|
| ▲ | this_user 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| You misunderstand Musk's motivation. This was never about money for him, but about control over a key technology. One of the main reasons he exited OpenAI was the fact that the other co-founders wanted to create a structure where no one, Musk included, would be able to seize full control of the company. That was the thing that prompted him to leave, which tells you a lot about what he really wanted in the first place. But he also falsely assumed that OAI would die without his money. Yet, they managed to pull through, and Musk is now on the outside looking in with very little influence in the AI space. xAI is his desperate attempt to get back into the game. That is why he won't give up. |
| |
| ▲ | estearum 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > This was never about money for him, but about control over a key technology That's too flattering. It's about ego. | | |
| ▲ | vladmk 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Agreed - if you read any Elon books that’s a part of it. He always had someone to prove himself to from his dad to the world. It’s almost Michael Jordanesque except business wise. | | |
| |
| ▲ | nchmy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Doesn't saltman effectively have full control of the company? | | | |
| ▲ | dmarcos 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I’m a big fan of Musk. One of the few criticisms I have is how xAI is also inconsistent with original OpenAI mission. I had imagined xAI as en effort to correct and fully embody all original values of OpenAI and that Elon says they betrayed. That makes his criticism weaker and I understand why some can think it was all about control. In his words: "I'm the reason OpenAl exists. I came up with the name. The name OpenAl refers to open source... The intent was - what was the opposite of Google? It would be an open source non-profit." I sometimes feel xAI wants to live up to those open values so I always celebrate when they decide to engage in open source. They still don’t fully embrace it. Perhaps because they think is not practical or will make them less competitive? | | |
| ▲ | popalchemist 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How can you be a fan of an overtly racist, nazi-saluting, destroyer of democracy whose act of wanton dismantling of government programs resulted in the deaths of 700,000 https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/the-... not to mention the many other things, but that suffices. He is objectively one of the worst people on the planet, and you're a fan? | | |
| ▲ | qup an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Because I don't believe what you just said about him. Literally not even one detail. | | | |
| ▲ | vanc_cefepime 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | <insert Mr. Krabs “Hello, I like money” meme> | |
| ▲ | HDBaseT 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not a fan of Musk either, but him being "Racist" or throwing a Nazi Salute are quite frankly the least of my concerns with him. | | | |
| ▲ | justinhj an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | lmao | |
| ▲ | throwaway884367 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | user- 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You say this from a throwaway account that you know will get banned. Dang, maybe think about IP banning this guy for such a premedidated move. | | | |
| ▲ | halfmatthalfcat 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ah oh, so USAID was the one in Wuhan who caused the incident. People act like the US is the only nation researching or funding this level of biology. People are just pissed off at the lack of admission that the US was, at best, tangentially involved in order to justify their grievances against government but it’s such a weak position to argue from. | | |
| |
| ▲ | icase 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | justinhj an hour ago | parent [-] | | it's worse really. at least there are subreddits relatively free of trump bad elon bad non stop nonsense | | |
| ▲ | shigawire 26 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Trump seems objectively bad at his job by a number of metrics. So it seems reasonable that would be the consensus in most forums. |
|
| |
| ▲ | throwitaway222 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | miguelazo 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Mr. Beast? LMAO. A ridiculous comparison in terms of development project implementation.
