Elon Musk’s Pro-Trump Backers Invest Millions in Facebook Ads for X: Report

Elon Musk’s Mr. Pack spends significantly more on advertising on Facebook and YouTube compared to Musk’s own social network, X.

America Pac allocated $201,000 for running numerous ads on X (formerly Twitter) in the past three months. However, the organization spent $3 million on thousands of ads on Facebook and Instagram over a similar timeframe. Musk established the pro-Donald Trump pack in July and provided it with around $75 million, as per filings with the Federal Election Commission.

Based on political advertising disclosures, America Pac invested over $166,000 on 59 ads on X from July 8 to October 1. wired. After Musk assumed control of Pac’s @America handle on October 7, the company spent approximately $34,000 on X ads. bloomberg Reported. These ads were targeted at various battleground states, with a focus on Pennsylvania, generating about 32 million impressions according to Wired.

Contrasting these figures with America Pac’s ad purchases on Facebook, the organization spent over $3 million on 1,910 ads during a 90-day period from July 22 to October 19, some of which were also duplicated on Instagram, as per Meta’s ad library. The ads targeted users in states like North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Arizona.

Around 12 ads from America Pac received over 1 million impressions, while others garnered hundreds of thousands. The Meta ad library doesn’t provide total impressions for individual advertisers, making direct comparisons with X ads more challenging.

Musk’s Pack also heavily invested in Google, particularly YouTube. According to the Google Ads Transparency Center, America Pac spent $1.5 million on 251 ads with Google and its subsidiaries since early July, which is ten times higher than what was spent on X. A significant portion of the ads were video advertisements, primarily targeting Georgia, as revealed in Google’s disclosure.

With over 200 million followers on X, Musk has a massive audience reach without incurring costs. Musk frequently retweets America Pack’s content, despite Pac having fewer than 7,000 followers.

The increase in Facebook spending signifies Musk’s shifting geographic focus. Audience data from Meta’s ad library indicated that a large percentage of America Pac’s ads in the past 90 days targeted North Carolina. However, in the recent seven days, over 25% of the ads focused on Pennsylvania, where Musk has been actively campaigning in person.

Facebook’s targeting options enable advertisers to reach specific audiences based on interests. America Pac tailored its ads to users intrigued by various subjects like Kelsey Grammer, trophy hunting, Kid Rock, the Boy Scouts of America, and Joe Rogan, among others.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Since Musk acquired Twitter and rebranded it as X in 2022, he has highlighted its advertising capabilities and app store performance. Even in 2023, advertising constituted 70-75% of X’s total revenue. bloomberg This trend persisted despite Musk introducing Twitter Blue, a subscription product. X’s revenue in 2023 amounted to $2.5 billion, nearly half of the previous year, primarily due to reduced advertising expenditure.

Musk is also focusing on organizing in-person events. He pledged to donate $1 million per day until the election to registered voters supporting America Pac’s petition. Musk has been awarding giant novelty checks at rallies in Pennsylvania over the recent days.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s Worldwide Political Objectives: A TechScape Analysis

Hello. Welcome to TechScape. I’m Blake Montgomery. I’m the technology news editor for the Guardian US. Today on TechScape, I’m decoding Elon Musk’s global political goals, a notable documentary filmed inside World of Warcraft, a vote on support for school phone bans, and TikTok’s cats. Thank you for your participation. First, let’s talk about Mr. Musk’s world politics.

Over the weekend, Mr. Musk promised to give $150,000 a day to registered voters in U.S. battleground states who signed Mr. Pack’s petition in support of the First and Second Amendments. He awarded the first prize, a novelty check the size of a kitchen island, at a rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday, and the second prize on Sunday in Pittsburgh. He plans to continue running until the November 5th election. Experts say the stunt may be illegal.


Why is Mr. Musk doing this? what does he want?

Last week, my colleagues Nick Robbins Early and Rachel Reingan published an article examining Musk’s inevitable influence on the US presidential election. The article delves into Musk’s political activities over the past few months, but what particularly interested me was the question it raised: As restrictions ease, masks around the world Is it the driving force behind his political activities? Is all this spending and campaigning about cutting government departments?

The constant battle with all the regulatory agencies comes at the same time that Musk has made numerous public statements supporting deregulation and calling for a full-scale federal audit. The idea has gained support from President Trump, who announced in September that he would create a Musk-led Government Efficiency Commission to audit cuts at federal agencies. Musk wants to call it the Department of Government Efficiency, or Doge, a reference to one of his favorite memes, the expressive Shiba Inu.

One of Musk’s go-to memes. Photo: The Guardian

The plan is vague in details and fails to address Mr. Musk’s apparent conflict of interest in auditing the regulators that oversee his company, but both Mr. Trump and Mr. He repeatedly brings up the idea of ​​playing some kind of role. President Trump appeared on Fox News earlier this week and said he would create a new position called “Secretary of Cost Reduction” and appoint Musk to the position.

“He wants to do this,” President Trump said.

But Musk’s fight to reduce government agencies is not limited to the United States. At times, he found himself at odds with other billionaires in battles with “regulators.” In India, Mr. Musk is at war with the government. satellite broadband distribution And he won against Mukesh Ambani. Asia’s richest man wanted more favorable terms for his communications empire.

He calls himself a “free speech absolutist” and is dissatisfied with speech regulators. A month after the general election, when Britain was in the midst of violent race riots, Musk tweeted that “civil war is inevitable” and posted a cartoon depicting a man in the electric chair. , argued that this was gratuitous punishment by the government. He has made similar criticisms of California’s government and President Joe Biden’s administration.

His fight for deregulation regularly puts him at odds with the judiciary. Last month, Brazil cut off access to X for failing to comply with a judge’s order and also fined SpaceX subsidiary Starlink for violating its sister company. Mr. Musk and Mr. X eventually complied.

Recently, some regulators have taken new steps and begun imposing penalties on mask companies for their (or Musk’s) actions.

Last week, European regulators took a page out of Brazil’s book, telling Company X’s lawyers: EU could impose fines For social media companies that failed to comply with the Digital Services Act. Importantly, regulators are proposing to calculate that tax based on the total revenue of Mr. Musk’s businesses, not just Company X’s profits. A possibly much higher fine could leave the social media platform in financial limbo.

In California, the Coastal Commission cited Musk’s tendency to tweet misinformation during a vote to reject SpaceX and the U.S. Air Force’s petition to launch more rockets from a base on the Santa Barbara coast. did. In response, Musk filed a lawsuit alleging political bias and violations of the First Amendment. He just wants to be left alone to peacefully fire rockets, tweet, and spend tens of millions of dollars on his presidential campaign.

Read the full story about Mr. Musk’s ubiquitous campaign.

Photo: Christopher Kumar/PR

Evelin’s amazing life The film follows the legacy of Mads Steen, a Norwegian teenager who suffered from a degenerative disorder that forced him to spend most of his 25 years in a wheelchair.

As Steen became more dependent on his wheelchair and breathing machine, he began spending more time playing World of Warcraft and other games, sometimes up to 12 hours a day. The film takes place where he spent most of his life: online.

Steen’s parents are concerned about the negative effects screen time is having on their son. They fear he will “never experience friendship, love, or making a difference in the lives of others.” But after his death, they realize that their despair has given him a lifeline, freeing him to do all the things they never thought he could do. Steen’s Warcraft character Eveline led him into deep friendships, adventures, and even digital romance. He left them a password when he died so they could find out about his second life.

Skip past newsletter promotions
Photo: The Guardian

The film’s action, which mirrors Steen’s life, occurs both offline and online. Shot on digital locations in World of Warcraft’s Azeroth, it follows Ibelin’s reenactments of her conquests, conversations, and relationships there. Close-up shots zoom in on the avatar’s facial expressions, simulating the presence and emotions of Steen and his friends who talk about him as part of the Warcraft family. Each speaks of the deeply positive impact of the in-game friendship they shared with Steen through Evelin.

Evelyn’s scenes in Azeroth succeed in imbuing the fictional characters’ actions there with real meaning. Evelin kisses her date at sunset. He joins a family called Starlight. In moments of distress he lashes out at those closest to him. These avatars constitute the entire emotional life of a group of friends. They gave hope to a boy whose parents saw his life as truncated and lacking. Who’s to say they’re not real?

The success story of video games and social media is as old as the backlash against both. But what makes this documentary different is that it places the viewer next to the subject on screen. This is an immersive and empathetic approach, and it’s much better than watching someone use a device from a third-person perspective.

The film comes as parents around the world debate how much screen time is appropriate for their children. The argument that time spent digitally with friends has tangible weight is made even more persuasive by its format. By relying on in-game cinematography, the film shows the emotional weight of online life.

The film will be released on Netflix on October 25th.

on my iPhone

Photo: The Guardian

This week I’ve been watching some interesting videos: Cat equipped with a camera collar. This video is not only a peek into the secret lives of outdoor pets, but also a marvel of camera stabilization technology. Some camera companies have already Sponsored by Mr. Kittershas become one of the main characters on TikTok. Another feline star, the confrontational @max20499, is more of a villain. He loves to ambush and fight unsuspecting cats. To find him, the app suggests the search terms “Maxwell the Bully Kitten” and “Maxwell the Bully Kitten meets his match.”

Britain has banned students from using mobile phones in schools. Should U.S. schools do the same?

Photo: Carlos Barria/Reuters

pew research last week released a poll of 5,110 American adults about banning cell phone use in schools. You may be surprised by the results, as I was. Quote from the poll results:

68% of U

Source: www.theguardian.com

Other Techies in Silicon Valley are Concerned About the US Election Beyond Elon Musk

The slogan “the personal is political” was influential in the 1960s, highlighting power dynamics in marriage. Today, a slogan like “technology is political” is equally relevant, showing how a few global corporations hold political sway in liberal democracies. Elon Musk’s recent appearance alongside Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally underscored technology’s prominent role in American politics. Despite Musk’s reluctance to tweet, his company provides internet to Ukrainian troops and his rocket was selected to land the next American on the moon.

Skip past newsletter promotions

In the past, tech giants like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, and Apple flourished in a lenient political climate. Democratic governments overlooked technology’s influence, and antitrust regulators were hampered by legal restrictions. The University of Chicago Law School promoted the idea that corporate dominance was permissible unless it harmed consumers. However, recent regulatory actions led by the DOJ and FTC show a shift towards addressing tech monopolies like Google facing antitrust allegations.

The tech industry’s political awakening is evident in the substantial financial support crypto companies provide to political campaigns. Rather than aiming to sway election results, this money is directed towards influencing the composition of Congress. This contrasts with the tech pioneers of the past who shunned politics, highlighting the current intertwining of technology and politics.

John Norton is a Professor of Public Understanding of Technology at the Open University.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk Sends X Dispute to Conservative Texas Court by Updating Terms of Service

Company X, owned by Elon Musk, has recently updated its terms of service. These changes redirect disputes from users of the social media platform formerly known as Twitter to federal court in Texas. Federal judges in Texas have a reputation for favoring conservative litigants in political cases.

The updated terms state that any legal action against Company X must be filed exclusively in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas or the state court in Tarrant County, Texas. This venue clause is a common practice for companies, but it is notable that Company X is located in Bastrop, Texas, which falls under the Western District of Texas.

It is speculated that this choice of venue is related to the political leanings of judges in the Northern District of Texas, which has fewer Republican-appointed judges compared to the Western District. This district is known for conservative activism and has become a preferred destination for lawsuits challenging Joe Biden’s policies, leading some to criticize the tactic as “judge shopping.”

Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University, suggested that the new language in the terms of service may be connected to Company X’s recent legal strategy. Elon Musk, known as the world’s richest man, has shown support for conservative causes and was a significant financial backer of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

Company X has already filed two lawsuits in the Northern District of Texas, including one against Media Matters for allegedly defaming the platform. Additionally, an antitrust lawsuit has been filed against multiple advertisers for conspiring to boycott and causing revenue loss. These cases are assigned to U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, known for controversial rulings on healthcare and gun control.

Despite concerns over potential conflicts of interest, Judge O’Connor has refused to recuse himself from the cases involving Company X. The federal court in Fort Worth, where the cases are being heard, has only two active judges, with the other judge, Mark Pittman, appointed by President Trump.

Source: www.theguardian.com

TechScape: Elon Musk Faces Challenges in Dealing with Donald Trump | Technology

Hello. Welcome to TechScape. I’m Blake Montgomery. I’m the technology news editor for the Guardian US. Thank you for your participation.

This week on iPhone

Slack notifications: 121. Photo: Sascha Steinbach/EPA

Average daily notifications:270

Apps with the highest total number of notifications:
message:391
new york post:190
slack:121

Elon during the election campaign

Elon Musk spoke on stage alongside Donald Trump at a campaign event in Pennsylvania this month. Photo: Alex Brandon/AP

Elon Musk is having a very difficult time against Donald Trump.

