this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
581 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

62073 readers
5034 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
581
Elon Musk just offered to buy OpenAI for $97.4 billion (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 day ago by some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
127 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It isn’t racist enough, so he has to take over and train it on nazi propaganda.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 33 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

He bought Twitter for 44 billion... and the US presidency for 290 million.

That is the single most dystopian shit I have ever heard. The idea that people and countries are so dirt cheap and companies are orders of magnitude more valuable is a thing that should damn their souls to hell.

You how bad this is affecting me? I've been an atheist and anti-death penality most of my life... Musk has for the past while made me think that the death penalty needs to be applied to people like him (and Israeli war criminals) and not to common crooks and common murderers. He is even making me want a hell to exist so people like him can burn in it.

[–] Etienne_Dahu@jlai.lu 8 points 12 hours ago

and the US presidency for 290 million.

So, about a dollar per American.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 30 points 16 hours ago

He can afford to pay twice the price of Twitter because he's using government money. Remember he barely swung the 44 billion for Twitter. Now he's buying something for more than double that? After putting code into the Treasury department computers to hide transactions?

Lmao.

[–] lovelywon@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago

He offered to buy it with someone else's money and take the credit

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 20 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

even if openai are assholes, chatgpt is still useful for things as long as you dont put too much trust in it. If that fucker buys it they will turn it into racist shitspewing garbage. Without it, regular people will have no decent or easy way to utilize ai and this new tech will benefit only the rich who will use it to oppress us even worse.

Stinky isnt an idiot, i wish he was. Anything he buys he can and will use to cause harm to us. So this would be bad for us all.

[–] 31337@sh.itjust.works 7 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Regular users can use Gemini, Deepseek, Meta AI, and there will probably be many more services in the future.

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 2 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

deepseek has censorship which makes it unreliable. But hopefully someone will fix that since its opensource. So at least there is that. google is garbage in comparison to chatgpt and i havent tried anything meta has produced since i dont want to have anything to do with that filth, so i dont know anything about that one. So maybe there is some hope in long term, if things dont get worse elsewhere.

[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 6 points 14 hours ago

Deepseek only has censorship on their hosted site... if you run the open source model on your own hardware it doesn't seem to censor

[–] ubergeek 1 points 13 hours ago

Chatgpt is also censored.

[–] 31337@sh.itjust.works 1 points 15 hours ago

Oh, I forgot about Claude. Last time I tried it, it seemed on par or even better that ChatGPT-4o (but was missing features like browsing).

[–] Hackworth@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

Deepseek took the training of foundation models from a billionaire's game to a millionaire's game. If Elon wants an AI monopoly, it'll have to be done through litigation. Which, ya know, they're also trying.

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 15 points 17 hours ago

How to become a millionaire: Start with 97.4 Billion.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 10 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Is he going to buy a “founder” clause in the contract?

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Well this time he actually is one of the founders. He invested 45 million to launch OpenAI and he was co-chair with Altman

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theopriestley/2015/12/11/elon-musk-and-peter-thiel-launch-openai-a-non-profit-artificial-intelligence-research-company/

[–] mavu@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

YES!

Finally a way to destroy the AI hype.

Maybe the man is good for something besides wasting oxygen after all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago

In order to ruin it like Twitter?

[–] Mio@feddit.nu 1 points 11 hours ago

Why buy it now and not earlier?

[–] ansiz@lemmy.world 11 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

This kind of thing is why it's short-sighted even for the other tech guys to cozy up to Trump. There's no room for anyone other than Musk and he is just going to use his leverage with Trump to screw over the other billionaires as well.

[–] FluffyTailSociety@lemmy.ca 2 points 17 hours ago

Anyone cozying up to Trump is announcing they have skeletons in their closet and he has the dirt.

[–] meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works 91 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] boramalper@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

[–] meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] boramalper@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Canigou@jlai.lu 35 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Where is the "hide Musk/DOGE/Trump related posts" button ?

EDIT : Found it ! (Damn, Lemmy is awesome 😊)

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 60 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Bro, I think you just wiped out your entire front page.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 65 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago

Lmao "Twitter"

[–] transitinoir@slrpnk.net 163 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Genius mastermind shadow president plan:

  1. Buy company A for shit ton of money
  2. Ruin company A so it is worth 80% less
  3. Still have shit ton of money
  4. Repeat with company B
[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 103 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Unfortunately, looks like buying Twitter was a very effective choice if you take profit off the priority list

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 59 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I mean, yeah. That was the entire point of him buying it: to control one of the biggest social media networks ever, and to use that to push and pull the public discourse however he wanted, in the interest of being a kingmaker. And it fucking worked.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 33 points 1 day ago

Buy a company mostly with other people's money (he paid ~15B of the 44B offer) lose a lot, 70% or more but use it to win an election and gain 200B in profit.

Musk is a salesman and he's good at getting investors to get behind his crap. He's never produced actual value but that doesn't matter to stock values apparently.

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

Ruin company A so it is worth 80% less

Ruin country USA so it is worth 80% less.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 189 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (13 children)

not even one-third of the valuation openai thinks they're worth (up to 340b). and still below what investors thought in 2022 (157b). src

i think this is old spice admitting that xAI is total bullshit and he's giving up on making his own.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 43 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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?

[–] Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 93 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Hahah he really hates Altman's guts. Good. Love to see those two expend their energy on each other rather than on fucking all of us.

[–] SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 67 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Unfortunately, they can multitask

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] beliquititious@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

“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.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›