions for the technology’s future.

OpenAI has pushed back forcefully against Musk’s claims in recent posts on X. In legal filings and public statements, the company argued that Musk’s departure from the organization had less to do with philosophical differences and more to do with disagreements over control.

“The truth is that this case has always been about Elon generating more power and more money for what he wants. Having increasingly realized that his attempt to damage the nonprofit OpenAI Foundation rests on a baseless legal case, Elon is once again trying to change the narrative and save face as the trial approaches. His lawsuit remains nothing more than a harassment campaign that’s driven by ego, jealousy and a desire to slow down a competitor.”

Attorneys for OpenAI have maintained that the company’s leadership, including Altman and co-founder Greg Brockman, stands firmly behind its decisions. They “are confident in their position and look forward to the facts being known,” lawyer William Savitt said after jury selection concluded.

Still, Musk’s legal challenge is sweeping in scope. He is seeking structural changes that would force OpenAI to return to a purely nonprofit model, as well as the removal of key executives. While he initially sought damages of up to $134 billion, Musk has since said he would redirect any financial award to the organization’s nonprofit arm rather than keep it.

Embed from Getty Images

As governments and companies worldwide grapple with how to regulate and fund artificial intelligence, the trial highlights a growing divide between those who see AI as a public utility and those who view it as a competitive industry driven by private investment.

Presiding over the case is Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who will ultimately decide the remedy, if any, after considering input from an advisory jury. A decision is expected by late May.

On the eve of the trial, Musk took direct aim at Altman on social media, calling him “Scam Altman,” a jab that underscores how a once-collaborative partnership has evolved into one of Silicon Valley’s most consequential feuds.

“Scam Altman and Greg Stockman stole a charity. Greg got tens of billions of stock for himself, and Scam got dozens of OpenAI side deals with a piece of the action for himself.”

During Tuesday’s proceedings, Judge Rogers raised concerns about Musk’s online activity, calling him to the bench to discuss whether to place limits on his public commentary. “How can we get things done without you making things worse outside the courtroom?” she asked.

After Musk said he was responding to statements from OpenAI, the judge urged him, Altman, and Brockman to begin with a “clean slate” and to “keep things to a minimum” on social media. They agreed.

His use of X reflects a broader pattern of shaping public narratives around high-profile disputes, even as jurors in such cases are typically instructed to avoid outside information.

Musk also amplified supportive commentary, including reposting a message that read, “The main difference between Elon Musk and Sam Altman: Elon Musk actually changes the world for the better and saves lives. Sam Altman? He mostly just takes.”

grok

Media Regulator Opens Formal Investigation Into X For Oversexualized AI Image Generation 

/in , /by

The investigation specifically regards the site’s Grok AI tool which is now being used to manipulate preexisting images of women and children to remove their clothes and create inappropriately oversexualized AI images. 

Read more
grok

Elon Musk Touts Grok 4 as ‘Smarter Than Grad Students’ Days After AI’s Nazi Meltdown

/in , /by

Elon Musk’s announcement of Grok 4’s debut arrived with all the bravado and drama one might expect from the tech mogul, complete with celebratory music, delayed streaming, and lofty claims of world-changing potential. But amid the flash and fanfare, controversy loomed large after the AI assistant’s tumultuous week.

Read more

Trump Suggests Elon Musk’s White House Tenure Nearing End Amid GOP Concerns

/in /by

President Donald Trump has informed close advisers, including Cabinet members, that Elon Musk is set to step back from his high-profile role in the administration in the coming weeks. Musk has been a key figure in the administration—spearheading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), championing Trump’s agenda, and making waves as an unapologetically aggressive political operative in Washington.

Read more
election

Comedian Rosie O’Donnell Questions Legitimacy of Trump’s Re-election

/in /by

Rosie O’Donnell has called for an investigation into the 2024 US presidential election results, questioning the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s sweeping victory across key swing states. The comedian and former co-host of “The View,” who has had a long-standing rivalry with Trump, voiced her concerns during an appearance on Irish talk show “The Late Late Show” last week.

Speaking to host Patrick Kielty, O’Donnell expressed disbelief over Trump’s electoral success, hinting that his close friendship with a powerful tech figure could have influenced the outcome. Without naming him directly, O’Donnell seemed to suggest Elon Musk, the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), stating, “One of his best friends owns and runs the internet.” She also named this individual as one of his “biggest donors.”

“I would hope that would be investigated and that we would see whether or not it was an anomaly or something else that happened on election night in America when Kamala Harris was filling up stadiums with people who supported her and Donald Trump was not able to do that. So it’s curious to me, and as an American and a believer in democracy, I would hope that we would be able to look at all of the reasons why this happened in our country.”