The CEOs of Tesla and SpaceX gave tens of millions of dollars to pro-Trump political action committees and planned a packed campaign schedule to boost the former president in Pennsylvania. The newspaper said he speaks with President Trump multiple times a week and has encouraged other billionaires to support the Republican candidate en masse in private gatherings. new york times.

Taken together, Mr. Musk’s actions are unprecedented in modern times. Musk, the world’s richest man and owner of one of the most influential mass communications outlets, is putting all his efforts into political candidates. He is no longer a billionaire dabbling in politics. Elon Musk is here to stay as a political actor.

Last weekend, Musk appeared with President Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, the site of Trump’s first assassination attempt. He plans to make additional stops in the Keystone State in the three weeks leading up to the election. Politico coverage. he also $47 referral bonus Anyone who is registered to vote in a battleground state can sign a petition filed by his political action committee, America Pac. Remember, Musk forced all Tesla employees to return to the office five days a week in mid-2022. One might wonder how he will manage the company’s affairs since he will be spending so much time in Pennsylvania.

Tesla’s CEO contributes not only IRL but also online. He is bending Twitter/X to his political ends: He @America behind the wheel For this week’s America pack. Last month he Hacked materials from the Trump campaign Published by independent journalists. Musk’s own feed is filled with support for Trump and retweets from people who support him.

President Trump seemed excited about all of the above, sending out a fundraising email with the subject line “Elon!” Elon! Elon! ”’ He also asked supporters to buy the black-on-black “Dark Maga” hat that Musk wore while jumping for joy behind Trump in Pennsylvania.

Elon Musk stands on stage with President Trump during a campaign rally at the site of Trump’s first assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, on October 5, 2024. Photo: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

As the world’s richest man fights for the Republican nomination, he is following a familiar rabbit hole down the rabbit hole for President Trump’s surrogates. He is increasingly appealing to the fringe of the “Make America Great Again” movement. “If you don’t vote, this will be your last election in America,” Musk said in Pennsylvania. It’s an irony reminiscent of the storming of the Capitol. He repeats the line, “If Kamala Harris wins, she’s going to jail.”

President Trump expressed a similar idea, albeit a more optimistic one, telling a group of Christian supporters in July: We’ll fix it just fine, so there’s no need to vote. ” This is a hopeful statement in the sense of ending democracy. Mr. Musk’s version is a repudiation of Mr. Trump’s, and is full of the doom of election deniers. This contrast is similar to the dynamic between President Trump and J.D. Vance, who has expressed extreme anti-abortion views in speeches and interviews, although Trump himself has said he would return the issue to the states. I’m trying to get around this problem by repeating this.

You might think science is a top priority for a tech CEO, but Musk also defers to Trump on science issues. but, This week’s interview with former Fox News host Tucker CarlsonMusk touted the anti-vaccination movement while walking off a cliff, saying, “I’m not anti-vaccine in general…we shouldn’t force people to get vaccinated,” before praising smallpox and polio vaccines. did. Trump himself called the coronavirus “one of humanity’s greatest achievements.” But during the campaign, he said he would cut funding to schools that require vaccinations and appoint the nation’s most notorious anti-vaxxer, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., to his transition team.

In the same conversation with Carlson, Musk repeated a statement he had previously recanted and wondered out loud why no one was trying to assassinate Harris.

Musk previously called Trump a “ruthless loser.” Trump once said with a vengeance that he could make tech moguls “bend the knee.” This strange partnership affected at least one of Musk’s businesses. A shift to the right and the launch of the Hot Wheels-style Cybertruck transformed Tesla from a brand coveted by Hollywood and Silicon Valley people to a brand beloved by law enforcement. It’s a change similar to that of Mr. Musk himself. Corporate value has fallen by tens of billions of dollars.

We will be keeping a close eye on Mr. Musk’s next steps on the campaign trail.

Art on Samsung TV and Art in the Museum

Vincent van Gogh’s “Starry Night” is on display.

What is the purpose of digital reproduction of paintings?

Skip past newsletter promotions

Samsung announced yesterday that it has entered into a partnership to license 20 paintings from the collection of the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York to be used on its Frame TVs. To promote this collaboration, the Korean electronics giant organized a tour of MoMA. I saw Vincent van Gogh’s “The Starry Night”, Claude Monet’s giant “Water Lilies”, and surrealist painter Leonora Carrington’s “And I Saw the Daughter of the Minotaur”.

“Water Lilies” by Claude Monet. Photo: Noah Karina/Guardian

Two weeks before this announcement, the Mauritshuis Museum in the Netherlands published a study measuring the neurological effects of art. Scientists have discovered that an original work of art stimulates a response in the viewer’s brain that is 10 times stronger than the response evoked by a reproduction of the same painting.

Philosopher Walter Benjamin theorized this finding about 100 years ago. In “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” published in 1937, he argued that original works have an indescribable aura that replicas can never match. Samsung seems to agree with him to invite journalists on a private MoMA tour to view original works. So what are the benefits of artwork on Frame TV?

Robin Saetta, MoMA’s director of business development, said during the tour that the partnership aligns with the museum’s goal of “extending and expanding access to modern and contemporary art.” I agree. Benjamin writes of the reproduction of a work of art, “Above all, it allows the original to meet the viewer half-heartedly.”

opt out

www.theguardian.com

Labor MP criticizes Westminster’s dependence on Elon Musk’s X as ‘wholly incorrect’

A close friend of Keir Starmer suggests that Westminster needs to distance itself from X, alleging that Elon Musk is purposely manipulating algorithms to further his own political and personal agenda. He implied that this might be the case.

Josh Symonds, Member of Parliament for Makerfield and former director of the pro-Starmerite think tank Labor Together, argues that Britain’s political elite is dangerously reliant on the platform formerly known as Twitter. He expressed his belief in it. Symonds maintains an active X profile but is cautious not to “overuse” it.

His remarks mirror the growing unease among Labour MPs regarding the impact of X following the summer riots, during which misinformation rapidly circulated on the platform. This situation also risks escalating tensions between the government and the company, with Musk persistently criticizing Starmer for his handling of the violence.


Congressman Josh Simmons Photo: Roger Harris/British Parliament

Simons, a tech expert who authored a book on artificial intelligence, conveyed in an interview with The Guardian: That’s all. Particularly because I hardly ever endorse anything he says and I really don’t want to see it, even though I encounter him frequently.

“I even mentioned, ‘Don’t show me any more,’ yet he’s constantly present. And that certainty – despite the disapproval from the company’s founders and owners. You’ll notice additional individuals in the algorithm – [of] Something happening.”

He added, “The notion that individuals in the Westminster bubble are acquainted through a ranking system devised by someone who has dedicated his life to supporting Donald Trump is entirely, unequivocally wrong and detrimental to British democracy. I believe it’s harmful,” he continued. “I think it’s short-sighted for us all.”

X did not respond to requests for comments

The relationship between the government and social media platforms has been strained since the summer riots, with experts contending that online misinformation about the perpetrator who killed three children in Southport incited the disturbances.

As the violence intensified, Musk repeatedly posted about the unrest, sharing a video of the riots in Liverpool with the caption: “Civil war is inevitable.” Downing Street publicly rebuked these comments, labeling them as “unjustified,” to which Musk retaliated with a flurry of enraged posts.

X’s owners recently revived their criticism of the Labour government after being excluded from an international investment summit on Monday. “I don’t reckon anyone should visit the UK when they release a convicted pedophile. [sic] For imprisoning individuals based on their social media postings,” he posted, apparently alluding to the government’s early release initiative.

Numerous Labour MPs have opted out of X and instead established profiles on competing platforms such as Bluesky.

Simons, formerly involved in Meta’s AI program and presently campaigning for a seat on the Commons Technology Select Committee, opines that the new cohort of MPs are more skeptical of platforms than their predecessors, he asserts.

“The landscape is evolving quite fundamentally,” the 31-year-old remarked. “In reality, I believe there’s a generation that doesn’t necessarily imply they won’t utilize it at all, particularly since it offers us another avenue to attract attention.”

He also contends that the discourse surrounding AI has been predominantly shaped by older politicians who did not grow up in a tech-immersed environment like his generation did. He suggests that such individuals are frequently overly optimistic or pessimistic about how technology will revolutionize government operations.

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair and ex-Conservative Party leader William Hague are among the most vocal proponents of broad AI integration in the public sector. Former Chancellor Rishi Sunak also conveyed optimism about the potential but cautioned about the “existential risks” to humanity.

“There’s a generation,” Simons remarked, “[that] didn’t grow up alongside data and technology, and they harbor simplistic, reductionist, and often utopian or apocalyptic notions about how technology will impact the nation’s future, public services, and economy.”

“AI frequently hinders delving deeper into the technology to better comprehend its policy and political implications.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk Issues Warning About Starlink Dominance in Brazilian Amazon: “I Can’t Survive Without It”

The helicopter descended into a remote part of the Amazon rainforest, where Brazil’s special forces leaped off and dove into the waters teeming with caimans.

Their mission was to uncover a massive steel structure concealed in the forests along the Boia River in Brazil. An illegal mining dredger was caught in the act of excavating the riverbed for gold.

In the crackdown, authorities found mercury bottles, gold, and a drill bit on board. They also discovered a high-tech Starlink satellite internet receiver, linking the criminal network.

Starlink antennas have become ubiquitous in the Amazon, providing internet connectivity to remote areas where it was once unimaginable.

Brazilian special forces said they had seized a number of Starlink antennas from criminals this year. Photo: Joan Raet/The Guardian

Starlink’s expansion in Brazil has transformed connectivity in remote areas, but it has raised concerns about data privacy and national security.

Brazilian authorities worry about Musk’s influence over Starlink and his erratic behavior, which could jeopardize the country’s reliance on the technology.

The global reliance on Starlink, led by Musk, has sparked debates about the potential risks of a single company dominating the satellite internet market.

A Starlink device discovered by Ibama during an illegal mining operation in a remote area of the Amazon. Photo: AP

Countries like Ukraine have shown the strategic importance of Starlink for national defense against potential threats. However, concerns about over-reliance on Musk’s company have surfaced.

Starlink’s near-monopoly in providing satellite internet services has raised questions about the geopolitical implications of Musk’s control over critical infrastructure.

As the competition in the satellite internet market intensifies, the Musk factor could sway customers’ choices, influencing the future landscape of global connectivity.

Calls for diversifying satellite internet providers and reducing dependence on a single entity like Starlink have gained traction amid growing concerns about data security and political influence.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Brazilian Court Requires Suspension of Elon Musk’s X after Expiration of Deadline

The Supreme Court of Brazil has ordered the suspension of social media platform X’s activities in the country as the company failed to appoint a legal representative within the specified deadline.

Judge Alexandre de Moraes, in a continuing legal battle with X’s owner Elon Musk, issued an order on Friday evening for the complete suspension of X’s operations until all court orders are fulfilled, fines are paid, and a new legal representative is appointed in the country.

The National Telecommunications Agency of Brazil has been given 24 hours to enforce the court’s decision, after which over 20,000 broadband providers in the country will be required to block access to X.

The agency’s director, Carlos Manuel Baigorri, confirmed that the order has been communicated to internet providers, with the expectation that all businesses will have implemented the blocks by the weekend.

Initially, Judge Moraes instructed Apple and Google to block X apps and VPN applications. However, these references were later removed pending further information from the involved parties.

Individuals or companies attempting to use X through VPNs will face fines of 50,000 reais per day.

Following X’s failure to appoint new legal representatives, Musk announced that the platform would not comply with the court’s orders.

Musk criticized Brazil’s actions, accusing the country of stifling the truth and intimidating those seeking it.

The conflict between Musk and the Brazilian authorities began in April, with accusations of spreading misinformation and censorship.

President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva emphasized the need for compliance with Brazilian laws and court decisions, warning against disrespect for the country’s sovereignty.

In response to Musk’s actions, local bank accounts linked to Starlink, Musk’s satellite and internet provider, were blocked to enforce fines imposed on X.

As legal experts criticized the decision affecting Starlink, the internet provider assured customers of continued service despite the financial implications.

Starlink has requested the Supreme Court to reconsider Moraes’ decision and lift the freeze on its accounts, or alternatively, limit the freeze to the fine amount imposed on X.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Calls for Royal Society to Expel Elon Musk Due to Behavior Concerns

The Royal Society is facing pressure to remove technology mogul Elon Musk from its membership due to concerns about his behavior.

