Law

Dr. Jeremy “Zico” Kolter said that so far, there have been two times when the committee “formally requested a delay of models.”

Anyway, he’s a member of the nonprofit board of the OpenAI foundation, but not the for-profit. He’s a safety expert.

He’s a Carnegie Mellon prof who focuses on safety and security.

Altman said — and evidence in the direct showed — that Altman had made sure Musk knew about Microsoft. “I would often have to remind Musk of things, but this one I assumed we had talked about enough times that he would remember,” Altman says. Of Musk’s attitude toward OpenAI, he says, “we were kind of left for dead.”

And that Musk hasn’t sued any of them. Softbank’s investment is bigger — so is Nvidia’s and so is Amazon’s. That’s all from Microsoft.

In response, Altman texted, “I agree this feels bad — we offered you equity when we established the cap profit, which you didn’t want at the time but we are still very happy to do any time you like.” Molo tries to ask if this is a bribe — if Altman is trying to say that if Musk lets him get away with stealing from a charity, he’ll split the loot. Savitt objects, YGR sustains.

Granted we’d all be dead as a result because who can keep up with this but... Drink every time:

Molo says, isn’t he saying you stole a charity? Altman looks confused. “No?”

It’s funny that he’s on the team alleging money overrode ethics, because, well, I guess it takes one to know one? Throughout the case, we’ve seen a number of own goals from the Musk team. This morning, when the Musk team was requesting to ask questions about safety concerns with AI, YGR snapped, “What else do you think you want to do? Because you do not want to be held in contempt I guarantee you.” She’s tough with lawyers as a general rule, but woof.

“I have no current plans to do so,” Altman replied, adding, “I’ve never thought about it before.”

Y’all I am so sick of this. We are literally litigating a week in 2023.

Molo is asking about a series of terms on the Microsoft deal that were developed post 2020. None of them are on the 2018 term sheet because they hadn’t been negotiated yet. Fascinating stuff from Molo — is this really the best use of his time?

While Musk was ready to get into a fight over anything and everything, Altman has rather mildly answered every insulting question Molo has asked him. Molo has just accused Altman of lying on his direct examination about Musk trying to tuck OpenAI into Tesla. In his deposition, Altman says he’s not sure one way or the other about that and then asks to scroll to the top of the deposition for context. Molo says no. A juror smiles. I expect I know what we’re going to see on the redirect.

OpenAI’s lawyers have objected to the question, which is about the New Yorker article which “basically calls you dishonest,” Molo says. YGR would like us to move on from all the people who have called Altman a liar. It’s been more than 10 minutes of this. I think everyone got the point.

Sam Altman is responding to being repeatedly called a liar, both in this trial and elsewhere. We’re just hearing a list of people who have called Altman a liar or a schemer, including the Anthropic cofounders, Dario and Daniela Amodei. Altman just seems confused.

“I believe I am an honest and trustworthy businessperson,” Altman says. We are now hearing about Ilya Sutskever’s testimony that he thought Altman was dishonest, and Mira Mirati’s as well. Altman is responding to this with confusion, seems hurt, and is speaking very softly.

He also says it’s the most meaningful thing in his life besides his family. It’s “awesome and fulfilling,” Altman said. He also testifies he is still enthusiastic about the nonprofit structure because it’s now one of the largest nonprofits in the world. “Mr Musk did try to kill it, at least twice.” We are now about to witness the cross.

He says he never received any money from OpenAI’s startup fund. “I temporarily held the gp position because as the only person on the executive team without OpenAI equity, if anyone else had that… it would’ve caused adverse tax consequences.” He says he’s recused from any related-party transactions and let the boards of the relevant companies decide what to do. This is followed by some PR talk about the OpenAI foundation’s Alzheimer’s work. Okay.

He was tempted to go to Microsoft to work on pure research effort, and he felt very angry. “I’m sure I could have made a ton of money and had a much easier life at Microsoft but I cared about the mission and the people,” he said. So he returned. As for the board, he says “I feel badly for the misunderstandings” with the board.

People started quitting OpenAI. Altman went to Brockman’s house and wanted to figure out a way to stabilize OpenAI. He had calls with board members about coming back to OpenAI. “Although I was still very angry” and thought he’d have to “clean up a mess I didn’t make,” he said he was willing to come back under other conditions.

All the board would tell him was that he wasn’t consistently candid and they weren’t going to get into why. Altman was completely shocked, he says. He also told them that their plan to announce it via a blog post would throw things into chaos. “If this is the decision, this is a terrible way to execute it,” Altman said he told them. The board told him it was too late to stop it.