(And I am no fan of USAID, whose real chief mission was creating dependency on the US and overthrowing independent governments.) | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | rcgy 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| |
| ▲ | Gigachad 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | He needs to be able to skew the worlds AI towards racism and whatever else he believes at the moment. | |
| ▲ | jimmygrapes 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What happened to the rule about steelmanning? I know it's chic to post super hot takes about what we assume a persons intentions are, and I know there are plenty of "if you can't see how bad they are you're the problem" type justifications; I know the supposed goal of empathy is tossed aside at first hint of disagreement whether real or perceived, and I know there is "evidence" of justification for hatred/dismissal. Yet still there is self-righteous presumption bandied about in a negative way that violates that steelman rule. Justified of course by the idea that there are no negotiations with terrorists, no association with Nazis, no forgiveness or understanding given to the Other. I just don't get it, I'm sorry. | | |
| ▲ | brokencode 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | | What rule about steelmanning? We’re commenting online, not writing peer reviewed research. And yeah, some people lose the benefit of the doubt. Sorry, but actions have consequences. Elon doesn’t just get to kill hundreds of thousands of poor people by eliminating USAID and expect everyone to treat him the same way. He’s made enemies for life, and he deserves it. |
| |
| ▲ | sieabahlpark 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | mandeepj 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > This was never about money for him, but about control over a key technology It's very comforting to know for those reasons he'd never be able to become POTUS; although there's still a way, I hope he never gets to know about it. Otherwise, he'll make it a fascist land. |
|
|
| ▲ | wouldbecouldbe 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don’t know, I wouldnt be suprised if he finds a way. All the tools around, he just have to make a jump in the quality. With GLM as example they should be able to het to opus level and cut the costs |
|
| ▲ | Grombobulous 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is what a normal company might say. xAI is not a company, it’s a financial instrument. The growth potential as perceived by investors is there to prop up the stock price. |
|
| ▲ | NikolaNovak 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It is my limited understanding that as much as many of us groan at the notion of Spacex becoming "an AI-first company", markets in general, and Musk investors in particular, are slurping it up. Musk is very very very good at promising the sky. I don't think he can backtrack, he always digs in further - and it has historically worked well for him. He will drop AI only when the next big hype thing comes along and he hitches a ride on that train. |
|
| ▲ | afavour 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The stock market would not like that, though. |
| |
| ▲ | derektank 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Does he even need to care about that at this point? He retains majority voting control over SpaceX so nobody can stage a hostile takeover. And he’s given his employees an opportunity to cash out if they wanted to. | | |
| ▲ | sumeno 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | He hasn't needed to worry about money for a long long time. Arguably his entire life. But he is incredibly greedy and narcissistic and desperate to fill the hole in his soul with more. |
| |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | dimgl an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Your product's brand name is mud. It is? |
| |
| ▲ | Gigachad an hour ago | parent [-] | | Yes, to the average person grok is known for generating csam, mechahitler, and undressing people for sexual harassment. And to tech people it’s now known for stealing your files. | | |
| ▲ | brightball an hour ago | parent [-] | | Reddit is not “the average person” | | |
| ▲ | Gigachad 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | The AI undressing scandal was on mainstream news and being discussed publicly by politicians. It's not some underground drama. The real life people I know still remember he called the cave diver a pedo after a disagreement. There's very few people left in the world not soured on Elon. | |
| ▲ | HDBaseT 24 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | In fact, most people try and distance themselves from Reddit as much as possible. Most people I spoke to don't even know what Grok is, or that Twitter had (or needed) an AI. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | Telemakhos 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Musk bought Twitter looking to build an “everything app,” the western WeChat. AI came along and promised an end to apps via an agentic OS that does what its user wants and vibes whatever it needs to accomplish that as it goes along. The agentic OS is basically the same thing as the “everything app,” and I doubt Musk will let go of that. |
| |
| ▲ | tbrownaw an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > Musk bought Twitter looking to build an “everything app,” I thought it was mostly on a whim that turned out to be binding, and the 'everything app' plan came later? | |
| ▲ | mexicocitinluez 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Musk bought Twitter looking to build an “everything app,” Part of me thinks he knows he lying and is just trying to drum up money and the other part thinks he's one of the most delusional and uninformed people in tech. |
|
|
| ▲ | andsoitis 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > You're allowed to exit the AI business. Isn’t it more fun to fight the incumbents, the behemoths, the goliaths? |
| |
| ▲ | beams_of_light 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | xAI is no David. | | |
| ▲ | RIMR an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | A $2,500,000,000,000.00 startup. An underdog really. | |
| ▲ | andsoitis 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Relative to OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google in the AI space? Absolutely. | | |
