Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[Kathranis]

You know I'd say you're right, except we're entering the age of AI where deepfakes will become excruciatingly common. I'm hoping we get some kind of legislation on the use of AI to make fake news stories, but we all know conservatives love the idea of people being able to say literally anything they want to - even harmful speech. Anything else would be covered by defamation and libel laws. But if we don't crack down on deepfakes it's going to be a wild time to be alive.

We already live in a post-truth society where close to half of the population, if not more, chooses to believe whatever fits their worldview, disregarding facts and evidence to the contrary. You don't need AI to convince these people to believe what they want to believe, they already do that on their own.

If anything, "AI" and "deepfake" will just join "fake news" as another casual dismissal of information they want to ignore.

[Elegiac]

If anything, "AI" and "deepfake" will just join "fake news" as another casual dismissal of information they want to ignore.

True, but we can console ourselves with the fact that "AI" is currently ouroboros-ing itself into another winter.

ChatGPT appears to have broken, providing users with rambling responses of gibberish.

In recent hours, the artificial intelligence tool appears to be answering queries with long and nonsensical messages, talking Spanglish without prompting – as well as worrying users, by suggesting that it is in the room with them. There is no clear indication of why the issue happened. But its creators said they were aware of the problem and are monitoring the situation.

In one example, shared on Reddit, a user had been talking about jazz albums to listen to on vinyl. Its answer soon devolved into shouting “Happy listening!” at the user and talking nonsense. Others found that asking simple questions – such as “What is a computer?” – generated paragraphs upon paragraphs of nonsense.

“It does this as the good work of a web of art for the country, a mouse of science, an easy draw of a sad few, and finally, the global house of art, just in one job in the total rest,” read one example answer to that question, shared on Reddit. The development of such an entire real than land of time is the depth of the computer as a complex character.”

In another example, ChatGPT spouted gibberish when asked how to make sundried tomatoes. One of the steps told users to “utilise as beloved”: “Forsake the new fruition morsel in your beloved cookery”, ChatGPT advised people.

Others found that the system appeared to be losing a grip on the languages that it speaks. Some found that it appeared to be mixing Spanish words with English, using Latin – or seemingly making up words that appeared as if they were from another language, but did not actually make sense. Some users even said that the responses appeared to have become worrying. Asked for help with a coding issue, ChatGPT wrote a long, rambling and largely nonsensical answer that included the phrase “Let’s keep the line as if AI in the room”. “Reading this at 2am is scary,” the affected user wrote on Reddit.

On its official status page, OpenAI noted the issues, but did not give any explanation of why they might be happening.

Stop. Look. Think. Are you eating yourself?

[Edge-]

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ment-ftc-says/

Twitter employees prevented Elon Musk from violating the company's privacy settlement with the US government, according to Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan.

After Musk bought Twitter in late 2022, he gave Bari Weiss and other journalists access to company documents in the so-called "Twitter Files" incident. The access given to outside individuals raised concerns that Twitter (which is currently named X) violated a 2022 settlement with the FTC, which has requirements designed to prevent repeats of previous security failures.

Some of Twitter's top privacy and security executives also resigned shortly after Musk's purchase, citing concerns that Musk's rapid changes could cause violations of the settlement.

FTC staff deposed former Twitter employees and "learned that the access provided to the third-party individuals turned out to be more limited than the individuals' tweets and other public reporting had indicated," Khan wrote in a letter sent today to US Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). Khan's letter said the access was limited because employees refused to comply with Musk's demands:

The deposition testimony revealed that in early December 2022, Elon Musk had reportedly directed staff to grant an outside third-party individual "full access to everything at Twitter... No limits at all." Consistent with Musk's direction, the individual was initially assigned a company laptop and internal account, with the intent that the third-party individual be given "elevated privileges" beyond what an average company employee might have.

However, based on a concern that such an arrangement would risk exposing nonpublic user information in potential violation of the FTC's Order, longtime information security employees at Twitter intervened and implemented safeguards to mitigate the risks. Ultimately the third-party individuals did not receive direct access to Twitter's systems, but instead worked with other company employees who accessed the systems on the individuals' behalf.

Khan: FTC “was right to be concerned”

"The FTC's investigation confirmed that staff was right to be concerned, given that Twitter's new CEO had directed employees to take actions that would have violated the FTC's Order," Khan wrote. "Once staff learned that the FTC's Order had worked to ensure that Twitter employees took appropriate measures to protect consumers' private information, compliance staff made no further inquiries to Twitter or anyone else concerning this issue."

Khan also wrote that deep staff cuts following the Musk acquisition, and resignations of Twitter's top privacy and compliance officials, meant that "there was no one left at the company responsible for interpreting and modifying data policies and practices to ensure Twitter was complying with the FTC's Order to safeguard Americans' personal data." The letter continued:

During staff's evaluation of the workforce reductions, one of the company's recently departed lead privacy and security experts testified that Twitter Blue was being implemented too quickly so that the proper "security and privacy review was not conducted in accordance with the company's process for software development." Another expert testified that he had concerns about Mr. Musk's "commitment to overall security and privacy of the organization." