Ask Runable forDesign-Driven General AI AgentTry Runable For Free
Runable
Back to Blog
Technology11 min read

Musk v. Altman proved that AI is led by the wrong people | The Verge

In Musk v. Altman, Elon Musk argued that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman shouldn’t direct the future of AI. A jury came to a verdict on Monday. Discover insights about mu

TechnologyInnovationBest PracticesGuideTutorial
Musk v. Altman proved that AI is led by the wrong people | The Verge
Listen to Article
0:00
0:00
0:00

Musk v. Altman proved that AI is led by the wrong people | The Verge

Overview

Tech Expand Amazon Apple Facebook Google Microsoft Samsung Business See all tech

Reviews Expand Smart Home Reviews Phone Reviews Tablet Reviews Headphone Reviews See all reviews

Details

Science Expand Space Energy Environment Health See all science

Entertainment Expand TV Shows Movies Audio See all entertainment

Policy Expand Antitrust Politics Law Security See all policy

Gadgets Expand Laptops Phones TVs Headphones Speakers Wearables See all gadgets

Verge Shopping Expand Buying Guides Deals Gift Guides See all shopping

Streaming Expand Disney HBONetflix You Tube Creators See all streaming

Transportation Expand Electric Cars Autonomous Cars Ride-sharing Scooters See all transportation

AIClose AIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All AI

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Policy Close Policy Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Policy

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Report Close Report Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Report

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Musk v. Altman proved that AI is led by the wrong people

Public opinion of the AI industry is already sinking. A parade of untrustworthy executives makes it look worse.

Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

AIClose AIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All AI

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Policy Close Policy Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Policy

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Report Close Report Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Report

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Musk v. Altman proved that AI is led by the wrong people

Public opinion of the AI industry is already sinking. A parade of untrustworthy executives makes it look worse.

Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

The tech trial of the year, Musk v. Altman, was ultimately a fight for control. Elon Musk argued that Sam Altman, with whom he helped found the now-massive company Open AI, shouldn’t direct the future of AI. Altman’s lawyers, in turn, poked at Musk’s own credibility. A jury came to a verdict on Monday after just two hours of deliberation, dismissing Musk’s claims due to the statute of limitations.

In a strictly legal sense, three weeks of testimony added up to nothing. But the trial offered a more damning broader takeaway: Almost nobody in this saga seems worth trusting. Some of the most powerful people in tech seem temperamentally incapable of dealing with each other honestly. And if that’s true, it raises a bigger question: Why are they in control of a trillion-dollar industry that’s set to upend people’s lives?

Open AI was, in the testimony of both Musk and Altman, founded to stop powerful AI from being owned and advanced by the wrong people. Testimony and evidence showed its founding team fretting about who would control artificial general intelligence (AGI), a buzzword for AI that broadly equals or surpasses human knowledge and ability. They deeply feared Google Deep Mind and its leader, Demis Hassabis. In 2015, Altman said he’d been mulling over whether anything could “stop humanity from developing AI” — and after concluding it was impossible, that he wanted “someone other than google to do it first.”

Fellow cofounders Greg Brockman and Ilya Sutskever so strongly opposed one-person control that they seemed willing to torpedo a lucrative deal that could — in their words — give Musk an “AI dictatorship.” In a part of the same email addressed to Altman, Brockman and Sutskever questioned his motivations, writing, “We haven’t been able to fully trust your judgements throughout this process … Is AGI truly your primary motivation? How does it connect to your political goals?”

These concerns would be quickly borne out. A central focus of Musk v. Altman was “the blip,” a five-day period in November 2023 when Open AI’s board removed Altman as CEO. Sutskever had spent more than a year architecting his ouster, assembling a 52-page memo alleging “a consistent pattern of lying, undermining his execs, and pitting his execs against one another.” The implications were broader than executive infighting, potentially impacting the public rollout of AI systems. Then-CTO Mira Murati, for instance, testified in court that Altman told her Open AI’s legal team had okayed skipping a safety review for one of its models — a statement, she said, that turned out to be false.

In closing arguments, Musk attorney Steven Molo hammered home the long list of people who had testified under oath that Altman was, in one way or another, a liar — all of whom Altman had worked with for years. “The defendants absolutely need you to believe Sam Altman,” Molo told the jury. “If you cannot trust him, if you don’t believe him, they cannot win. It’s that simple.”