| ▲ | verandaguy 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Nah. They're all rotten to the core, just in different ways. The key difference between xAI and Anthropic/OAI/Google is that xAI has the least-likely path to existing as viable business in a decade. That said, the economics of the entire AI industry are kinda made up at this point, so who really knows; it's quite possible that the players with the best odds of surviving the crash are those that can draw funding from their parent company's other businesses. | | |
| ▲ | anonym29 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | >The key difference between xAI and Anthropic/OAI/Google is that xAI has the least-likely path to existing as viable business in a decade. I don't know, renting out a fleet of GPUs at annualized rate of ~100% of the capex deployed to obtain said GPUs seems reasonably better than lighting hundreds of billions of dollars on fire in order to earn tens of billions of dollars. | | |
| |
| ▲ | LastTrain 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | David was a good vs evil with an order of magnitude fewer resources on the good side. XAi is evil vs evil with comparable resources on each side. Now this is where I know you’re MAGA because as I’ve said a million times you guys don’t do fair comparisons. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | solumunus 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| But how will Musk stay a trillionaire without fake AI hype? |
| |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Just be a rocket company | | |
| ▲ | estearum 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | According to SpaceX's own filing documents, you are incorrect. They must be principally an AI company to justify anything close to their current valuation. | |
| ▲ | Gigachad 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The rocket business is hardly profitable. The whole valuation is based around grok and space datacenters. He needs to keep pumping the hype or else we are in for the worlds biggest crash. | | |
| ▲ | m4rtink 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well, in the long run expansion into space is the only profitable thing. | | |
| ▲ | tbrownaw 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | That's a much longer long run than Keynes' "in the long run we are all dead". | |
| ▲ | Gigachad 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I’m sure that’s an idea Musk wants to sell you on. | |
| ▲ | sumeno an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | What a bizarre take. What's so special out there that we can feasibly reach in the lifetimes of our grandchildren that makes it the "only profitable thing"? | | |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | IncreasePosts 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Renting his boatload of GPUs to Google, Anthropic, et al | | |
| ▲ | cyberax 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | He doesn't have _that_ many. And they're also not _his_, he just got them from NVidia. | | |
| ▲ | fragmede 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You don't have to like the guy, but buying something is typically how ownership goes. I refer to my car as mine, but I did just buy it from Honda. | | |
| ▲ | cyberax 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I mean that it's not his IP, he's not producing any GPUs/TPUs. He's just reselling his idle stock of cards. | | |
| ▲ | sourweasel 28 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Not to be pedantic, but although the datacenters are running Nvidia hardware, Tesla did develop their own 20-core/3-npu high bandwidth chip for their cars. It's nowhere near the computational ability of any datacenter GPU, but at 150+ TOPS it's no slouch either. |
|
| |
| ▲ | wombat-man 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I read that they bought quite a few, but their DC build out is not very fast. Maybe they should just resell the hardware |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | charcircuit 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| As a social media site they need to understand content for recommendations and they allow people to ask questions about posts for free. Along with having a large amount of data that can be trained on xAI has good reason to continue developing AI. |
| |
| ▲ | __float 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Twitter (and others) had an algorithmic feed long before LLMs. These don't actually seem like "good reasons" to me. | | |
| ▲ | charcircuit 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Before using large language models, they used language models. Large language models perform better, at the cost of being more expensive to run. |
| |
| ▲ | wombat-man 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They bought a lot of GPUs. They could still do these things on that hardware with someone else's model. | |
| ▲ | michaelmrose 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They could use other people's models running on their hardware while renting most of the existing capacity to others. The real issue is that their leadership is delusional and their stock is literally based on this shared delusion and acknowledging reality would gut their ability to raise new funds and destroy paper wealth based on delusional returns that are never going to happen. |
|
|
| ▲ | citizenpaul 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >just stop. Thats not how AI psychosis works. |
|
| ▲ | ButlerianJihad 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Just be a rocket company. Ah, are you referring to the rockets that become autonomous 60 seconds prior to launch, like Falcon 9? The rockets that steer and diagnose themselves with a minimum of input/communication from ground stations? The crewed space capsules that deliver astronauts to the ISS and trans-lunar orbits, without the ordinary needs for manual piloting or astrogation? Those rockets? Sure bro, "exit the AI business" and keep on with the rocket science, I guess |
| |
|
| ▲ | hsnewman 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That is probably the best solution too! |
|
| ▲ | nine_k 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| That would be a strategic move. |
