Elon Musk sues OpenAI
We recorded 5 claims from this post. 3 were checked against evidence. 2 can’t be checked. 2 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (5)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“I take the recital of facts in Musk’s lawsuit to be largely accurate. It is consistent with my own observations and with earlier reporting by The New York Times and The New Yorker.”
What we tested: The facts set out in Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI are largely accurate.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Elon did not get what he paid and worked for.”
What we tested: Elon Musk did not get the OpenAI he paid for and worked for.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“And anyone making deals with Altman would be wise to read it.”
What we tested: Anyone making deals with Sam Altman should read Musk's lawsuit.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“I won’t predict who will win, but I will say that Elon has a point.”
What we tested: Elon Musk has a point in his lawsuit against OpenAI, Altman and Brockman, though Marcus declines to predict who will win.
Assessment: MixedSaid
“The company Sam and Greg built has little to do with what was originally promised.”
What we tested: The OpenAI that Altman and Brockman built has little to do with what was originally promised.
What held: OpenAI introduced investor and employee financial returns through a commercial subsidiary. This materially changed the original model, although the same announcement retained nonprofit control and mission-first obligations. (OpenAI, )
What did not: The announcement identifies the nonprofit as the governing body and retains mission-based oversight. This is meaningful continuity with the original purpose, although it does not prove that commercial pressures had no practical influence. (OpenAI, )
Held from this post (2)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: Musk's lawsuit gives further evidence for the OpenAI board's view that Sam Altman has not always been consistently candid.
- The two reviews read the claim differently