As reported by The Guardian, Musk, known for owning the social media platform X, was elected to the British Academy of Sciences in 2018. Some view him as a contemporary innovator comparable to Brunel for his contributions to the aerospace and electric vehicle sectors.

Musk, a co-founder of SpaceX and the CEO of Tesla, has been commended for advancing reusable rocket technology and promoting sustainable energy sources.

Nevertheless, concerns have been raised by several Royal Society fellows regarding Musk’s membership status, citing his provocative comments, particularly following recent riots in the UK.

Critics fear that Musk’s statements could tarnish the reputation of his companies. In response to inquiries, Musk’s companies, including X, provided comments.

Musk’s social media posts during the unrest were widely condemned, with Downing Street rebuking his remarks about civil war and false claims about UK authorities.

The concerns around potentially revoking Musk’s membership focus on his ability to promote his beliefs responsibly and not on his personal views.

The Royal Society’s Code of Conduct emphasizes that fellowship entails upholding certain standards of behavior, even in personal communications, to safeguard the organization’s reputation.

Skip Newsletter Promotions

The Code stipulates that breaching conduct rules may result in disciplinary measures, such as temporary or permanent suspension. Specific procedures are outlined if misconduct allegations are raised against a Fellow or Foreign Member.

Expelling a member from the Royal Society is rare, with no records of such action in over a century. Previous controversies included a dean resigning over remarks about teaching creationism in schools.

A Royal Society spokesperson assured that any concerns regarding individual Fellows would be handled confidentially.

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Reasons Behind My Ongoing Focus on Elon Musk in the World of Technology

“I Last week, I sent out TechScape to our readers, hoping to take a break from writing about Elon Musk. However, my news editor had other plans: “Can you keep an eye on Elon Musk’s Twitter feed this week?”

Reading Musk’s tweets, I felt like my brain was melting. Even though I’d covered him for years, his online presence surprised me. From promoting Tesla and SpaceX to sharing cheesy nerdy jokes and diving into right-wing politics, his chaotic behavior had a new twist.

His briefest overnight break came on Saturday night, when he retweeted controversial content and then dived back in hours later with more questionable tweets.

Musk’s involvement in UK politics pushed him further into the far-right spectrum. Engaging with controversial figures like Lauren Southern and supporting Britain First’s co-leader, Musk’s online persona was more divisive than ever. Now, they are his supporters.

Well, that’s fine.

Today I’ll give you a good example from the world of AI that shows the difference between a scientific press release and a scientific paper. University of Bath’s press release claims AI poses no existential threat to humanity, but the actual research paints a different picture.

The study questions the capabilities of large-scale language models, suggesting that they are not as groundbreaking as claimed.

While the press release version is attention-grabbing, the scientific paper delves deeper into the limitations of AI capabilities. It highlights the challenges of ensuring AI safety in the face of emergent capabilities.

The paper reveals that emergent AI capabilities might not be as groundbreaking as they seem and are more controllable than believed. This sheds light on the complexity of AI safety in the face of evolving technology.

The pain of training

Nvidia’s use of YouTube data to train AI has led to legal troubles. A federal lawsuit alleges Nvidia stole videos from YouTube creators to train its AI, sparking a debate about intellectual property rights.

This lawsuit underscores the challenges AI companies face when sourcing training data. While some companies openly disregard copyright restrictions, others like Nvidia face legal battles over data usage.

On the other hand, companies like Google have a different approach due to their dominant position in the tech industry. Many websites allow Google to use their content for AI training to maintain visibility in search results.

Ask Me Anything

In my final TechScape after 11 years at the Guardian, I’m answering readers’ questions. Feel free to ask me anything tech-related, and I’ll do my best to provide insights and recommendations.

The Wider TechScape

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s Twitter Week: What’s the Controversial CEO Been Tweeting About?

pictureRon Musk isn’t stopping tweeting. In just seven days last week, he made nearly 650 posts on the social network he bought in November 2022 and reluctantly rebranded as X. He also spent nearly three hours wrestling with technical issues in what he would later conclude was the result of an unproven hacking attack while trying to host a “conversation” with Donald Trump, and livestreamed himself playing Blizzard’s sword-and-sorcery game Diablo IV for several hours.

The volume of his content alone is impressive enough, but even for someone who was so into posting that he spent more money on a site than the Manhattan Project budget, Musk’s consistency is astonishing.

In the week of tweets analysed by The Guardian, there was a 90-minute period when he posted nothing, between 3am and 4:29am local time, but he tweeted at least once every other half hour throughout the day and night: at 4:41am on Saturday morning, 2:30pm on Wednesday night, and at 11pm on six of the seven days.

The longest Musk went without tweeting that week was seven and a half hours, when he slept until 8:10 a.m. after a late-night posting session. On Saturday night, Musk logged out after retweeting a meme likening the Metropolitan police to the SS, then returned online four and a half hours later to retweet a tweet from a cryptocurrency influencer complaining about the prison sentences of British protesters.

Awesome, awakened, cool

Not all of Musk’s posts on X are loaded with meaning. Most are simple one- or two-word replies to fans, followers and allies. Two minutes after he replies “Cool” to a construction influencer’s AI-generated photo of himself, he replies “Cool” to a montage of photos of the Tesla Cybertruck driving through North America, and a minute later an AI-generated cartoon of himself points to a sign that reads “Criticism is welcome on this platform” and replies “💯.”

One-word replies can sometimes be a good thing and a bad thing. Musk, who has never been one to follow traditional “online etiquette,” occasionally replies to messages with a “😂” emoji and then copies the exact same thing to his own feed without credit. It’s unclear why some posts get Musk’s treasured retweets while others get stolen and reposted.

Musk is sometimes careful with his praise, especially when it comes from users he’s not comfortable being too vocal about. An End Wokeness post about a California early release bill, a Malaysian far-right influencer’s post about Haitian criminals, and a Libs of TikTok post about another California bill have all been marked with a simple “!!” by Musk, while a post by Dom Lucre, a far-right influencer who was banned from the site for posting child abuse imagery, doesn’t even get that mark. Personally covered In 2023, I received just one “!” from a billionaire.

Riot and Grok

Musk’s outrage over the UK riots seems to be deepening his ties to the far-right: Over the past week, he has begun a conversation with Canadian influencer Lauren Southern, one of three anti-Muslim activists named in the UK riots. Banned from entering the UK It was launched by Theresa May’s government in 2018. Though the pair share a distrust of the media, Musk is now a paying subscriber to her feed, supporting her – along with more than 160 other users – for £4.92 a month.

But Musk’s crazy behavior makes sense. A showman, the memes and chatter he retweets and reposts are full of promotions he wants to make that day. Sometimes, it’s professional. On Wednesday and Thursday, when his AI company xAI released the latest version of its large-scale language model, Grok, a significant percentage of his posts were sharing quotes and images generated by it.

In the UK in 2030, you could be executed for posting a meme…

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 10, 2024

And then there are the riots. During the week, Musk’s attention was diverted from tensions in the UK, but the spate of rulings handed down over the weekend meant he was primed for a bit of mayhem.

He latched onto right-wing memes about Keir Starmer promoting a “two-tier” policing system and downplayed their contribution to the violence while constantly drawing attention to the punitive sentences given to rioters. Early on Friday morning, he expanded on his criticism of the SNP's Humza Yousaf, calling the former Scottish First Minister a “super super racist” and challenging him to take legal action in response.

Trump and Tesla

On Monday and Tuesday, Musk drew attention to his conversation with Donald Trump, sharing posts before the livestream in which fans excitedly wondered how many people would tune in and what the two smartest people in the world would discuss, then reposting posts after the livestream in which fans were upset that biased media wouldn’t write more positive headlines and asking fans to shorten the conversation into a more manageable hour-long highlights reel.

Despite this friction, another side of Musk shows up when he talks about his two biggest companies, Tesla and SpaceX. With Tesla being a public company, Musk has to be careful with what he says. He has a fiduciary duty to shareholders and legal obligations on how to disclose material information. Those obligations came to a head when the SEC sued him over his infamous tweets in which he falsely claimed he had “secured funding” to take Tesla private. In a subsequent settlement with regulators, Musk agreed to have his lawyers review all of his tweets about Tesla, a deal he has since regretted.

But after an appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, the deal remains valid, meaning Musk’s final chance to escape the “Twitter guards” may be… It was scrapped in April this year.His posts about Tesla have been surprisingly muted. Shortly after his conversation with Trump, he posted a lengthy, mostly standard, statement retracting some of his comments about climate change: “To be clear, I believe global warming is real.” He startedWhat he meant was that even without global warming, high levels of CO2 It was dangerous.

“Guardians are trash…”

Musk also used the opportunity to take aim at another favorite target, The Guardian. After the paper quoted experts in what he called “the dumbest climate change debate in history,” Musk slammed others he follows who shared the article, telling author Stephen King that “The Guardian cannot be considered objective” and entrepreneur Vinod Khosla that “The Guardian is rubbish.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Former President of Twitter Vows to Take Action Against Elon Musk if Troubles Continue – Bruce Daisley

TThe current social media trend is familiar, with self-absorbed individuals posting excessively on the platforms they dominate, a scenario we’ve seen play out in the past. Donald Trump’s incendiary tweets post-election loss resulted in the Capitol siege on January 6, 2021. Following this, the then-president was banned from Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and even Pinterest, disappointing those aiming to emulate the Mar-a-Lago style on their mood boards.

The situation is likely to evolve differently this time, especially with social media provocateur Elon Musk at the helm of the platform he utilizes.

The two are set to engage on Monday, with Musk engaging directly with the former president. “An entertaining encounter is anticipated”.

During Trump’s tenure, I was stationed at Twitter as its highest-ranking official outside the U.S. Over my eight-year tenure, it became apparent that there was a disparity in the interpretation of free speech between the UK and the U.S., with the latter often championing a libertarian outlook on the concept.

As the UK subsidiary of an American entity, we witnessed a daily fervent defense of free speech. Twitter’s founding legal advisor, Alex MacGillivray, famously dubbed the company as “the free speech wing of the free speech party.” While the U.S. often assumes its freedoms are unique, the UK’s Human Rights Act of 1998 guarantees freedom of speech while also acknowledging its responsibility, stressing that it should not be used to incite criminal activities or spread hatred.

For American tech firms, the interpretation of “free speech” varies. During my tenure at Twitter under a more enlightened leadership, the UK team quickly realized that the Silicon Valley notion of “free speech” wasn’t always geared towards fostering an ideal world. Instead, it often allowed certain groups to target marginalized sections of society, such as women, the LGBTQ+ community, and ethnic minorities, with impunity, detracting from the platform’s original enjoyable nature.

Working within the UK office felt akin to operating within a parliamentary system devoid of a written constitution, relying more on external expectations to shape the organization’s direction.

Efforts to brand “free speech” as a philosophical conviction notwithstanding, its appeal to tech companies is primarily economic. As journalist Kara Swisher notes, Silicon Valley’s approach is more profit-driven than principle-based, evidenced by the support for Trump within San Francisco’s venture capital realm. Holding tech oligarchs accountable for their platforms’ content is feasible and necessary.

Considerations around Musk’s tweets often offer insights into his actions. For instance, his posts on social media platforms like Instagram highlight his late-night musings, providing clues about his mindset and geographic location. Musk’s propensity for controversial posts and real-world ramifications underscores the need for accountability on social media platforms.

The discussion centers on whether billionaire oligarchs like Musk should be allowed to influence societal discourse unchecked. Calls for regulation and accountability in the social media landscape are imperative to address the challenges posed by influential figures like Musk.

  • Bruce Daisley served as Twitter’s vice president for Europe, Middle East, and Africa from 2012 to 2020.

  • If you have any comments on the topics discussed in this article and wish to submit a response of up to 300 words for publication in our Letters section, please click here.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s SpaceX experiences technical difficulties at beginning of interview with Donald Trump

Just as the much-anticipated conversation between Donald Trump and Elon Musk was set to begin, users of X (formerly Twitter) were met with a message stating, “This space is no longer available.”

X’s livestreaming audio feature, Spaces, was supposed to host the conversation, but technical difficulties prevented it from working. Clicking on a link to Trump’s inactive account, @RealDonaldTrump, caused the site to freeze and become unusable, leading to complaints from users about being unable to join and browsers crashing.

Musk, the owner of X, posted that it seemed the platform had been hit with a massive DDOS attack. However, the rest of X seemed to be functioning without issues.

The interview was scheduled for 8pm ET, but due to resolving technical problems, Musk announced a 30-minute delay. Eventually, users were able to join the broadcast by clicking a link.

When the hold music on X stopped at 8:30 p.m. ET, a rustling sound could be heard from Trump’s microphone, leading to 10 minutes of silence before the interview finally began. X showed a high listener count of over 1 million as the interview progressed.

