It isn’t racist enough, so he has to take over and train it on nazi propaganda.
I guess grok isn’t doing so well.
I wonder why his offer wasn’t 69.420 billion?
This is corporate trolling. Open AI is trying to go public soon, and Elon did this to fuck with that.
Massive oversimplification but basically: In the United States, you are required to take the best offer when selling a company, unless you can argue in court that you had reasons not to sell to whomever placed the highest bid. Because of this offer, as open AI attempts to go public, they will have to either to be close to Elon’s bid, forced to sell to him, go to court and fight him ther, or be forced to remain private.
I feel like “look at twitter” is probably enough of a defence to decline president musk.
It would probably need to be wordier for court proceedings.But they aren’t required to sell though.
Yes, they could remain private but they are attempting to go public. This action is a legal speedbump that they must now work really hard to maneuver around.
Lmao, musk is on record as making absurd offers and then trying everything he can to back out of them. I’m not sure why he offered this himself instead of getting a consortium of investors together to do so on his behalf without any involvement from him.
Isn’t this what he did with Twitter and the courts forced him to honor the offer?
He offered to buy it with someone else’s money and take the credit
I’ve never understood how you can take out a loan to buy a company, turn around and place all that debt on the company you just bought, and have no personal ramifications when the company goes belly up because the debt load is too high.
Where is the “hide Musk/DOGE/Trump related posts” button ?
EDIT : Found it !
I don’t see this option sadly, only block instance/community/user. Would love to block Trump/Musks fucking faces from my life.
Yeah, I’m pretty much done with Lemmy right now. It’s just getting way too much. The sky is falling every five minutes.
Bro, I think you just wiped out your entire front page.
They’re also hiding their head in the sand, which might be a bigger issue.
I’m still reading the old school press and listening to the radio. I’m just not on lemmy to read about it AGAIN… On top of that, it’s mostly absurd and inaplicable announcements. They crave attention so much, it’s painful to listen. Look at Musk’s video gaming scheme. Just pathetic…
Not sure FlyingSquid is aware of life outside Lemmy. They’re addicted to the lotus flowers here.
Ok, that’s fair. It is very hard to tell these days who is paying attention but overwhelmed and who is saying “this is all bad news, so I’m going to ignore it because I don’t like hearing about bad things.” The latter is the dangerous attitude. I’m glad it isn’t yours, but unfortunately Lemmy is not free of it.
It’s not “because I don’t like hearing about bad things” but rather “I am focusing on what I can control instead of what I cannot control”.
It’s a strategic move to maximize the good you can do for yourself and your immediate environment instead of dwelling on all the bad things happening to each one of the 8 billion people
When it’s actual news, I’ll hear about it regardless.
I’m not going to perseverate over every headline, I have a life to live. The media is actively trying to piss us off, they’ll skew and distort and all but fabricate to keep us angry and engaged.
I’m not doing it. I can’t recall a single time in my life that keeping up to date up to the hour has actually improved anything for me. Sitting around just knowing stuff is happening isn’t going to change my life for the better.
I live in a safe republican state and a leans Republican district. I could send a letter to my senator, call my representative, spend hours of my time just worried about something, and still, they’ll vote how the party wants them to. Being informed and doing the things I’m supposed to do won’t change anything.
But being good to your neighbors and doing direct action like volunteering will make a huge difference, and you don’t need the news for that!
There are two sides two this. There’s yours, and then there is self-care and self-protection. Being constantly bombarded with this shit, these issues, problems and the world going down hill while you as an individual can’t even begin to influence or have any kind of impact on them can and will wreck your mental health.
In the end it needs balance. Don’t stick your head in the sand, but also don’t drown in the never ending despair that is the flood of bad news in modern media.
Elon’s $97.4B hostile takeover bid for OpenAI is less about “safety” and more about a billionaire’s corporate tantrum. The offer reeks of desperation—a laughable lowball for a company valued at $340B, dressed as altruism.
Altman’s clapback—“buy Twitter for $9.74B”—is the perfect middle finger to Musk’s flailing empire. Remember when X became a $44B dumpster fire? Now he wants to drag OpenAI into his orbit of mismanaged toys.
This feud isn’t about AI ethics—it’s two tech oligarchs weaponizing legal battles and PR stunts. Musk’s “open-source” crusade is safety theater while his own xAI hoards code. The only winner here? Lawyers billing hourly as the world burns.