Embed from Getty Images

O’Donnell, 63, recently relocated to Ireland shortly before Trump retook office, describing the move as beneficial for her mental health and sleep quality. In an Instagram post from earlier this month, she stated, “It’s not easy to move to another country, and we really felt as a family this was the safest and best thing for us to do, and it looks like sadly we were correct.”

She and her 12-year-old daughter, Dakota, settled in Dublin. In her interview, she made it clear that she stood by her decision. “The president of the United States has it out for me and has for twenty years when I told the truth about him on a program called The View,” she said.

“I mentioned his bankruptcies, and I mentioned all of the sexual assault charges, and I mentioned that he was not, in fact, the businessman that everyone thinks he is because of the show, The Apprentice, where they sold a bunch of lies to America for over 10 years, and half of America believed it. And so he was very angry to say the least, and he hasn’t let it go. And he sort of uses me as a punchline whenever he feels the need.”

O’Donnell also expressed deep concern over Trump’s significant government restructuring, particularly his plans to dismantle the Department of Education. She highlighted the personal implications for her autistic child, Dakota, had she stayed in America, emphasizing the severe impact such decisions have on federally funded programs supporting special needs education. “

Embed from Getty Images

“It’s going to be disastrous for children on the spectrum. And that was terrifying. But the biggest reason that it was different than the first time he was in office is because of the Supreme Court giving him ultimate power, the powers of a king or a monarch. And that’s not what the United States is all about. And it’s a terrifying prospect. And in fact, what has happened since he’s taken office has been terrifying, I think for the world and definitely for the United States of America.”

Additionally, O’Donnell criticized MMA fighter Conor McGregor’s recent White House visit, calling it “very depressing” and raising concerns about Trump’s association with controversial figures. Another one of McGregor’s previous visits followed shortly after an Irish High Court ruled in a civil case that he had assaulted and raped a woman in 2018. “It’s very strange that the president of the United States has so many friends who are sexual abusers,” she said. She also stated that the first few weeks of President Trump’s second term have been terrifying.

O’Donnell is Irish on both sides of her family and is currently in the process of applying for citizenship. Reflecting on her new life in Ireland, O’Donnell humorously shared her adjustment to driving on the opposite side of the road on Instagram. “Bought a little used car to tool around the countryside on the wrong side of the road,” she wrote. “Hit the curb three times—thought I hit a cat! #newadventures.” She also expressed excitement about walking Dakota to her new school, signaling her optimism despite the challenging political landscape back in the United States.

elon

Elon Musk Downplays Hitler’s Role in the Holocaust, Blames Public Workers Instead

/in /by

Early Friday morning, Elon Musk briefly shared and then quickly deleted a controversial post on X, which falsely argued that dictators like Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Mao Zedong were not directly responsible for millions of deaths, shifting the blame instead to their government employees.

The contentious post stated, “Stalin, Hitler, and Mao didn’t murder millions of people. Their public sector workers did.” Musk provided no commentary when sharing the message but swiftly removed it following widespread criticism from other users, who condemned it as historically inaccurate, antisemitic, and dismissive of atrocities.

Historians overwhelmingly agree that Stalin’s regime in the Soviet Union, Hitler’s Nazi government in Germany, and Mao’s rule in China were directly accountable for mass casualties, including the Holocaust, Stalin’s purges, and the devastation of Mao’s Cultural Revolution.

This incident is not the first time Musk has attracted controversy with his social media posts. Since acquiring X, formerly known as Twitter, Musk has dramatically loosened policies governing hate speech and misinformation, reinstating numerous previously banned accounts—including that of former President Trump.

In 2023, Musk shared another antisemitic post on X, which he claimed represented “the actual truth” about Jewish people, leading to significant backlash and advertiser departures. The first part of the post read, “Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them.”

Following an assassination attempt on former President Trump last year, Musk also posted—and quickly deleted—a provocative remark questioning why no similar attempts had occurred against President Biden or Vice President Harris.

Embed from Getty Images

Musk, who frequently leverages his platform to broadcast politically charged statements to over 219 million followers, has increasingly aligned himself with right-wing figures worldwide. He has publicly supported leaders such as Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Javier Milei of Argentina, and India’s Narendra Modi—countries where Musk maintains significant business interests.

Most recently, Musk minimized the severity and legacy of the Holocaust during an online event supporting Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), a party linked to neo-Nazi affiliations, by asserting, “Children should not feel guilty for the sins of their parents—or even their great-grandparents.”

His repeated flirtations with Nazi symbolism and historical revisionism remain puzzling, especially considering his public visit to Israel and the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp just over a year ago. Holocaust survivor Gidon Lev, who accompanied Musk on that visit, later expressed disappointment, noting Musk’s apparent lack of genuine engagement and describing his participation as merely a “photo op.”