Musk mentioned that the DDOS attack had been mostly overcome, stating, “There is strong opposition to listening to President Trump, as evidenced by this massive attack.”

Trump expressed satisfaction with the incident, calling it an honor alongside millions of others.

This mishap is particularly damaging for X’s image as a tech innovator and a reliable advertising platform. The company recently filed a lawsuit against major advertisers for monopolistic practices.

Despite some challenges, Musk continues to position X as a platform at the forefront of politics and free speech.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Former Twitter CEO calls for Elon Musk’s arrest for provoking riots in the UK

A former Twitter executive has suggested that Elon Musk should be subject to “personal sanctions” and the possibility of an “arrest warrant” if he is found to be disrupting public order on his social media platform.

Bruce Daisley, Twitter’s former vice president for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, expressed in the Guardian that it is unfair to let tech billionaires like Musk tamper with discord without facing personal consequences.

He urged Chancellor Keir Starmer to toughen online safety laws and assess whether media regulator Ofcom is equipped to handle fast-moving individuals like Musk.

Daisley emphasized that the threat of personal sanctions is more effective against executives than the risk of corporate fines, as it could impact the lavish lifestyles of tech billionaires.

The UK government has urged social media platforms to act responsibly following recent riots, attributing them to false information spread online, including claims about asylum seekers.

Musk’s inflammatory posts, such as predicting civil war in the UK, have garnered criticism from government officials, with some calling his remarks unacceptable.

Daisley, who worked at Twitter from 2012 to 2020, described Musk as someone who behaves like a reckless teenager and suggested that an arrest warrant might make him reconsider his actions.

He emphasized the need for legislation to establish boundaries for acceptable behavior on social media and questioned whether tech billionaires should be allowed to influence society without consequences.

Daisley urged for immediate strengthening of the Online Safety Act 2023 to hold tech executives accountable for their actions and to prioritize democratic governance over the influence of tech billionaires.

He also suggested that views deemed harmful, such as those from individuals like Tommy Robinson, should be removed from platforms under the guidance of regulators like Ofcom.

Daisley concluded that the focus should be on upholding acceptable behavior on social media rather than prioritizing profits, especially when influential tech figures like Musk are involved.

He emphasized the possibility of holding tech billionaires accountable for the content allowed on their platforms and called for stricter measures to prevent abuse of power.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Is Elon Musk alienating potential Tesla customers with his rhetoric? | Automotive industry

pictureRon Musk has long been interested in right-wing politics and has enjoyed portraying himself as a contrarian showman. However, his recent political affiliations have raised doubts about Tesla, the electric-car giant he founded. How much further can he push before customers start abandoning his product?

A German pharmacy chain, Rothmann, was among the first to speak out this week. The family business announced that it would not expand its fleet of 34 Tesla cars after Musk publicly supported Donald Trump for US president.

Rothmann’s spokesperson, Raul Rothman, wrote, “Mr. Trump has consistently denied climate change, which contradicts Tesla’s mission to protect the environment by producing electric vehicles.”

Musk’s support for Trump was followed by controversial posts about far-right riots in the UK. He made remarks like “Civil war is inevitable,” which sparked criticism from politicians across the spectrum. Musk engaged with far-right figures, raising concerns among some consumers.

Some Tesla owners are now reevaluating their choice of vehicle due to Musk’s recent behavior.

Given the divisive nature of Mr. Musk’s comments and his apparent enjoyment of creating discord, we have decided to discontinue our relationship with Tesla.”

Tesla has been reached out to for comment.

In online forums, Tesla owners debate the impact of Musk’s politics on the brand. Some have created bumper stickers like “I bought this before I knew Elon was crazy.”

David Bach, a strategy and political economy professor at IMD, noted that Musk’s recent behavior sets him apart from other CEOs. Musk’s actions have garnered mixed reactions, especially in the UK.

Tesla’s sales in the UK account for a small portion of its global business. Musk’s involvement in US politics, particularly with Trump, could have significant repercussions for Tesla.

Despite Musk’s polarizing comments, some consumers still support Tesla. However, there are concerns about the potential impact on business.

Musk’s actions have already affected X and could impact SpaceX as well. Some industry insiders believe that Musk’s current path could eventually lead to a decline in Tesla’s sales.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk: The Evolution from Humanitarian to Right-Wing Meme Poster

ohOtherwise, it would be news that the CEO of one of the world's largest companies endorsed and shared a fabricated headline published by the leader of a fascist party. For Elon Musk, that happened just Thursday.

Unusually for Musk, his post was a retweet of a tweet by Britain First co-leader Ashley Simon, who shared a fake Telegraph headline about British rioters being held in the Falkland Islands, which he deleted shortly after sending it. The 30-minute livestream on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter, which Musk bought in 2022, garnered almost 2 million views.

Musk's outspoken criticism of the government has surprised many since unrest began across the UK last week, but it is just the latest sign that the billionaire is heading down a path of radicalisation.

After making his fortune in the dot-com boom and then from his involvement in PayPal, Musk invested in Tesla in 2004 and eventually became its chief executive. For a while, he presented himself as you'd expect of a former software executive running an electric car company, speaking at length about the risks of climate change while also launching and investing in projects that fit a broad vision of improving the future of humanity, including SpaceX, OpenAI and The Boring Company.

But starting in 2020, Musk's public profile began to shift. He'd always been a fairly active user of Twitter, but when the pandemic hit, he began posting much more frequently and for the first time faced the world of fact-checking, as soft-spoken claims about the danger and duration of the pandemic led to calls for his account to be suspended for spreading misinformation.

In his personal life, Musk's relationship with his family has been turbulent: His relationship with Claire Boucher, better known as the musician Grimes, began to fall apart in 2021. Boucher, mother of at least three of his 12 children, ended up in court over custody.

Around this time, Musk began sending Grimes “right-wing memes and conspiracy theories,” according to biographer Walter Isaacson, to which Grimes responded, “Is this from 4chan or something? You're really starting to sound like a far-right person.”

At the same time, his daughter Vivian She came out as transgender and changed her name.She declared that she no longer wanted to have “any kind of association with my biological father.”

Musk himself has cited Vivienne as the reason for his political switch, telling pop psychologist Jordan Peterson: [his] son [sic]essentially,” and concludes that his son was “killed by the virus of the awakened mind.”

“Many people who are radicalized have a formative personal experience that serves as a cognitive catalyst for their radicalization journey,” said one radicalization expert, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution. “For Musk, it appears that was his daughter's gender transition.”

Skip Newsletter Promotions

The expert also believes Musk is essentially a man with “few beliefs beyond those that enrich him, and a strong desire for attention and validation. Since beginning his right-wing radicalization, he has received a flood of the latter from the far right, building for himself the largest echo chamber in the world that will only continue to grow.”

The expert added: “What's remarkable is that he experiences little to no consequences for his actions and is successful in blackmailing reality to make people comply with his beliefs.”

In July, Musk announced the creation of a political action committee, America PAC, which will “largely but entirely” support the Republican Party because it supports “meritocracy and individual freedom.” Musk did not say how much he planned to donate to the PAC, but previous reports had suggested he was considering donating as much as $45 million a month.

The extent of Musk's political transformation has even led to concerns about his health. In March, he He said he was not drunk “almost all the time.” He claimed that his use of ketamine to treat depression during his X posting sessions was unrelated to his social media presence.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk spreads false information about English rioters being relocated to the Falkland Islands

Elon Musk shared a fake Telegraph article claiming Keir Starmer is considering sending far-right rioters to “emergency detention camps” in the Falkland Islands.

Musk deleted the post about 30 minutes later. Screenshot taken by Politics.co.uk It is suggested that the video had nearly 2 million views before it was removed.

In it, Musk shared an image posted by Ashley Simon, co-leader of the far-right group Britain First, with the caption: “We will all be deported to the Falkland Islands.”

The fake article, purportedly written by a senior Telegraph news reporter and styled to resemble the paper, said that camps in the Falkland Islands would be used to hold prisoners from the ongoing riots because the UK prison system is already at capacity.

The Telegraph said on Thursday it had never published the story in question. A Telegraph Media Group spokesman said in a statement: “This is a fabricated headline for a story that doesn't exist. We have notified the relevant platforms and asked them to remove the story.”

In a post about X, the paper said: “We are aware that an image circulating purporting to be a Telegraph article about 'emergency detention centres' on X. The Telegraph has never published such an article.”

Musk has not apologized for sharing the fake report, but has continued to share material criticizing the UK government and law enforcement response to the riots.

The Guardian contacted Mr X for comment but received an automated response saying: “We're busy at the moment, please check back later.”

On Thursday, Musk said Share the Sky News interview Stephen Parkinson, the director of public prosecutions in England and Wales, said officers were searching social media for content that incited racial hatred. “This is something that is really happening,” Musk said. In another post about the same clip:Musk called Parkinson a “woke Stasi.”

Skip Newsletter Promotions

Musk has been embroiled in a spat with Prime Minister Keir Starmer and British police authorities after saying a “civil war is inevitable” in response to anti-immigration protests in England and Northern Ireland and claiming the police response had been “one-sided”.

A spokesman for the Prime Minister said this week there was “no justification” for the comments. In response, Mr Musk has repeatedly attacked Mr Starmer on his platform, branding him a “second-rate keel”.

Musk, the billionaire co-founder of Tesla, SpaceX and the payments platform X.com that later became PayPal, bought Twitter for $44 billion in 2022. Last year, he renamed it X. The direction Twitter has taken under his leadership has sparked a series of controversies, including accusations that it has not taken harmful content seriously enough.

The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospitals NHS Trust said in a post on Thursday that after 13 years running X's account it was closing it because the platform “no longer aligns with the trust's values”. The trust directed followers to Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn.

This week, Musk announced he was suing a group of advertisers and major corporations for illegally agreeing not to advertise on X.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Don Lemon files lawsuit against Elon Musk and X for breach of talk show contract termination

Don Lemon, former CNN anchor, has filed a lawsuit against Elon Musk and Company X for breaching a contract with the now-formerly known Twitter social media platform.

The lawsuit, filed in California Superior Court in San Francisco, alleges fraud, negligent misrepresentation, misappropriation of name and likeness, and breach of contract.

Shortly after filming an interview with Musk, Lemon received a text ending their partnership which led to the abrupt termination.

Don Lemon’s lawyer, Carney Shegerian, stated the executives at Company X used Lemon for their advantage and then tarnished his name.

When contacted for comment, Company X responded with an automated message of being busy.

Lemon, once a prominent CNN figure, was let go due to conflicts and poor reviews as a morning show host. He was fired in April 2023.

Linda Yaccarino, CEO of Company X, initially reached out to Lemon’s agent to propose a new show after his CNN departure. The platform aimed to become a video-centric platform.

Lemon’s first scheduled episode on the platform, an interview with Musk, turned tense as Lemon questioned Musk on various topics, leading to the show’s cancellation over creative differences.

Skip Newsletter Promotions

Musk’s increasing conservatism and Lemon’s conflict with the platform’s content direction resulted in the show’s cancellation. Musk’s efforts to attract talent ended with limited success.

The platform’s shift to video content and creator outreach faced challenges with extremism and content moderation issues leading to advertisers pulling out.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk under fire for sharing edited Kamala Harris video and accused of spreading misinformation

Kamala Harris’ campaign has accused Tesla CEO Elon Musk of spreading “manipulated lies” after he shared a fake video of the vice president on his X account.

Musk reposted a video on Friday evening that had been doctored to show Harris saying, “I was selected because I’m the ultimate diversity hire,” along with other controversial statements. The video has garnered 128 million views on Musk’s account. He captioned it with “This is awesome” and a laughing emoji. Musk owns X, which he rebranded from Twitter last year.

Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar criticized Musk for violating platform guidelines on sharing manipulated media. Users are not allowed to share media that may mislead or harm others, although satire is permitted as long as it doesn’t create confusion about its authenticity.

Harris’ campaign responded by stating, “The American people want the real freedom, opportunity, and security that Vice President Harris is providing, not the false, manipulated lies of Elon Musk and Donald Trump.”

The original video was posted by the @MrReaganUSA account, associated with conservative YouTuber Chris Coles, who claimed it was a parody.

However, Musk, a supporter of Donald Trump, did not clarify that the video was satire.

California Governor Gavin Newsom stated that the manipulated video of Harris should be illegal and indicated plans to sign a bill banning such deceptive media, likely referring to a proposed ban on election deepfakes in California.

Musk defended his actions, stating that parody is legal in the USA, and shared the original @MrReaganUSA video.

