Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

Closing time

read original more articles
Why This Matters

This trial highlights the ongoing power struggles and credibility issues within the AI industry, emphasizing the importance of transparency and expertise. For consumers and the tech industry, it underscores the need for trustworthy leadership and clear communication in AI development and regulation.

Key Takeaways

is a reporter who writes about tech, money, and human behavior. She joined The Verge in 2014 as science editor. Previously, she was a reporter at Bloomberg.

Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Today was closing arguments in the Musk v. Altman trial, and I almost feel bad writing about the unbelievable demolition derby I just witnessed. Steven Molo, Musk’s lawyer, stumbled over his words. He at one point called Greg Brockman — a co-defendant — Greg Altman. He erroneously claimed that Musk wasn’t asking for money and had to be corrected by the judge. He made it clear we’ve heard from many liars over the past few weeks, but offered little evidence for Musk’s actual legal claims.

OpenAI’s lawyer, Sarah Eddy, countered this by simply arranging the mountain of evidence that the company introduced in chronological order. She didn’t spend time trying to pretend anyone in this trial is especially reliable. She did, however, get the zinger of the day, about Musk: “Even the mother of his children can’t back his story.” William Savitt, who took the defendant baton after her presentation, demonstrated the number of times Musk “didn’t recall” some critical detail — and wondered how a sophisticated businessman couldn’t understand or read a four-page term sheet OpenAI had sent to him.

I found myself wondering, again, why we were all wasting our time here. So let’s discuss the gossip, which is the real point of this trial. How good was it? Here are my favorite nuggets.

While this trial was meant to punish Altman and arguably already has, I’d like to focus on my actual takeaway here: Elon Musk sucks at AI.

Zilis wrote in 2018 that Brockman and Sutskever thought that Musk “really hasn’t done his homework [on] AI / AGI and that concerns them about working with him.” I am leaving this trial thinking all these fucking liars deserve each other, but in fairness to Brockman and Sutskever, they were absolutely right about this. The question now is if anyone who’s thinking of investing in the upcoming SpaceX IPO has noticed, or cares.