“I was not impressed because he didn’t make the least attempt to make any personal connections. So, you know, like, ‘Where were you, Gidon? What happened to your father?’ There was nothing. I was there as a decoration. It was the AJE, the Jewish Association, who wanted a Holocaust survivor to be photographed together with Elon Musk. So, I went along. I was sort of a prop, but it was freezing cold, and it was hard. And he was not connected.”

Musk’s involvement with public sector employees has intensified lately as part of his advisory role to President Trump on government efficiency and spending reforms. He’s openly criticized federal workers, accusing them of hiding fraud and urging them to resign. Musk’s comments triggered immediate outrage among public-sector worker unions and advocates.

Embed from Getty Images

Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the largest trade union for public sector employees in the U.S., strongly denounced Musk’s post in a statement. 

“America’s public service workers – our nurses, teachers, firefighters, librarians – chose making our communities safe, healthy and strong over getting rich. They are not, as the world’s richest man implies, genocidal murderers. Elon Musk and the billionaires in this administration have no idea what real people go through every day. That’s why he’s so willing to take a chainsaw to people’s jobs, Medicaid, Social Security and Medicare.”

Despite deleting the controversial post, Musk continued responding to critics on X throughout Friday, defending himself against antisemitism allegations and suggesting that his critics were the actual fascists.

“Look at what they did to President @realDonaldTrump. He was loved by Democrats until he ran for president. Now they call him Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, etc. and try to kill him.”

Musk’s attempts to distance himself from accusations of supporting Nazi ideologies have been met with skepticism. In January, Musk attracted additional controversy after being seen making a gesture similar to the Roman salute onstage, famously associated with Nazi Germany.

During a recent podcast interview with Joe Rogan, Musk argued that one can’t be labeled a Nazi without actively “committing genocide” or “invading Poland”—an oversimplification that overlooks contemporary neo-Nazis who openly adopt Nazi beliefs without perpetrating such acts.

Comments such as these have intensified criticism against Musk and sparked boycott campaigns targeting his company, Tesla. Activists, who refer to Tesla vehicles as “swasticars,” have held peaceful protests outside dealerships. However, some dealerships have faced more aggressive actions, including vandalism and suspected arson incidents, with swastikas spray-painted on cars and property.

doj

Unions Sue Musk Over “Job Justification” Email to Federal Workers

/in /by

Federal employees are suing Elon Musk after he sent a controversial email demanding that the entire workforce justify their roles by the end of the week or risk being fired from their positions.

The lawsuit, filed by unions, businesses, veterans and advocacy organizations, alleges that the email sent by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) breaches federal workforce regulations and exceeds the office’s authority. The filing also alleges Musk violated the law with his demand.

The State Democracy Defenders Fund, an organization spearheading the lawsuit, described the threat of widespread firings as “one of the most massive employment frauds in the history of this country.”

On Friday, federal employees received an email asking them to provide a list of five accomplishments from the past workweek without disclosing any classified information. However, multiple agency heads, including those appointed by Trump, advised staff to not respond, leaving them confused and unsure of what to do.

Musk shared on X that he was acting on instructions from President Donald Trump.

“All federal employees will shortly receive an email requesting to understand what they got done last week. Failure to respond will be taken as a resignation.”

Thousands of public health personnel at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) received contradictory orders regarding the email over the weekend.

An email obtained by the BBC reveals that workers were first instructed to review and reply to the message by Monday after receiving confirmation that it was legitimate. Soon after, HHS employees were told to “pause” activities related to the email since department heads were trying to determine how to work with the administration. As of Monday, staff members are still waiting for a clear directive.

One HHS worker told BBC, “They’re succeeding in driving us insane.” Several federal employees have reported considering minor acts of defiance or malicious compliance, including replying to emails with tasks such as answering hate mail and firing their colleagues.

Embed from Getty Images

In a coordinated effort, the US Department of Justice, Department of Defense, and Federal Bureau of Investigation have advised their personnel against replying to the email, which set a deadline for Monday night. The current leadership consists entirely of individuals appointed by Trump and those who have demonstrated loyalty to him.

Department of Defense official Darin Selnick released a statement on X on Sunday that instructed staff to “please pause any response” to the email.

“The Department of Defense is responsible for reviewing the performance of its personnel and will conduct any review in accordance with its own procedures. When and if required, the department will coordinate responses to the email you have received from OPM. For now, please pause any response to the OPM email titled ‘What did you do last week.’”

Several federal agencies have followed suit. The Department of Transportation, however, told its employees to abide by the email’s instructions.

Amid the turmoil, Musk displayed no indication of relenting via his posts on X.

“EXTREMELY troubling that some parts of government think this is TOO MUCH!! What is wrong with them??”

Over the weekend, Musk encountered backlash from several Republican politicians, such as Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who labeled the communication as an  “absurd weekend email” in a post on X.