Skip Newsletter Promotions

An expert on deepfakes commented on the video, highlighting the use of generative AI technology to create convincing fake audio and visuals.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk refutes claims of donating $45 million monthly to Trump Super PAC

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has denied reports that surfaced last week that he plans to donate $45 million a month to a super PAC working to elect President Donald Trump.

Musk appeared on Jordan Peterson’s show on Tuesday and said the allegations were “simply not true.” “I’m not giving $45 million a month to Donald Trump,” he said.


“What I’ve done is I’ve created a pack, or a super pack, or whatever you want to call it,” he said. “It’s called the America Pack.”

Super PACs (short for political action committees) are independent political organizations that allow donors to give unlimited amounts, but there are contribution limits on individuals and organizations other than super PACs.

After his interview with Peterson, Musk Reply “Yeah right,” he commented on a clip of X’s interview, as well as another tweet addressing the reports. To tell“Yeah, that’s ridiculous. I donate some money to America PAC, but at a much lower level. The PAC’s core values ​​are supporting meritocracy and individual liberty. Republicans are largely, but not entirely, on the side of meritocracy and liberty.”

The denial came days after Joe Biden dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, who has enough delegates to win the Democratic nomination in August.

Also on Tuesday, The New York Times report The super PAC employed former staffers from Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ presidential campaign. “The super PAC has created an air of mystery around Trump, with other outside groups knowing almost nothing about its plans,” the Times reported.

But aides to DeSantis’ initial campaign manager, Genera Peck, and Phil Cox, former chairman of the Republican Governors Association, said the campaign was seeking to become one of the major groups supporting Trump, which could help increase its legitimacy within the Republican establishment.

“It’s about promoting the principles that made America great in the first place,” Musk said on Peterson’s show. “I wouldn’t say I’m, like, a MAGA,” he added, referring to Trump’s catchphrase. “I think America is great. I’m more of a MAG, someone who makes America greater.”

Musk did not disclose how much he plans to donate to the PAC.

AmericaPac already has the backing of Musk’s friends and allies in the tech industry, the Times reported. reportJoe Lonsdale, who co-founded the software company Palantir with Peter Thiel, Major Political Donors President Trump’s new running mate is Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio.

The Winklevoss twins, crypto entrepreneurs who have accused Joe Biden of waging a war on cryptocurrencies through regulation, have also contributed to the effort, The Wall Street Journal reports. reportIn June, they praised Trump as a “pro-Bitcoin, pro-crypto and pro-business.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk to Donate $45 Million Monthly to Pro-Trump Super PAC, Sources Say

According to The Wall Street Journal, Elon Musk has announced plans to donate $45 million per month from July onwards to support a super PAC working towards the election of Donald Trump.

Musk, a tech billionaire who recently endorsed Trump, has already made a substantial donation to America PAC. The exact amount of this donation will be revealed in election filings on July 15, as per Bloomberg.

Reports from both The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are based on anonymous sources familiar with Musk’s plans. With an estimated net worth of $252 billion, Musk is considered one of the wealthiest individuals globally.

The potential donation from Musk is described as “tremendous” by The Wall Street Journal, highlighting that the largest known donation in the 2024 election cycle so far is $50 million. This amount was contributed by the great-grandson of banker Thomas Mellon to a pro-Trump super PAC.

As of June 30, there were no records of Musk donating to the super PAC, according to a review by The New York Times.

America PAC has garnered support from Musk’s tech industry associates, as reported by The New York Times. Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir with Peter Thiel, has also endorsed the PAC, along with the Winklevoss twins, crypto entrepreneurs critical of Biden’s policies.

America PAC, launched recently, aims to finance robust Republican voter mobilization initiatives in key states to counter Democratic efforts, according to The New York Times.

Contrary to earlier reports, Musk clarified in a tweet in March that he had not made any donations to U.S. presidential candidates.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Tesla asserts Elon Musk was awarded a $56 billion compensation package even though a judge found it to be invalid.

According to court documents released on Friday, Tesla Inc. states that Elon Musk has emerged victorious in a legal battle over his $56 billion compensation package. This victory comes after shareholders voted in favor of the pay, despite a judge previously setting it aside earlier this year.

The company’s submission comes following Tesla shareholders’ approval of his stock option package for 2018, conducted two weeks ago. This decision was made after a Delaware judge voided the compensation in January due to alleged mismanagement by Musk during negotiations and misleading shareholders about critical details.

The ongoing lawsuit has strained Musk’s relationship with Tesla, as the company grapples with declining sales and mounting competition. Musk has hinted at developing products outside of Tesla if he fails to secure a larger ownership stake.

In its proposal, Tesla has outlined to Delaware Chancery Court Judge Katherine McCormick how the final order should be drafted to implement her January ruling. The company argues that the order should declare “judgment is entered in favor of the defendants.”

Shareholders’ lawyers are urging the judge to uphold the previous ruling that invalidated Musk’s compensation package. They are seeking a directive for Tesla to issue billions of dollars in Tesla stock to cover legal expenses.

Tesla has suggested a fair fee of up to $13.6 million.

McCormick has instructed both parties to prepare briefs discussing the impact of the shareholder vote on the case and to schedule oral arguments on the matter in late July or early August.

Oral arguments on costs are set for July 8, with a decision likely to be reached after several weeks. Even if the January ruling remains unchanged, McCormick may acknowledge that the shareholder vote indicates little merit in winning the case, as Tesla shareholders appear to desire substantial compensation, which could undermine the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fee claim based on the value they have provided by overturning the compensation packages.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s $45 Billion Compensation Package Approved by Tesla Shareholders

Tesla shareholders have given their approval to a contentious referendum regarding CEO Elon Musk’s leadership, resulting in an agreement to pay him $45bn (£35.3bn).

The results, which were released on Thursday, reflect a struggle for the billionaire tycoon to retain the largest compensation package ever awarded to an executive at a publicly traded U.S. company.

“First of all, I want to say I love you guys so much!” said Musk, expressing his elation as he took the stage after the vote.


The vote followed a ruling by a Delaware judge in January that invalidated a previous payment to Musk, which was then valued at about $56bn (£439m), citing lack of board independence from Musk’s influence and an unlawful process in reaching the amount.

The outcome is seen as a win for Musk and the Tesla board, who actively lobbied shareholders to support the deal. It could potentially challenge the judge’s decision to nullify the payment and aid in demonstrating that shareholders were adequately informed about the payment and directors’ relationships with Musk prior to voting.

Tesla’s board cautioned that Musk may sever ties with the company if the package was not approved, but Musk asserted he had substantial backing from investors.

Despite opposition from major shareholders like Norway’s sovereign wealth fund and the California State Teachers Retirement System, as well as proxy advisory firms Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services, the vote does not automatically guarantee the release of the funds, and further legal debates are expected.

The vote may trigger additional litigation that could prolong legal proceedings, and the approval of relocating Tesla’s legal headquarters from Delaware to Texas could complicate the matter further.

Tesla initially introduced Musk’s compensation package in 2017, which included stock options based on meeting specific company goals. The package was approved by shareholders in 2018 but faced legal challenges alleging board deception and unfairness.

Judge Katherine McCormick of the Delaware Chancery Court criticized Tesla’s board process for determining Musk’s compensation, highlighting conflicts of interest and close relationships with Musk’s associates. Despite this, the board aims to challenge Judge McCormick’s ruling.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk Confirms Tesla Shareholders to Vote on $56 Billion Compensation Package

Tesla shareholders are set to approve Elon Musk’s $56 billion remuneration package by a significant margin before the company’s important annual general meeting later today. The compensation package, the largest ever granted to a CEO of a U.S. company, will be subject to an investor vote after being previously rejected by a U.S. court this year. Shareholders will also vote on Musk’s proposal to relocate Tesla’s legal base to Texas.

Several investors, including Norway’s sovereign wealth fund and the California State Teachers Retirement System, have indicated their intent to oppose the compensation package. Proxy advisory firms Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services have also advised shareholders to reject the pay.

On the eve of the meeting, Musk suggested on X (formerly Twitter) that investors overwhelmingly supported both the compensation package and the Texas relocation: “Both Tesla shareholder resolutions have now passed by large margins! Thank you for your support!!”

The results will be disclosed at Tesla’s headquarters in Texas at 4:30pm ET (9:30pm UK time).

Even if the remuneration package is approved, Musk may encounter further obstacles, including potential litigation. Legal experts doubt that the Delaware court that rejected the initial package would accept a new, nonbinding vote to reinstate it.

Originally approved by Tesla’s board in 2018, the compensation has faced legal challenges from shareholders. Judge Kathleen McCormick of Delaware raised concerns about the size and necessity of the package in her January ruling.

Skip Newsletter Promotions

In her ruling, McCormick questioned the necessity of the compensation plan, stating, “Perhaps swayed by the ‘all-positive’ rhetoric or enthralled by Musk’s superstardom, the board never asked the $55.8 billion question: Was this plan truly necessary for Tesla to retain Musk and achieve its goals?”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk unexpectedly withdraws legal action against Sam Altman and OpenAI

Elon Musk has submitted a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against ChatGPT developer OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman, claiming that the startup has deviated from its original goal of developing artificial intelligence for the betterment of humanity.

Musk filed the lawsuit against Altman in February, and the legal process has been progressing slowly in a California court. Up until Tuesday, Musk had not shown any intention of dropping the case. Just a month ago, his legal team filed an objection, leading to the presiding judge stepping down.


Musk’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit did not provide any rationale. A San Francisco Superior Court judge was set to consider arguments from Altman and OpenAI on Wednesday to have the lawsuit thrown out.

The dismissal brought an abrupt end to the legal dispute between two influential figures in the tech realm. Musk and Altman co-founded OpenAI in 2015, but Musk resigned from the board three years later following disagreements over the company’s governance and direction. Their relationship has become increasingly strained as Altman’s prominence has grown in recent years.

Musk’s lawsuit centered on his assertion that Altman and OpenAI breached the company’s “foundation agreement” by collaborating with Microsoft, transforming OpenAI into a predominantly profit-driven entity, and withholding its technology from the public.

OpenAI and Altman contested the existence of such an agreement, citing messages that appeared to show Musk supporting the shift towards a for-profit model. They vehemently denied any wrongdoing and published a blog post in March suggesting Musk’s motivations were rooted in jealousy, expressing regret that a respected figure had taken this course of action.

Musk’s lawsuit raised eyebrows among legal experts, who pointed out that certain claims, such as OpenAI achieving artificial intelligence equivalent to human intelligence, lacked credibility.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Is Tesla’s Board Operating as a Public Company or a Fan Club for Elon Musk? | Nils Pratly

ohThe rational view on the Elon Musk compensation issue is that Tesla shareholders should stick to their guns and re-approve his astronomical $56 billion compensation, sending a message to the interventionist Delaware judge who struck down the 2018 plan that they are more than capable of making their own decisions.

Broadly speaking, that’s the stance taken by Baillie Gifford, an early and large investor in electric-car companies. “When we agreed the compensation package with Tesla in 2018, we were doing it because we had set ambitious targets that, if met, would deliver huge returns for shareholders,” says Tom Slater, manager of FTSE 100 Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust. He told the Financial Times “Since we agreed to this, we believe we should pay it,” he said last month. Certainly, this statement has the virtue of consistency: we know what we voted for, and a deal is a deal.

Similarly, no one is likely to complain that Norway’s sovereign wealth fund will vote in opposition on Thursday, just as it did in 2018. The fund opposed the plan then, and sees no reason to change its view just because Tesla’s shares have since soared, triggering a record payout to Musk before a Delaware court stepped in.

So the reapproval vote would produce a similar result to the original 73% majority. The shareholder register has changed over the years, but not by much. If anything, retail investors, who make up almost 40% of the stock, seem to have become even more enamoured with Musk lately. And if the majority is indeed secured, that would be the end of the matter and we wouldn’t have to go to court again.

But before this furor fades from the headlines, there’s the small matter of what Delaware Judge Katherine McCormick actually said. Her 200-page ruling January. Read in its entirety, the impression one gets is that Tesla’s 2018 board is a collection of casualties too subservient to its boss to even implement a semi-robust process for setting his incentives.

No one disputes that Tesla’s stock price would have needed to undergo a minor miracle to realize Musk’s full prize money, which had to top $650 billion by 2028, compared with a valuation of around $50 billion (it actually took just three years to achieve that goal). Rather, the problem was the people Tesla appointed to negotiate with Musk and determine a fair prize.

As the judge noted, lead director Ira Ellen Price had a 15-year business relationship with Musk. Another member of the working group, Antonio Gracias, vacationed with Musk’s family. A third, Musk’s former divorce lawyer and company general counsel Todd Maron, “broke down in tears in praise of Musk during testimony.” McCormick concluded that the adjudication process was “deeply flawed” and that the terms were “not entirely fair” to all shareholders. In short, Musk said what he wanted and received minimal backlash.