To be clear (and as far as I understand), it’s not a hostile takeover bid because it cannot be: OpenAI is not a public company and thus doesn’t have a fiduciary duty to thousands to millions of shareholders but instead to a handful of big investors who can decide for themselves whether they want that Elon’s money or not. So this isn’t similar to what Twitter had been through but more like Elon teasing Altman I believe.
OpenAI is not a public company and thus doesn’t have a fiduciary duty
Public companies only have fiduciary duty to their sharehoders to the extent that their corporate charters say that they do. It’s entirely possible to launch a corporation that promises nothing to its shareholders, though it might be difficult to find investors.
The distinction you’re making is valid but misses the forest for the trees. Whether OpenAI is public or not, Musk’s bid is a textbook power play, not a genuine offer. The lack of fiduciary duty doesn’t erase the intent—it amplifies it. This isn’t about shareholder obligations; it’s about Musk leveraging his wealth to reshape AI governance in his image.
Comparing this to Altman’s jab at Twitter isn’t apples-to-apples. Altman’s point was rhetorical, highlighting Musk’s track record of overpromising and underdelivering. The “open-source” crusade Musk touts is hollow when xAI remains proprietary.
This isn’t about legality or structure—it’s about influence and control. Dressing it up as altruism insults anyone paying attention.
I read this on Hacker News, which I found particularly interesting:
Elon Musk’s bid for OpenAI isn’t about buying it but about disrupting its transition to a for-profit company. OpenAI Inc., the nonprofit, controls OpenAI LP, the capped-profit subsidiary. To convert to a full for-profit entity, OpenAI Inc. must sell its technology and IP to the new company, with regulators determining a fair valuation.
The rumored SoftBank investment at a $260B valuation relies on this transition, but the current estimated valuation is around $150B. Typically, control premiums in such deals range from 20-30%, putting the expected nonprofit payout at $30B-$40B. However, Musk’s $97B bid for OpenAI Inc.’s assets sets a significantly higher valuation, giving regulators a strong argument that the nonprofit should receive much more.
If regulators adopt Musk’s benchmark, OpenAI Inc. would end up with a 62% majority stake, making the transition far more complex or even blocking it entirely. Even though OpenAI won’t accept Musk’s offer, the bid’s primary effect is to make the legal and financial process of going for-profit much more difficult. It’s a strategic move designed to frustrate OpenAI’s leadership, particularly Sam Altman, and potentially derail the entire transition.
The Hacker News post you referenced aligns with the broader narrative: Musk’s bid isn’t about acquiring OpenAI but about obstructing its for-profit transition. By setting a high valuation benchmark, he’s complicating regulatory approval and forcing a reassessment of the nonprofit’s stake. This isn’t altruism; it’s a calculated disruption aimed at frustrating Altman and OpenAI’s leadership.
The bid also underscores Musk’s ongoing feud with Altman, weaponizing financial maneuvers to challenge OpenAI’s trajectory. It’s less about AI ethics or governance and more about power plays and ego clashes.
While the restructuring may benefit the nonprofit financially in theory, Musk’s interference highlights how these transitions often prioritize control over mission. Dressing this up as concern for AI governance is disingenuous—it’s a chess match between tech oligarchs, with humanity as the board.
“It’s time for OpenAI to return to the open-source, safety-focused force for good it once was,” Musk said in a statement provided by his lawyer Marc Toberoff to The Wall Street Journal. “We will make sure that happens.”
I’ll believe that when I see it.
lol. Wasn’t grok built specifically without safety in mind?
chump change fellas
Cage fight is no option anymore? 😎
Well, maybe it is better this way. Let them ruin each other, and their companies. The world will be a better place then.
Probably just the same market manipulation he tried with Twitter and succeeded with Bitcoin.
Why not make it an even 100 billion is what I would ask if I were uninformed, which I am, so it’s what I’m asking.
Because if you believe it’s worth $97B you don’t offer to overpay by $3B…
I really hope he tanks Open AI.
Shortly after the news was announced, Altman posted on X: “no thank you but we will buy twitter for $9.74 billion if you want.”
If only their slapfight meant something good for the world. At least, I don’t see everything collected in Musk’s hands.
Lmao “Twitter”
Ah so he’s again going to pay twice the amount of what it’s worth to then run of off a cliff and make it worth 20% of it’s real value within a years time?
Seriously, why do people still believe anything this scammer says?
I mean, they believed everything Trump said because he was “a business man, not a politician” even though all he ever was was a failed business man. These people are functional at best - they ain’t bright.
