Musk vs. Altman Trial Nears End With Closing Arguments
▼ Summary
– Musk’s lawyer, Steven Molo, gave a poor closing argument, stumbling over names and making claims the judge had to correct.
– OpenAI’s lawyer, Sarah Eddy, countered by presenting evidence chronologically and delivered a sharp remark about Musk’s credibility.
– William Savitt highlighted how Musk repeatedly failed to recall critical details and questioned his understanding of a term sheet.
– The article suggests the trial’s real value is gossip, not legal merit, and concludes that Musk is bad at AI.
– A 2018 statement from Brockman and Sutskever noted Musk lacked homework on AI, which the author agrees with.
Today marked the final stretch of the Musk vs. Altman trial with closing arguments, and what unfolded was nothing short of a chaotic spectacle. Steven Molo, Musk’s attorney, struggled through his presentation, mixing up names,calling co-defendant Greg Brockman “Greg Altman” at one point,and incorrectly stating that Musk wasn’t seeking financial damages, only to be corrected by the judge. He repeatedly referenced the many liars who testified over the past few weeks, yet offered scant evidence to support Musk’s core legal claims.
In contrast, OpenAI’s lawyer Sarah Eddy took a methodical approach, simply laying out the company’s extensive evidence in chronological order. She didn’t waste energy pretending anyone in this trial was entirely trustworthy. But her sharpest jab came when she noted, “Even the mother of his children can’t back his story.” William Savitt, who followed her, highlighted how often Musk “didn’t recall” key details during testimony, questioning how a seasoned businessman could fail to understand or even read a simple four-page term sheet from OpenAI.
I found myself asking, once again, why we’re all spending time on this. The real value here is the gossip, and it’s been delicious. Let’s get to the highlights.
While the trial was meant to punish Sam Altman,and arguably has,my main takeaway is this: Elon Musk is terrible at AI. In 2018, Shivon Zilis wrote that both Brockman and Sutskever believed Musk “really hasn’t done his homework on AI / AGI, and that concerns them about working with him.” I’m leaving this trial convinced that all these liars deserve each other, but credit where it’s due: Brockman and Sutskever were spot-on. The real question now is whether anyone eyeing the upcoming SpaceX IPO has noticed,or cares.
(Source: The Verge)