But during court proceedings, Musk — who now leads competing lab x AI, under his space company Space X — didn’t come off any better. Joshua Achiam, now Open AI’s chief futurist, testified that Musk’s race against Google led him to take an “obviously unsafe and reckless” approach to achieving AGI. When he and others raised concerns, he says, Musk argued that Open AI’s for-profit makeover created incentives to disregard safety, but his own x AI is for-profit and has, at best, a haphazard approach to safety. And in the name of making sure Open AI remained open, Musk was obsessive in his need for control over it. In closing arguments, Sarah Eddy, one of Open AI’s attorneys, told the jury that Musk “wanted dominion over AGI.”

As one X user put it, “if untrustworthyness had mass, putting Musk and Altman too close to one another would collapse the courtroom and all of earth into a black hole.”

Open AI and Musk did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

It’s not just Musk and Altman, either. Trial evidence suggested Murati helped get Altman removed, then switched sides to support his reinstatement while appearing “totally uninterested” in disclosing the role she’d played. Shivon Zilis, a close Musk associate who served on Open AI’s board, asked Musk if he’d “prefer I stay close and friendly to Open AI to keep info flowing” during his departure — avoiding revealing that she had two children with him at the time. Brockman’s diary entries played a key role in Musk’s case; at one point, he admitted Musk could “correctly” claim “we weren’t honest with him” if Open AI made a for-profit shift without his involvement.

Musk v. Altman gave each man an opportunity to sling dirt at the other and, in theory, establish himself as the more scrupulous guardian of AI. But a more obvious takeaway is that several of the AI industry’s household names are at best naive — and, at worst, hypocrites with little regard for the consequences of their actions.

Public sentiment about AI is at an all-time low. In a Pew Research survey from last summer, half of US adults said the “increased use of AI in daily life makes them feel more concerned than excited” — and only 10 percent said they felt more excited than concerned. Many of these concerns are related to job loss, but protests are also surging against mass data center construction across the country. Some resistance has turned potentially violent, with individuals allegedly attempting to attack Altman’s home on two occasions. And many tech CEOs themselves maintain that they have bunkers or other doomsday-prepping plans for if things go horribly wrong.

These companies push public messaging that AI empowers its users. But a 2025 Pew Research study found that nearly 60 percent of US adults feel they have little to no control over how AI is used in their lives. In the US, the prospect of meaningful government regulation — which could at least offer some level of external oversight — remains shaky. And now, it’s clearer than ever how far the AI world’s biggest players will go to maintain control.

Amid the trial’s reams of evidence, one document offers a rare example of Altman and Musk offering to cede some power. In March 2015, Altman emailed Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella with a simple request: Sign a letter that he and Musk were drafting, asking the US government to establish “a new regulatory agency for AI safety” and address “the biggest risk to the continued existence of humanity that most people are ignoring.” Weeks later, Nadella responded to shut down the idea. The “issue of human safety and the control problem will become real issues,” he said. But executives, he insisted, should be calling for “federal funding and encouragement of research,” not oversight. Altman promptly agreed. The letter, he promised, would be changed — leaving the option of regulating the AI industry “if and when.”

Hayden Field Close Hayden Field Senior AI Reporter Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All by Hayden Field

Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

AIClose AIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All AI

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Analysis Close Analysis Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Analysis

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Elon Musk Close Elon Musk Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Elon Musk

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Law Close Law Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Law

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Microsoft Close Microsoft Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Microsoft

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Open AIClose Open AIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Open AI

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Policy Close Policy Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Policy

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Report Close Report Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Report

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

Tech Close Tech Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All Tech

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

x AIClosex AIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. Follow Follow See All x AI

Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.

More in: All of the updates from Elon Musk and Sam Altman’s battle over Open AI

University of Arizona students boo Eric Schmidt’s AI cheerleading during commencement

Disco Elysium’s spiritual successor can’t escape its phantoms

Key Takeaways

  • Tech Expand Amazon Apple Facebook Google Microsoft Samsung Business See all tech
  • Reviews Expand Smart Home Reviews Phone Reviews Tablet Reviews Headphone Reviews See all reviews
  • Science Expand Space Energy Environment Health See all science
  • Entertainment Expand TV Shows Movies Audio See all entertainment
  • Policy Expand Antitrust Politics Law Security See all policy

Cut Costs with Runable

Cost savings are based on average monthly price per user for each app.

Which apps do you use?

Apps to replace

ChatGPTChatGPT
$20 / month
LovableLovable
$25 / month
Gamma AIGamma AI
$25 / month
HiggsFieldHiggsField
$49 / month
Leonardo AILeonardo AI
$12 / month
TOTAL$131 / month

Runable price = $9 / month

Saves $122 / month

Runable can save upto $1464 per year compared to the non-enterprise price of your apps.