2023 was “the beginning of the inflection.” ChatGPT had been introduced, and “it became clear to us we would need a lot more compute.” They needed it for both research and for the models being used by the public. Around then, Shivon Zilis resigned from the OpenAI board. Shortly after that, Musk announced xAI, and Altman says there were”a lot of efforts to recruit our employees” and “negative tactics from Mr. Musk toward us.” Musk’s lawyers don’t like this but over their objections, Altman “started to hear rumblings” about litigation.

...and it’s a little catty. (I live!) At one point, Altman says that Zilis told him Musk had “front-runner-itis” — but there’s an objection that stops Altman from telling the rest of this story. Altman looks slightly disappointed. We then hear that Zilis advised Altman on how to engage Musk so that Musk wouldn’t “bash us on Twitter.”

Musk didn’t raise any objections, though. And then he sent the infamous message where he rated OpenAI’s chances as zero. Altman appears to be concentrating hard on his testimony but is coming across as being a little bewildered about why he is here at all — but maybe that’s just how his eyebrows look at all times.

We’re getting testimony about emails and meetings Altman had with Musk to try to walk him through the for-profit. They reviewed documents together at the meeting and then emailed him the term sheet that Musk testified he didn’t read.

It was when Altman met with Musk and Zilis to discuss plans for for-profit meetings. Zilis texted after the meeting to say she was glad they had the meeting to let Musk think about “the investment thing so it won’t irk him later.”
A good vibes meeting means a long conversation of Musk”showing us memes on his phone.”

He learned in 2022 that Musk was the father of her kids, and keeping her on the board was “a close call for me personally because she had sort of told us that Mr Musk was playing a more involved role than originally intended and that they were spending more time together.” On the other hand, Altman says he thinks highly of Zilis “and valued her counsel.”

Musk’s departure from the board had a mixed result on morale. “Mr. Musk is a well known figure and known to be fairly mercurial and people wondered if he was gonna try to take a vengeance out on us or something.”
On the other hand, people were relieved to be rid of him. “I don’t think Mr Musk understood how to run a good research lab.,” Altman said, “He had demotivated some of our most key researchers.”

He “didn’t want to be associated with something he couldn’t control and didn’t think would succeed.” Additionally, Musk wanted to work on AI at Tesla and didn’t want to be conflicted.

“We were kind of running the org on a shoestring” and had “an extremely short runway of cash,” Altman said. OpenAI didn’t meet its fundraising goal of $100 million in 2018, raising only a hair under $50 million. Major donors are Aphorism Foundation (Reid Hoffman), Fidelity Charitable, Gabe Newell, Good Ventures Foundation (Dustin Moskowitz), Amazon Web Services and, hilariously, Alameda Research (FTX / Sam Bankman-Fried).

“The only path - the best path that he saw - was for OpenAI to become part of Tesla,” Altman says. We are now looking at text messages. Musk “remains very open to you joining the Tesla board as part of this,” Musk’s subordinate Sam Teller wrote. And, also, Teller said, “regardless of how these conversations about OpenAI shake out, he is committed to building a stronger AI team within Tesla.” Altman said, “I viewed a vague, like a lightweight threat in there” that Tesla would do it with or without OpenAI.

Altman asked what would happen if Musk died. Musk said, “I haven’t thought about it a ton, but maybe control should pass to my children,” Musk replied. We also see an email where Altman says, “I desperately want to see this work with Elon... but I am worried about control. I don’t think any one person should have control of the world’s first AGI.” He says he’d be open to creative structures - like Musk having control up to a certain milestone.

Someone — Altman doesn’t remember whether it was Musk or his subordinate, Sam Teller, said it — told Altman that Musk had “long since decided” he would only work on companies that he controlled. “Mr. Musk felt very strongly that if we were going to form a for-profit he ended to have total control over it initially and this was because he only trusted himself to make non-obvious decisions that were going to turn out to be correct,” Altman says.

He is being sworn in now.

Having the ability to sell their equity let them finance their activities, such as AI research into Alzheimer’s research.

He is now testifying about Musk’s attempt to buy OpenAI using xAI, which happened after this lawsuit was filed. “I was surprised” by it, Taylor says. “Ostensibly this lawsuit is about our nonprofit purpose and mission adn this proposal was to acquire this nonprofit by a group of for-profit investors, which felt contradictory to the spirit of this lawsuit.” The OpenAI Foundation board rejected the bid because they didn’t feel it was appropriate for one person to control the mission

But also about some light character assassination. It looks like Musk now has a broader strategy to try to make Altman a liability to OpenAI.

He has not managed to do this at all. He is speaking rapidly, in a monotone.

“We’re decidedly not cash-flow-positive today.” The company has not generated any profits to date.