In theory, Tesla’s board had some powerful cards to play. At the time, Musk owned just over a fifth of Tesla’s stock (before he sold some to fund his Twitter antics), so he couldn’t have lacked the appetite to pursue a goal of “transformative” growth. Even without a plan, every $50 billion increase in Tesla’s market cap was worth $10 billion to Musk. This negotiating point appears to have been ignored.

The company has not adequately addressed the judge’s criticisms of the process. Chairman Robin Denholm, who took over in late 2018, said: He said the board “supports this package” and feels vindicated by what has happened.As a precaution, the company adopted Musk’s plan to move Tesla’s headquarters to Texas.

If Musk asked for a larger stake to keep him focused on Tesla and not on his personal company, would the supposedly independent directors go along with it? Probably.

So even if we accept that contracts, even the obvious excesses, should be honored, the lack of soul-searching in Tesla’s boardroom is astonishing. The lesson to be learned from this is that this is a public company, and the job involves more than being a cheerleader for Elon Musk’s fan club.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Tesla’s Chairman warns that Elon Musk may step down if shareholders reject $56 billion compensation package

The chairman of Tesla has suggested that Elon Musk might leave the company if shareholders do not support his $56 billion (£44 billion) pay package, implying that Musk has other opportunities to explore. Despite the vote next week on the CEO’s compensation deal, Robin Denholm emphasized that the decision is not solely about money, as Musk will still be one of the richest individuals regardless of the outcome.

Denholm mentioned that if the June 13 vote does not go in Musk’s favor, he could potentially depart from Tesla or reduce his presence at the company. In 2018, investors approved a similar compensation plan for Musk, which was later invalidated, prompting the board to seek investors’ approval once more.

Denholm emphasized the importance of Musk’s time and energy, stating that while he has many ideas and potential endeavors, Tesla and its owners should be his primary focus. Concerns have been raised by some investors about Musk’s engagement with Tesla given his involvement in other ventures like SpaceX, xAI, and X.

Denholm clarified that the compensation package includes a provision requiring Musk to hold the Tesla shares he receives for five years before selling any of them. With Musk’s net worth at $203 billion, he is currently ranked as the third wealthiest person globally, according to Bloomberg.

ISS and Glass Lewis have advised shareholders to vote against the proposed pay package, citing excessive payouts. Despite differing opinions among major investors, Denholm stressed the need to uphold the 2018 agreement to ensure Musk’s continued dedication and commitment to Tesla.

Skip Newsletter Promotions

In a bid to streamline operations and facilitate growth, Denholm proposed relocating Tesla’s legal domicile to Texas, highlighting the state’s favorable corporate laws and potential for innovation. She noted that Texas legislators and courts are well-equipped to handle Tesla’s future endeavors effectively.

Analyst Dan Ives believes that while Musk is unlikely to leave Tesla entirely, a rejection of the compensation package could lead to his stepping down as CEO and reducing his involvement with the company over time.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s Trip to China leads to Rapid Progress, a Turning Point for Tesla and the Auto Industry

Reports suggest that Elon Musk’s visit to China led to an immediate benefit with a deal for Tesla to utilize mapping data from Baidu, a major web search company, to introduce driver-assistance technology to the largest car market globally. This marks a significant advancement.

Over the weekend, Musk made a surprise visit to China. He shared a photo of his meeting with Chinese Premier Li Qiang on the social network X, which he acquired in 2022.

According to sources referenced by Bloomberg News, Baidu, a dominant force in Chinese web search, will offer mapping and navigation services to aid Tesla in implementing driver-assistance technology labeled as “Full Self-Driving” (FSD). The provision of mapping services, crucial for driver-assistance technology, is strictly regulated by the Chinese government.

Despite its name, FSD does not enable autonomous driving. It necessitates a driver who is prepared to take control at any moment. Launching in China could enhance Tesla’s position in the competitive market there and boost revenue. The service costs $8,000 or $99 (£80) per month, but is not accessible in many countries.

Musk has had confrontational interactions with politicians in the past, criticizing U.S. President Joe Biden and entering a dispute in Brazil over censorship issues on X, formerly Twitter. However, his approach towards China’s second-ranking official, Li, was more conciliatory, expressing being “honored” to meet him.

Musk’s interactions with China have been complex due to various business ties. X is blocked by the Chinese government due to strict censorship policies. Additionally, there were concerns from the Chinese government regarding an incident involving a satellite launched by SpaceX, Musk’s rocket company, coming close to their space station.

However, Tesla operates a factory in Shanghai, and its Model Y was the third best-selling electric or plug-in hybrid vehicle in China in March 2024, according to CleanTechnica. BYD, a Chinese competitor to Tesla in electric car sales, has two top-selling models.

The news of Musk’s visit and the partnership with Baidu were met with enthusiasm by Tesla investors, who view potential self-driving capabilities as crucial for Tesla’s position as the most valuable automaker globally. Tesla’s stock price rose by 6% in premarket trading in New York.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Dan Ives, a technology analyst at Wedbush investment bank, mentioned in a client note that Tesla’s future standing relies heavily on FSD and autonomous driving. He emphasized the significance of making FSD accessible in China, a step that appears to be imminent.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s Prediction Comes True: Electric Vehicle Sales Begin to Slow Down in the Automotive Industry

ERon Musk became the richest man in the world by evangelizing electric cars and delivering one million electric cars. But in recent months, his company Tesla has struggled to maintain its momentum. This year's sales have declined and stock prices have fallen.

These struggles are emblematic of the broader situation facing the electric vehicle (EV) industry. The pace of sales growth has slowed after years of the coronavirus pandemic that sent demand and valuations soaring. The industry is entering a new phase, raising questions about whether the switch from gasoline and diesel to cleaner electricity will face a nasty stall or a temporary speed bump.

Musk acknowledged the difficulties this week, telling investors: “Globally, EV penetration is under pressure, with many other automakers pulling back from EVs and pursuing plug-in hybrids instead. ” he said. Musk, of course, insisted it was the wrong decision.




Electric vehicle charging stations in Norway, where EVs account for 90% of the market. Photo: Andreas Wirth/Alamy

However, sluggish sales are a reality. Tesla and its closest rival in electric car sales, China's BYD, have both reported declines in electric car sales. Across Europe, the share of sales of battery electric cars fell to 13% from 13.9% last year, while sales of hybrid cars, which combine a battery and an internal combustion engine, rose to 29% from 24.4%. In the UK, electric cars accounted for 15.5% of total car sales in the first three months of 2024, only a slight increase on the same period last year.

In recent years, electric car manufacturers have been able to easily sell every electric car they make. However, many companies around the world are currently struggling to cope with the end of the era of rock-bottom interest rates, when households have less money left in their pockets.

“The economic headwinds are pretty bad across the board, so it's no surprise that the economy is slowing down,” said Ian Henry, whose auto analysis consultancy works with several automakers.

Buyers still have to pay more upfront for battery cars (though most will save money by owning an electric car because energy is cheaper). Additionally, electric vehicle repair costs and insurance premiums may be higher in some locations due to a lack of mechanics. Another important factor is that the rollout of public chargers has been very patchy, giving some potential buyers pause. All of these were pounced on by EV industry skeptics, turning the industry into a culture war battleground.

government's hand

Rico Luhmann, senior sector economist for automotive at investment bank ING, said EV sales had reached a “plateau” and that after an initial rush of early adopters accustomed to switching from gas-powered cars, electric vehicle sales were on the rise. He said sales will become even more difficult. diesel.

But there is more at play in this showdown than purely economic factors. Government also plays a big role. This trend is particularly evident across Europe, where EV sales are following diverging paths even as buyers face similar pressures. Norway is an outlier. Electric vehicle sales are heavily subsidized and EVs currently account for 90% of the market. This year, EV market share also expanded in Denmark, Belgium, and France.

However, in Germany, once the largest electric car market, the adoption rate of electric cars has declined simply because the government has ended subsidies.

Regulations not only affect demand but also play a large role in the cars sold. Matthias Schmidt, a Berlin-based electric vehicle analyst, has long predicted that European electric vehicle sales growth will slow in 2024. The reason is that January 1, 2025, is the date when the EU will take the next big step towards zero-emission vehicles, meaning lower average carbon emissions. The carbon footprint of the cars sold by each manufacturer must be reduced by 15% compared to 2021.




Ford Puma. Photo: SYSPEO/Sipa/Rex/Shutterstock

Therefore, this rule is a big incentive for automakers to focus their efforts on electric vehicles next year. Schmidt argues that the European industry is experiencing a “replay” of the situation experienced in 2019 when manufacturers held back sales of electric cars before mass-launching new models in 2020.

Sure enough, automakers are releasing new mass-market models at just the right time. Renault's electric 5 hatchback will cost less than €25,000 (£21,430) when it goes on sale this autumn, while Ford plans to launch an electric version of Britain's best-selling car, the Ford Puma, later this year.

Skip past newsletter promotions

moan maker




A man helps assemble an Opel Grandland X SUV at the Opel factory in Eisenach, eastern Germany. Photo: Martin Schutt/dpa/AFP/Getty Images

Stellantis, which owns the Vauxhall, Peugeot-Fiat, and Chrysler brands, is also joining the rush, unveiling the Vauxhall/Opel Grandland electric SUV on Tuesday. Still, the company's CEO, Carlos Tavares, complained bitterly about how regulations are encouraging the switch to electric cars.

This week, he slammed Britain's Transport Secretary Mark Harper over the government's zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate, which forces car manufacturers to increase the proportion of electric vehicles they sell. He later told journalists that the mandate was a “terrible” policy because it would force automakers to introduce electric models too quickly.

“The result of this is that everyone starts pushing BEVs (battery electric vehicles), pushing metals into the market, completely destroying profitability and destroying businesses,” he said.

Schmidt said the automakers’ complaints could have ulterior motives. EU rules will ban the sale of most internal combustion engines by 2035 but are expected to be revised in 2026.

“Many manufacturers are now complaining that it's unrealistic to meet these goals, but that's lobbying by stealth,” Schmidt said. “They do it so often that it's almost like a boy-werewolf affair. There’s definitely an ulterior motive to their moans.”

But other manufacturers have already delayed that shift, which means extending the sales period for still-profitable gasoline models. In the United States, General Motors postponed production at a plant in Michigan last year, and Ford also postponed construction of a plant in Kentucky. And in the UK, luxury car maker Bentley announced last month that it would postpone the launch of its first battery car by one year, until 2026.

“Manufacturers are definitely struggling strategically at the moment,” Luhmann said. “They're playing around with the timing of the model right now, but they're not delaying it too much. If they don't, they're going to miss out in terms of market share.”

Perhaps the biggest reason why European and American automakers are unlikely to switch gears toward EVs is China. China sales growth may have slowed in the first quarter of 2024 compared to a year ago, but still exceeded 1 million units, according to industry data cited by Reuters. Many Chinese automakers, including leader BYD and cash-rich new entrants such as mobile phone maker Xiaomi, are fighting to dominate their home market and capture a new role as the world's biggest car exporter. There is.

During a recent visit to China, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz spoke out against protectionism, keenly aware that imposing penalties on Chinese EVs would lead to swift retaliation against German automakers, but that Chinese manufacturers remain He said there needs to be access to the market.

Massive competition is fierce for electric car makers, with even Tesla having to cut prices to keep selling its cars. The competition will give auto industry executives sleepless nights and could force some companies to face mergers or bankruptcies, causing job losses. But prices could fall even further, making electric cars cheaper than gasoline cars.

“This is potentially good for consumers,” Ian Henry said. “Whether that's a good thing for manufacturers who are trying to make a profit is another question.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Australian court orders Elon Musk’s X to remove Sydney church stabbing post from global users

The Federal Court of Australia mandated that Elon Musk’s content be hidden from users.

X, along with Mehta, was instructed by eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman-Grant to promptly remove any material depicting “unreasonable or offensive violence with serious consequences or details” within 24 hours or risk facing fines.

The content in question was a video allegedly showing Bishop Mar Mari Emanuel being stabbed to death during a livestreamed service at the Assyrian Church of the Good Shepherd in Wakely.

Although X claimed compliance with the request, they intended to challenge the order in court.

During a hearing, eSafety barrister Christopher Tran informed Judge Jeffrey Kennett that X had geographically restricted access to the posts containing the video, rendering them inaccessible in Australia but available globally through VPN connections.

Tran argued that this noncompliance with online safety laws necessitated the removal of the content globally as an interim step.

