Yesterday I was using Sonnet 3.7 extended thinking in Cursor when I got rate limited. No problem, GPT 4.5 should be as good right? Noticeably worse! Not what I expected.
I had the same thought, especially compared to their previous press releases on the matter. I suspect they're capitalizing on the growing anti-Elon sentiment across the world.
This lawsuit has always been driven by Elon’s personal and financial interests in advancing his for-profit AI company. As his own emails confirm, he sought to merge a for-profit OpenAI into Tesla under his control. When we declined, he left, unable to take command. Now, after witnessing our progress without him, he has resorted to meritless litigation while simultaneously attempting to replicate our advancements through his own multi-billion-dollar, for-profit enterprise.
Last week, the court denied Elon’s request for a preliminary injunction, determining that he had not “demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits.” Beyond that, the court went even further by dismissing several of his claims outright. This ruling is a significant step toward putting this baseless lawsuit behind us.
As Elon is learning, facts matter—especially in court. One fact he continues to misrepresent is the status of our non-profit. Contrary to his claims, there is no “conversion” of the non-profit underway.
We welcome the opportunity to make this clear in court: (1) the non-profit remains a central pillar of our mission, and (2) we are committed to ensuring it is not only supported by a successful business but also in a stronger position than ever before. For years, we have operated with for-profit subsidiaries, and any structural adjustments will be designed to enhance, not undermine, the non-profit’s ability to fulfill its mission.
Our Board has been unequivocal in its commitment to strengthening the non-profit for the long term. We are not selling it—we are reinforcing it. The non-profit will retain a significant stake in our proposed public-benefit corporation, making it one of the most well-funded non-profits in history.
In one respect, Elon was right: in 2017, he recognized that OpenAI’s structure needed to evolve. He was also correct in establishing xAI as a public-benefit corporation. However, he is entirely wrong in pursuing this lawsuit, which is both legally baseless and transparently self-serving. The court has already seen through this effort, and we are confident it will continue to do so.
How about OpenAI's attempts to slow down the competition?
what is OpenAI doing other than making deals with companies and doing business?
Lobbying government to ban open source models.
I'm guessing they're also encouraging the government to ban Nvidia sales in China altogether.
see
>OpenAI calls DeepSeek 'state-controlled,' calls for bans https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43355779
>Ask HN: Why is OpenAI pushing for regulation so much? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36045397
OpenAI should concentrate on delivering models that don't get overtaken 3 months later by open source offerings.
Yesterday I was using Sonnet 3.7 extended thinking in Cursor when I got rate limited. No problem, GPT 4.5 should be as good right? Noticeably worse! Not what I expected.
Is it just me or does this post sound ridiculously unprofessional?
I had the same thought, especially compared to their previous press releases on the matter. I suspect they're capitalizing on the growing anti-Elon sentiment across the world.
Ironic. ChatGPT could have easily improved it:
This lawsuit has always been driven by Elon’s personal and financial interests in advancing his for-profit AI company. As his own emails confirm, he sought to merge a for-profit OpenAI into Tesla under his control. When we declined, he left, unable to take command. Now, after witnessing our progress without him, he has resorted to meritless litigation while simultaneously attempting to replicate our advancements through his own multi-billion-dollar, for-profit enterprise.
Last week, the court denied Elon’s request for a preliminary injunction, determining that he had not “demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits.” Beyond that, the court went even further by dismissing several of his claims outright. This ruling is a significant step toward putting this baseless lawsuit behind us.
As Elon is learning, facts matter—especially in court. One fact he continues to misrepresent is the status of our non-profit. Contrary to his claims, there is no “conversion” of the non-profit underway.
We welcome the opportunity to make this clear in court: (1) the non-profit remains a central pillar of our mission, and (2) we are committed to ensuring it is not only supported by a successful business but also in a stronger position than ever before. For years, we have operated with for-profit subsidiaries, and any structural adjustments will be designed to enhance, not undermine, the non-profit’s ability to fulfill its mission.
Our Board has been unequivocal in its commitment to strengthening the non-profit for the long term. We are not selling it—we are reinforcing it. The non-profit will retain a significant stake in our proposed public-benefit corporation, making it one of the most well-funded non-profits in history.
In one respect, Elon was right: in 2017, he recognized that OpenAI’s structure needed to evolve. He was also correct in establishing xAI as a public-benefit corporation. However, he is entirely wrong in pursuing this lawsuit, which is both legally baseless and transparently self-serving. The court has already seen through this effort, and we are confident it will continue to do so.