zlacker

>>modele+(OP)
Whatever his reason may be (like resentment for jumping off the ship too soon and missing out, or standing in for humanity), I like what I read in the sense that it contains all the stuff that needs to be spoken about publicly, and the court seems to be the optimal place for this.

It feels like Microsoft is misusing the partnership only to block other companies from having access to the IP. They said they don't need the partnership, that they have got all what they need, so there would be no need to have the partnership.

If this is the way Microsoft misuses partnerships, I don't feel good about Mistral's new partnership, even if it means unlimited computing resources for them and still have the freedom to open source their models.

Not seeing Mistral Large as an open source model now has a bitter taste to it.

I also wonder if this lawsuit was the reason for him checking out Windows 11.

>>qwerto+zH1
I don't think he has any resentment about jumping off "too soon" as you say. He specifically abandoned ship because he didn't align with the organization anymore. I suspect this has been a long time coming given his public commentary on AI.

He's goal on OpenAI investments were to keep close watch on the development of AI. If you believe the public comments or not is an entirely different matter though I do feel like there is sincerity in Elons AI comments.

>>boring+cI1
I’d offer that Musk hasnt shown any consistent principle motivating his behavior other than gathering power, in the face of stated motivations.

So while he may genuinely believe what he is saying, the inherent philosophical conflicts in his consistent narcissistic actions, have poisoned any other possible position to such an extent that he has lost all moral credibility

Revealed preferences never lie

>>Andrew+qf2
He seems to broadly pursue projects he considers helpful to humanity like sustainable energy, the multiplanetary thing and setting up OpenAI. You can interpret people's motivations in different ways but it doesn't look like just power gathering to me. I mean if he was that power hungry you'd expect him to try to monopolize AI for himself rather than make it open.

>>tim333+ji2
How does manipulating MemeCoin prices or buying Twitter to bring back the n-word benefit humanity?

While the broad strokes of Tesla and SpaceX might benefit humanity, he seems to have no compunction about doing screwed up things with those companies, either. Remember when he proposed putting indentured servants on Mars?

>>kerkes+My2
If you pass by the slightly inflammatory language (“indentured servitude”) it’s just a different model.

As in: if I want to go and work on Mars, but can’t afford the flight, it’s not unreasonable to take a proportion of my earnings up front (in kind) and then work off that debt subsequently. Obviously the devil is in the detail of how that would work, and which protections I might be afforded, but the underlying concept doesn’t seem bad to me.

>>mft_+284
> If you pass by the slightly inflammatory language (“indentured servitude”) it’s just a different model.

"Indentured servitude" is the nice way of saying this. "Slavery" is the inflammatory way of saying it.

> As in: if I want to go and work on Mars, but can’t afford the flight, it’s not unreasonable to take a proportion of my earnings up front (in kind) and then work off that debt subsequently. Obviously the devil is in the detail of how that would work, and which protections I might be afforded, but the underlying concept doesn’t seem bad to me.

Those who do not learn history are bound to repeat it.

>>kerkes+Jb4
Repeating the same things without additional explanation or arguments doesn’t really progress the discussion.

Slavery is involuntary and unpaid, so it wouldn’t be that.

The form of indentured servitude that was outlawed a long time ago was also involuntary, so it’s not that either.

Would you have a problem with someone taking out a bank loan to travel to Mars, and then working there to pay off the loan?