In a United States court, OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman has rejected claims from fellow tech mogul Elon Musk that he betrayed the artificial intelligence company's original vision. Tuesday marked the start of Altman's testimony in a contentious trial unfolding in Oakland, California, between some of tech's richest and most powerful titans. He alleged that OpenAI's leader persuaded him to invest $38bn, based on a goal of improving humanity, only to see the company pivot to a for-profit venture in 2019. On the witness stand on Tuesday, Altman instead framed Musk as a competitor obsessed with exercising control over OpenAI. "It does not fit with my conception of the words'stealing a charity' to look at what has actually happened here," Altman told the court.

Elon Musk tried to take control of OpenAI, even suggesting it could pass to his children when he dies, Sam Altman said on Tuesday. Altman is co-founder and chief executive of the artificial intelligence (AI) company behind ChatGPT. He is being sued by Musk, who accuses him of having looted a charity given OpenAI began as a non-profit. Appearing before a federal jury in Oakland, California, Altman said Musk not only backed the idea of OpenAI becoming a for-profit business, he wanted control of it for the long-run. A particularly hair-raising moment was when my cofounders asked, 'If you have control, what happens when you die?'

Ilya Sutskever Stands by His Role in Sam Altman's OpenAI Ouster: 'I Didn't Want It to Be Destroyed' The former OpenAI chief scientist may be estranged from the company, but he still came to its defense as he testified on Monday. Elon Musk's trial against OpenAI and Microsoft entered its final stretch on Monday, with testimony from Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, and current OpenAI chairman Bret Taylor. Sutskever drew the spotlight, revealing an ownership stake in OpenAI's $850-billion for-profit arm that is currently worth about $7 billion. That makes him one of the largest known individual shareholders of OpenAI. Earlier in the trial, OpenAI president Greg Brockman acknowledged for the first time that he has around $30 billion worth of OpenAI shares .

Showdown between Musk and Altman has rendered the world's most wealthy comical under egalitarian eye of court For the past couple of weeks, on the fourth floor of a courthouse on a quiet street in downtown Oakland, the world's richest man and one of the world's most valuable startups have been at war over the future of artificial intelligence. Being one of the reporters in the room has felt like watching an updated, opposite-coast version of Tom Wolfe's The Bonfire of the Vanities - ambition, ego, greed and the spectrum of social class on full display. The supporting cast has included Elon Musk fanboys, a stern judge and a who's-who of Silicon Valley's most influential people. All courtroom battles are theatre, but this one has proved to be a unique spectacle, with the judge chastising the lawyers for leading the witness, raising meritless objections and even too much coughing. With Musk on the stand, he griped that an opposing attorney had asked a leading question, to which the judge told him to "tell the jury you're not a lawyer".

Musk v. Altman week 2: OpenAI fires back, and Shivon Zilis reveals that Musk tried to poach Sam Altman OpenAI president Greg Brockman said Elon Musk wanted the company to create a for-profit entity--and endured a public peek into his diary. OpenAI president Greg Brockman, foreground, exits the U.S. District Court in Oakland, California. In the second week of the landmark trial between Elon Musk and OpenAI, Musk's motivations for bringing the suit were under scrutiny. Last week, Musk took the stand, alleging that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman had deceived him into donating $38 million to the company. He claimed that they'd promised to maintain it as a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI for the benefit of humanity, only to later accept billions of dollars of investment from Microsoft and restructure the company to operate a for-profit subsidiary. This week, Brockman fired back with his side of the story, arguing that Musk had actually pushed for OpenAI to create a for-profit arm and fought a bitter battle to have "absolute control" over it.

Leaders at the tech giant were skeptical of OpenAI--but wary of pushing it into the arms of Amazon, according to evidence revealed during the trial. OpenAI's relationship with Microsoft, its longtime investor and cloud partner, has grown increasingly complicated over the years as the ChatGPT-maker has grown into a behemoth competitor . But Microsoft executives had reservations about sending additional funding to OpenAI as far back as 2018 when it was just a small nonprofit research lab, according to emails between more than a dozen Microsoft executives, including CEO Satya Nadella, shown in a federal court on Thursday during the trial. The emails show how Microsoft, at the time, wavered over what has since been held up as one of the most successful corporate partnerships in tech history. Several Microsoft executives said in the emails their visits to OpenAI did not indicate any imminent breakthroughs in developing artificial general intelligence.

Messages between Shivon Zilis and Tesla executives reveal plans in 2017 to start a rival AI lab, potentially led by Altman or Demis Hassabis. A few months before Elon Musk left OpenAI's board of directors in February 2018, he tried to recruit Sam Altman to join a "world-class AI lab" within Tesla. Musk went as far as offering the OpenAI CEO a Tesla board seat, according to emails and testimony presented in federal court on Wednesday during the trial . The emails were shown to a jury during the cross examination of Shivon Zilis, a former OpenAI adviser and board member who is also the mother of four of Musk's children. Musk's core claim in this lawsuit is that Altman and OpenAI president Greg Brockman effectively stole a nonprofit, using the $38 million Musk invested to create a private company worth more than $800 billion today.

A former OpenAI board member has explained how her unconventional personal relationship with Elon Musk evolved into having four of his children. Shivon Zilis testified in a federal courtroom in Oakland, California for hours on Wednesday as part of Musk's lawsuit trying to reverse OpenAI's change to a for-profit company. The focus of Zilis's appearance was her direct involvement in early talks with Musk around the company becoming a for-profit, but also how she worked for and became involved with Musk as she advised OpenAI. I still really wanted to be a mum and Elon made the offer around that time and I accepted, she said, explaining Musk in 2020 had offered to donate sperm. He was encouraging everyone around him at that time to have kids and he'd noticed I did not.

OpenAI's cofounder and president revealed in federal court on Monday that he's one of the largest individual stakeholders in the AI lab. Two days before the Musk v. Altman trial began, Elon Musk asked OpenAI cofounder and president Greg Brockman about reaching a settlement. When Brockman suggested both sides drop their claims, Musk responded, "By the end of this week, you and Sam [Altman] will be the most hated men in America. If you insist, so be it." The message --which OpenAI's lawyers made public on Sunday, and which Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers subsequently refused to let the jury hear about--underscores what may be Musk's larger goal in this trial.

Readers respond to Sarah Stillman's piece about the detention of migrant children, Patrick Radden Keefe's investigation into car-insurance fraud in New Orleans, and Ronan Farrow and Andrew Marantz's profile of Sam Altman. Sarah Stillman, in her excellent article on the U.S. government's detention of migrant children, does what many media outlets find impossible: she stays with an ongoing horror even as the news cycles that placed it front and center have passed ("No Mercy," April 20th). Stillman's piece also reminded me that the United States is the only U.N. member state that refuses to ratify the organization's Convention on the Rights of the Child, which enshrines children with certain rights--including to stay with their families whenever possible and to due process. America's refusal dates back to the nineteen-nineties; considering this, the current Administration's actions can be seen only as a shameful continuation of our country's failure to respect human rights, even on its own soil. Stillman's piece details widespread medical neglect at the Dilley Immigration Processing Center, in Dilley, Texas, and points out that one source for its population's medical problems is the town's water.