“If Elon Musk truly wants to understand what federal workers accomplished over the past week, he should get to know each department and agency and learn about the jobs he’s trying to cut.”

The White House voiced its disapproval of the lawsuit, with Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly implying that the workers may be evading responding.

“In the time it took these employees on taxpayer-funded salaries to file a frivolous lawsuit, they could have briefly recapped their accomplishments to their managers, as is common in the private sector, 100 times over.”

Trump supporters, such as republican Rep. Tim Burchett from Tennessee, have lauded the proposal requiring government employees to account for their performance. “I think it’s a great idea; you do it in private business all the time. You have to have accountability,” he said.

Embed from Getty Images

The new lawsuit builds on a previous one filed last week in California, which aims to challenge the Trump administration’s agenda of mass firing federal workers.

The updated filing claims that “No OPM rule, regulation, policy, or program has ever, in the history of the United States, purported to require all federal workers to submit reports to OPM.”

Prominent federal employee unions, such as the American Federation of Government Employees, alongside advocacy organizations, including Vote Vets, are involved in the lawsuit. The State Democracy Defenders Fund and the California-based Altshuler Berzon law firm are representing the group.

Musk’s recent strategy to reduce the number of federal employees has sparked worries about the potential exposure of classified information.

American Federation of Government Employees President Everett Kelley wrote to OPM leadership, “Federal employees have a duty to ensure that sensitive information, data, and records are only used and disclosed for authorized purposes.”

Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have been rapidly implementing bold measures to reduce the size of the federal workforce. Government employees have been inundated with emails from the Office of Personnel Management containing threats of layoffs, proposals for buyouts with ambiguous conditions, dismissals of probationary staff, and directives for managers to compile lists of employees targeted for cuts.

The recent initiatives have ignited frustration among federal employees and prompted a wave of legal challenges, yet this latest directive has faced public opposition from within the agency’s own leadership.

Max Stier, president of the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service, labeled the email as “yet another example of the new administration’s contempt for public servants and public service that will lead to further confusion, anxiety and waste.”

“Demanding federal employees to summarize their work week in five bullet points by Monday evening or face termination is a counterproductive distraction that OPM legally cannot even act on. Our government’s main mission is to serve the public and keep us safe, and unnecessarily terrorizing the two million workers responsible for this ultimately puts us all at risk. There are many strategic, productive ways to make our government more effective that don’t involve scaring our civil servants, and I urge DOGE and OPM to instead partner with them and consult their deep expertise in their efforts to reform our government.”

open ai

Elon Musk To Withdraw $100 Billion Bid For OpenAI If It Remains A Nonprofit 

/in , /by

Elon Musk stated that he will likely drop his bid to purchase OpenAI, maker of ChatGPT, if it maintains its current structure operating as a nonprofit. 

Musk initially announced on Monday that he was leading a group of investors offering to buy OpenAi for $97.4 billion, according to CNN. Just two days later the tech CEO announced he was planning on withdrawing his bid if the company decides to maintain their founding mission. 

Embed from Getty Images

“If OpenAI, Inc.’s Board is prepared to preserve the charity’s mission and stipulate to take the for sale’ sign off its assets by halting its conversion, Musk will withdraw the bid,” Musk said in a court filing. 

“Otherwise, the charity must be compensated by what an arm’s-length buyer will pay for its assets.”

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has not fully rejected Musk’s bid and stipulations, but he did question the rationale, accusing him of hypocrisy. 

“In this Court, Musk argues that OpenAI, Inc.’s assets cannot be ‘transferred away’ for ‘private gain,’ OpenAI said in a legal filing. 

“But out of court, those constraints evidently do not apply, so long as Musk and his allies are the buyers. Musk would have OpenAI, Inc. transfer all of its assets to him, for his economic benefit and that of his competing AI business and hand-picked private investors.”

Embed from Getty Images

“The independent Board’s sole fiduciary duty is to the mission of ensuring AGI benefits all of humanity. Respectfully, it is not up to a competitor to decide what is in the best interests of OpenAI’s mission,” said Andrew Nussbaum, counsel for the OpenAI Board at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.

OpenAI is operated by a nonprofit organization that controls a for-profit company called OpenAI LP. The for-profit company worked to get OpenAI valued at around $100 billion within just a few years. 

Musk has filed multiple legal complaints against both OpenAI and Altman over claims that the company and the executives have misrepresented their work as philanthropic. 

“OpenAI has gotten this far while having at least dual nonprofit/for-profit role. What they’re trying to do now is completely delete the nonprofit. And that seems really going too far,” Musk said. 

“This is analogous to if you fund a nonprofit to preserve the Amazon rainforest but instead they turn it into a lumber company and chop down trees and sell them for wood, you’d be like: ‘Wait a second, that’s the exact opposite of what I donated the money for.’”