X’s legal representative, Marcus Hoyne, requested an adjournment, citing the late hour in San Francisco where X is based and lack of instructions from his client.

Judge Kennett proposed issuing an interim order until the next hearing, requiring the post’s removal and global access blockage until a specified date and time.

Treasurer Stephen Jones criticized X as a “factory of trolls and misinformation” and affirmed the government’s readiness to combat legal challenges from the company.

The eSafety Commissioner clarified that the notice solely concerned the video footage and not any commentary surrounding the incident.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese emphasized the harmful impact of violent content on social media and condemned X for noncompliance with the removal order.

Meta purportedly followed the directive, while X accused the regulator of “global censorship” and announced intentions to challenge the order in court.

Treasurer Jones vowed to challenge X’s stance, emphasizing the need for online platforms to adhere to laws and maintain safety.

Regulators collaborated with various companies, including Google, Microsoft, Snap, and TikTok, to remove the contentious content.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton voiced support for eSafety’s actions and criticized X for considering itself above the law.

Green Party spokesperson Sarah Hanson-Young called upon Elon Musk to address the issue in parliament and urged tech companies to act responsibly.

This confrontation is the latest in the ongoing dispute between X and the eSafety Commissioner, which includes legal battles over compliance with safety regulations.

X faced legal action for allegedly bullying a trans man on Twitter, prompting the company to block access to the content in Australia, while filing a lawsuit challenging the decision.

Queries for comments from X remain unanswered.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk seeks shareholder approval for $56 billion payout from Tesla, judge rejects request

Tesla is seeking shareholders’ re-approval for CEO Elon Musk’s hefty $56 billion compensation plan from 2018, which was previously rejected by a Delaware judge in January for being excessive and unjustified.


Musk’s compensation, tied to Tesla’s market value increase to $650 billion over the next decade, currently stands at over $500 billion, according to LSEG data, excluding salary or cash bonuses.

The rejection from Delaware Court of Chancery’s Kathleen McCormick criticized the board’s decision, deeming the compensation “incalculable” and unfair to shareholders.

Tesla’s move for a fresh shareholder vote appears to bolster support for Musk’s pay package and challenge the court’s ruling, which disapproved the largest corporate pay package in America.

In response to the court’s decision, board chair Robin Denholm expressed disagreement, stating that the ruling did not conform to corporate law principles.


In 2023, Musk’s compensation was recorded as $0, as he does not draw a salary but is compensated through stock options. The court case also mentioned Musk’s involvement in an attempt to disrupt Twitter Inc.’s acquisition deal.

Tesla is suggesting a re-vote on the original 2018 compensation package, contemplating legal considerations, as well as seeking approval from shareholders to relocate its state of incorporation from Delaware to Texas.

Ahead of the market opening, shares of the leading automaker rallied by 1%.

This year has been challenging for Tesla, with reports of underperforming against market expectations and observing its first decline in deliveries in four years, prompting a workforce reduction of 14,000 employees. The broader electric vehicle industry has also experienced a slowdown, with major players like Ford revising their plans.

Meanwhile, Apple scaled back its self-driving electric car project, leading to layoffs, indicating a shifting landscape in the electric vehicle sector.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk aims to streamline Tesla with 14,000 job cuts to create a more efficient automaker

Tesla, the electric car manufacturer, is reducing its global workforce by more than 10%, which is approximately 14,000 jobs, in response to decreased demand and pricing pressures. CEO Elon Musk made this announcement in a memo that was initially reported by Elektrek. Tesla currently employs 140,473 individuals, as stated in its annual report.

Musk explained that Tesla’s rapid growth led to duplicated roles and responsibilities, necessitating these layoffs. He noted, “There’s nothing we hate more, but it has to be done. This allows us to be lean, innovative, and greedy for the next cycle of growth.”

This decision comes after a challenging start to the year for electric car companies, with Tesla reporting lower-than-expected car deliveries in the first quarter of 2024. The company attributed this decline to production challenges and a slowdown in global demand.

According to critics, including Ross Gerber from Gerber Kawasaki, Tesla’s sales dip in a growing economy highlights concerns about lack of advertising, competition, and leadership. The company aims to boost profit margins amidst price cuts and increased competition.

The layoffs reflect the broader trend of slowing growth in the electric vehicle market, impacting Tesla’s performance. Tesla’s stock has seen a decline in value, losing around a third of its market capitalization this year.

Additionally, Reuters reported that BP is scaling back its electric vehicle charging business, reducing its workforce by more than 10% to focus on commercial electric vehicles. The company cited a need for greater precision and effectiveness in achieving its goals.

Tesla has facilities across the US, Germany, and China. The company has not yet responded to requests for comment.

Source: www.theguardian.com

What role does Elon Musk play in Tesla’s sales performance?

The overwhelming sales on Tuesday were attributed to the actions of Tesla’s CEO by one Tesla investor.

In response to the sales figures, Ross Gerber, CEO of Gerber Kawasaki, pointed to Elon Musk’s actions as the reason for Tesla’s inability to sell cars. He criticized the board of directors for not stopping Musk’s behavior, which he deemed toxic towards the Tesla brand.

Musk retaliated by calling Gerber an idiot and mentioning the challenges faced by Chinese rival BYD in the quarter.

Following Tesla’s revenue update and stock fall, Gerber expressed his disappointment, attributing the decline in deliveries to various factors including Houthi rebel attacks and delays in production.

Analysts raised concerns about slowing demand for Tesla vehicles, despite production challenges being mentioned as contributing factors.

While Musk’s controversial actions have led to a decline in sales in the US market, some analysts believe that Tesla’s long-term decisions will resolve the company’s problems.

Key figures in the financial industry voiced their concerns over Tesla’s sales figures, attributing the downturn to a combination of global EV demand slowdown and issues in China, rather than just Musk’s antics.

Tesla’s ongoing global fame, driven by Musk’s actions, continues to be a focal point, with experts highlighting the potential impact on sales and market perception.

Despite the challenges, Tesla is reportedly scouting locations in India for a new manufacturing plant, indicating long-term growth plans.

While some analysts downplay the impact of Musk’s behavior on sales, others believe that it contributes to the overall perception of the company and its products.

In conclusion, the future of Tesla remains uncertain, with various factors at play influencing the company’s performance in the market.

Tesla has not provided a comment on the situation at this time.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Neuralink Question: Has Elon Musk Achieved a Revolutionary Advance in Brain Implant Technology?

Noland Arbor can play chess using Neuralink implant

Neuralink

Neuralink, the brain-computer interface company founded by Elon Musk, has revealed the identity of its first patient who says its implant “changed his life.” But experts say it’s not yet clear whether Neuralink has done more than replicate existing research efforts.

Who was Neuralink’s first patient?

Musk announced in January that the first human patient had received a Neuralink implant, but few details were released at the time. We now know from something. Live stream video by company – Who is that person and how will the test be done?

Noland Arbaugh explains in the video that an accident eight years ago dislocated his fourth and fifth vertebrae, leaving him a quadriplegic. He previously controlled the computer with a mouth interface, and is shown moving the cursor with just his thoughts, apparently using a Neuralink implant.

“Once I started imagining the cursor moving, it became intuitive,” Arbaugh says in the video. “Basically, it was like using ‘force’ on the cursor, and I was able to move the cursor anywhere I wanted. I could just look anywhere on the screen and the cursor would move where I wanted it. It was a very wild experience.”

He uses the device for reading, language learning, and computer games such as chess, and claims he uses it for up to eight hours at a time, at which point he needs to charge the device. “It’s not perfect, I’ve run into some problems. But it’s already changed my life,” he says.

What does the implant contain?

Neuralink did not respond to requests for an interview, but its website says the current generation coin-sized implant, called N1, generates neural activity through 1,024 electrodes distributed across 64 threads that extend into the user’s brain. It is said that it records. These are so fine that they must be placed by a surgical robot.

In a livestream video, Arbaugh said he was discharged from the hospital the day after his implant surgery, and that from his perspective the surgery was a relatively simple process.

The implant uses a small battery that is charged through the skin by an inductance charger and communicates wirelessly with an app on your smartphone.

Does this mean the first human trials were successful?

Reinhold Scherrer Researchers at the University of Essex in the UK will decide whether Neuralink’s first human trial was a success because the company “has not released enough information to form an informed opinion” He said it was too early.

“While the video is impressive and there is no doubt that it took a lot of research and development work to get to this stage, it is unclear whether what is being shown is new or groundbreaking,” he said. Masu. “Although control appears to be stable, most of the studies and experiments presented so far are primarily replications of past studies. Replication is good, but major challenges still remain. ”

Who else is working on brain implants?

Neuralink isn’t the only group exploring this idea. A number of academic organizations and commercial startups have already conducted human experiments that have successfully interpreted brain signals and produced some sort of output.

A team at Stanford University in California placed two small sensors just below the surface of the brain of a man who was paralyzed from the neck down. Researchers may be able to interpret the brain signals when a man decides to put pen to paper and translate them into text that can be read on a computer.

When will Neuralink be available and how much will it cost?

It’s too early to tell, as this has a long way to go before it becomes a commercial product, with much testing and certification to come. But Musk has made it clear that he intends to commercialize the technology.of The first product planned was named Telepathy.allows users to take control of their mobile phones and computers.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Elon Musk stands firm on stance on diversity and free speech in controversial interview

Elon Musk defended his stance on diversity and free speech in a tense interview with former CNN anchor Don Lemon.

Tesla’s chief executive was openly irritated by Lemon’s line of questioning during an hour-long video interview. published on Monday.

Asked about prescribing ketamine, Musk said, “It’s a pretty private thing to ask someone about a medical prescription.” He said he took the drug to deal with “negative chemical conditions in the brain, such as depression.”

Asked if he had abused drugs commonly used as anesthetics, he said: If you use too much ketamine, you won’t be able to actually do any work. There’s a lot of work.”

Musk, who canceled his X platform’s contract with Lemon after the interview was taped earlier this month, has spoken out about diversity, equity and inclusion, including his support for conservative Ben Shapiro’s thread on X. (DEI) asked about criticism of the system. Experts argued that DEI was putting patients at risk.

Lemon told Musk there was “no evidence” that the DEI system was lowering standards of medical practice, and the billionaire said his responses to the X User interview “will be his own decision” on the issue. He said it would be helpful.

Asked if he believes in DEI, Musk said, “I think we should… treat people according to their skills and integrity.”

Musk also defended X’s content moderation standards after Lemon highlighted anti-Semitic and racist posts that still remain on the platform, which the Tesla CEO acquired in 2022.

When asked why it wasn’t removed, Musk said the post wasn’t illegal, saying, “I mean, Don, you love censorship.” Lemon said he believed in moderation, to which Musk replied, “Moderation is a propaganda word that means censorship.”

If a post is illegal, “we’re going to take it down,” Musk said, adding that if it doesn’t violate the law, “we either deserve the censorship or we’re the censors.”

Musk made his frustration with Lemon clear on several points. When the moderator asked if he was upset, the entrepreneur replied, “You’re upset because the way you phrased your question was not very convincing.”

Musk told Lemon that the next Tesla Roadster model will be a collaboration with the SpaceX business and “will incorporate rocket technology.”

He added, “I think the only way to make something cooler than the Cybertruck is to combine SpaceX and Tesla technology to make something that isn’t actually even a car.” Asked if it was a flying car, Musk replied, “Maybe.”

Musk also acknowledged that he had recently met Donald Trump, but said he had not donated to Joe Biden’s campaign, although he had “stepped back” from supporting him. Asked if he would support a presidential candidate, he said, “I may end up supporting a candidate, but I don’t know yet.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Sydney Researchers Lead the Way in Brain Chip Technology Ahead of Elon Musk’s Neuralink Neuroscience

BLaine computer interface technology is at the heart of movies like Ready Player One, The Matrix, and Avatar. But outside of the world of science fiction, BCIs are used on Earth to help paralyzed people communicate, to study dreams, and to control robots.

Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk announced in January that his neurotechnology company Neuralink had implanted the first computer chip in a human. In February, he announced that patients can now control a computer mouse with their thoughts.

Neuralink’s purpose is noble. It is about helping people who are unable to communicate or interact with their environment. But details are scant. The project quickly raised alarms about brain privacy, the risk of hacking, and other potential issues.



Dr Steve Kassem, senior research scientist at Neuroscience Research Australia, said the Neuralink news should be taken with a “large pinch of salt”. It’s not the first company to do neural implants, he says. In fact, Australia is a ‘hotspot’ for relevant neurological research.

Does the patient dream of electric sheep?

The University of Technology Sydney project, which has received millions of dollars in funding from the Department of Defense, is now in its third phase to demonstrate how soldiers can use brain signals to control robotic dogs.

“We succeeded [demonstrating] Handa can use his brain to issue commands that direct the dog to reach its destination completely hands-free…so the dog can use its hands for other purposes. ” he says.

Soldiers use assisted reality glasses with special graphene interfaces to issue brain signal commands to send the robot dog to different locations. Lin said he is working on making the technology multi-user, faster and able to control other vehicles such as drones.

Meanwhile, Sydney company Neurode has developed a headset to help people with ADHD by monitoring the brain and sending electronic pulses to help them cope with changes. Another his UTS team is working on it. dream machine, which aims to reconstruct dreams from brain signals. It uses artificial intelligence and brainwave data to generate images from your subconscious mind.

And then there are the implants.

good signal

Synchron started at the University of Melbourne and is now based in New York. it is, Mesh inserted into blood vessels in the brain This allows patients to use the Internet by transmitting signals that operate similar to Bluetooth. People can shop, send emails, and communicate online using technology that controls computers.



Synchron has implanted and monitored mesh in many patients, including one in Australia. Patient P4, who has motor neuron disease, had mesh implanted several years ago.

“I think he’s had over 200 sessions,” says Gil Lind, Sychron’s senior director of advanced technology. “He is still progressing well with his implant treatment and is working very closely with us.

“He was able to use the computer through the system…As the disease progressed, it became very difficult to use the physical buttons.

“This allows for online banking, communication with caregivers, [with] Someone I love. ”

Dr Christina Maher from the University of Sydney’s Brain and Mind Center said Synchron’s technology is “miles ahead” of Elon Musk’s, and is more sophisticated and safer as it does not require open brain surgery. Stated. The researchers have also published more than 25 papers, she said.

“As for Neuralink, we don’t know much about it.

“My understanding is that the top priority for them is to test the effectiveness and safety of surgical robots…so they are focusing more on the robotic side of things, and this is a commercial It makes sense from a perspective.”

Need for regulation

But amidst the hype and promise of neurotechnology, there are concerns about who will have access to the beneficial technologies and how they will be protected.

Maher says it’s important to balance the need for innovation with appropriate regulation while allowing access to those who really need it. She says the “gap between the haves and have-nots” is being discussed not just in Australia but around the world.

Skip past newsletter promotions


“As brain-computer interfaces become more common, people will be divided into those who can afford them and those who cannot,” she says.

Lind said Synchron is focused on those who have the most to gain, such as quadriplegic patients. “We want to expand it as much as possible. We hope to reach a bigger market and help more people in need,” he says.

A personal and pivotal moment for him, he says, was seeing the faces of the clinicians, team, and family of the first patient who received a successful implant.

At Neuralink, Kasem warns that there are always risks when technology is developed by a company that exists to make a profit. “A cell phone plan for the brain is not what we want,” he says.

“And what if this gets hacked? There’s always a risk when it’s not a closed system.”

But it’s more likely that Neuralink will use people’s data.

“Like every app on your phone or computer, Neuralink monitors everything it can. Everything it can,” Kasem says.

“It will be stored somewhere.”

Protect your brain data

Maher agrees that data is a big issue, saying the risk of hacking remains when devices are connected to the internet. She says much of the social media, biometrics, and other data is already out there, but her brain’s data is different.

“meanwhile [BCI companies] They are subject to the same data privacy laws…The difference in many people’s minds is that brain data is very private and it’s your personal thoughts.

“The big picture here is that once you start recording large amounts of brain data, there are absolutely megatons of data out there,” she says.

Despite privacy concerns, Kasem says interacting with the brain has exciting potential.

“We need to remember how powerful and important the brain is. All you are, all you have been, and all you will ever be is your brain and nothing else.” he says.

Quoting American physicist Emerson Pugh, he says the brain has trillions of neural connections that lead to “infinite opportunities.” hand. ”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s Lawsuit Criticized by OpenAI as “Frivolous” and “Disjointed” in Legal Filings

OpenAI criticized Elon Musk’s lawsuit against the company in a legal response filed on Monday, calling the Tesla CEO’s claims “frivolous” and driven by “advancing commercial interests.”

The filing is a rebuttal to Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI earlier this month, accusing the company of reneging on its commitment to benefiting humanity. OpenAI refuted many of the key allegations in Musk’s lawsuit, denying the existence of what he referred to as an “establishment agreement.”

The filing highlighted the complexity and lack of factual basis for Musk’s claims, pointing out the absence of any actual agreement mentioned in the pleadings.


The conflict between OpenAI and Musk has been escalating since Musk’s lawsuit, intensifying the ongoing disagreement between Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Although they co-founded the nonprofit in 2015, disputes over company direction and control led to Musk’s departure three years later. The relationship between Musk and Altman has soured as OpenAI gained recognition for products like ChatGPT and DALL-E.

Musk’s lawsuit accuses OpenAI of straying from its original mission as a nonprofit organization focused on sharing technology for humanity’s benefit, alleging that Altman received significant investments from Microsoft. OpenAI denied these claims in a recent blog post, stating that Musk supported the shift to a for-profit entity but wanted sole control.

OpenAI’s response painted Musk as envious and resentful of the company since starting his own commercial AI venture. The filing dismissed the notion of a founding agreement between Musk and Altman, labeling it as a “fiction” created by Musk.

According to the response, Musk’s motivation for suing OpenAI is to bolster his competitive position in the industry, rather than genuine concerns for human progress.

Skip past newsletter promotions

The filing concluded that Musk’s actions stem from a desire to replicate OpenAI’s technological achievements for his own benefit.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Kenan Malik argues that Elon Musk and OpenAI are fostering existential dread to evade regulation

IIn 1914, on the eve of World War I, H.G. Wells published a novel about the possibility of an even bigger conflagration. liberated world Thirty years before the Manhattan Project, “humankind'' [to] Carry around enough potential energy in your handbag to destroy half a city. ” A global war breaks out, precipitating a nuclear apocalypse. To achieve peace, it is necessary to establish a world government.

Wells was concerned not just with the dangers of new technology, but also with the dangers of democracy. Wells's world government was not created by democratic will, but was imposed as a benign dictatorship. “The ruled will show their consent by silence,” King Ecbert of England says menacingly. For Wells, “common man” means “Violent idiots in social issues and public affairs”. Only an educated, scientifically-minded elite can “save democracy from itself.”

A century later, another technology inspires similar awe and fear: artificial intelligence. From Silicon Valley boardrooms to the backrooms of Davos, political leaders, technology moguls, and academics are exulting in the immense benefits of AI, but they are also concerned about its potential. ing. announce the end of humanity When super-intelligent machines come to rule the world. And, as a century ago, questions of democracy and social control are at the heart of the debate.

In 2015, journalist Stephen Levy Interview with Elon Musk and Sam Altmanthe two founders of OpenAI, a technology company that gained public attention two years ago with the release of ChatGPT, a seemingly human-like chatbot. Fearful of the potential impact of AI, Silicon Valley moguls founded the company as a nonprofit charitable trust with the goal of developing technology in an ethical manner to benefit “all of humanity.”

Levy asked Musk and Altman about the future of AI. “There are two schools of thought,” Musk mused. “Do you want a lot of AI or a few? I think more is probably better.”

“If I used it on Dr. Evil, wouldn't it give me powers?” Levy asked. Altman responded that Dr. Evil is more likely to be empowered if only a few people control the technology, saying, “In that case, we'd be in a really bad situation.” Ta.

In reality, that “bad place” is being built by the technology companies themselves. Musk resigned from OpenAI's board six years ago and is developing his own AI project, but he is now accused of prioritizing profit over public interest and neglecting to develop AI “for the benefit of humanity.” He is suing his former company for breach of contract.

In 2019, OpenAI created a commercial subsidiary to raise money from investors, particularly Microsoft. When he released ChatGPT in 2022, the inner workings of the model were hidden. I didn't need to be too open about it, Ilya SatskevaOne of OpenAI's founders, who was the company's chief scientist at the time, responded to criticism by claiming that it would prevent malicious actors from using it to “cause significant damage.” Fear of technology became a cover for creating a shield from surveillance.

In response to Musk's lawsuit, OpenAI released a series of documents last week. Emails between Mr. Musk and other members of the board of directors. All of this makes it clear that all board members agreed from the beginning that OpenAI could never actually be open.

As AI develops, Sutskever wrote to Musk: The “open” in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the results of AI once it is developed. [sic] It's built, but it's totally fine if you don't share the science. ” “Yes,” Musk replied. Regardless of the nature of the lawsuit, Musk, like other tech industry moguls, has not been as open-minded. The legal challenges to OpenAI are more a power struggle within Silicon Valley than an attempt at accountability.

Wells wrote liberated world At a time of great political turmoil, when many people were questioning the wisdom of extending suffrage to the working class.

“Was that what you wanted, and was it safe to leave it to you?” [the masses],” Fabian Beatrice Webb wondered., “The ballot box that creates and controls the British government with its vast wealth and far-flung territories”? This was the question at the heart of Wells's novel: Who can one entrust their future to?

A century later, we are once again engaged in heated debates about the virtues of democracy. For some, the political turmoil of recent years is a product of democratic overreach, the result of allowing irrational and uneducated people to make important decisions. “It's unfair to put the responsibility of making a very complex and sophisticated historical decision on an unqualified simpleton.” Richard Dawkins said: After the Brexit referendum, Mr Wells would have agreed with that view.

Others say that such contempt for ordinary people is what contributes to the flaws in democracy, where large sections of the population feel deprived of a say in how society is run. .

It's a disdain that also affects discussions about technology.like the world is liberated, The AI ​​debate focuses not only on technology, but also on questions of openness and control. Alarmingly enough, we are far from being “superintelligent” machines. Today's AI models, such as ChatGPT, or claude 3, released last week by another AI company, Anthropic, is so good at predicting what the next word in a sequence is that it makes us believe we can have human-like conversations. You can cheat. However, they are not intelligent in the human sense. Negligible understanding of the real world And I'm not trying to destroy humanity.

The problems posed by AI are not existential, but social.from Algorithm bias to surveillance societyfrom Disinformation and censorship to copyright theftOur concern is not that machines might someday exercise power over humans, but that machines already function in ways that reinforce inequalities and injustices, and that those in power strengthen their own authority. It should be about providing tools for

That's why what we might call “Operation Ecbert,” the argument that some technologies are so dangerous that they must be controlled by a select few over democratic pressure, It's very threatening. The problem isn't just Dr. Evil, it's the people who use fear of Dr. Evil to protect themselves from surveillance.

Kenan Malik is a columnist for the Observer

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk and Sam Altman’s Feud Unpacked: A Technology Showdown

After OpenAI’s launch in December 2015, co-founder Sam Altman spoke to Vanity Fair about the company’s mission to save the world from a dystopian future. Altman discussed the vision of keeping artificial intelligence safe and widely accessible, highlighting his strong relationship with co-chairman Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla.

Nearly a decade later, Musk and Altman find themselves in a public disagreement and facing a legal battle. Musk filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in California court, alleging that Altman and other executives deviated from the company’s original mission by pursuing private commercial interests. The lawsuit questions the direction of OpenAI, now valued at $80 billion, and the shift towards profitability.

The legal dispute highlights the tension between Musk and Altman, two prominent figures in the AI field. Allegations of breach of contract and divergence from OpenAI’s founding principles have escalated the conflict, with Musk accusing Altman of changing the company’s course towards commercial success.

In response to Musk’s lawsuit, OpenAI published a detailed blog post defending its actions and countering Musk’s claims. The post addresses the history of OpenAI, Musk’s involvement, and the evolution of the organization into a for-profit entity.

As the legal battle unfolds, Musk has publicly criticized OpenAI and Altman on social media, fueling further controversy surrounding the dispute. Legal experts question the grounds of Musk’s lawsuit and its implications for OpenAI’s future.

The feud between Musk and Altman traces back to their initial collaboration and shared vision for AI’s role in shaping the future. However, diverging interests and strategic decisions have led to a breakdown in their relationship, culminating in a legal confrontation over OpenAI’s direction and objectives.

Despite their past camaraderie, Musk and Altman now find themselves at odds, each defending their beliefs and actions in the realm of artificial intelligence innovation.

The origins of Musk and Altman’s feud

Prior to their discord, Musk served as a mentor to Altman, fostering a relationship based on shared aspirations for AI advancement. Their dialogue on AI’s societal impact led to the creation of OpenAI, but differences in approach and strategic direction strained their partnership over time.

The evolution of their feud sheds light on the complexities of navigating the ethical, commercial, and technological landscapes of artificial intelligence. Musk and Altman’s diverging viewpoints encapsulate the broader debates surrounding AI governance and responsibility.

Source: www.theguardian.com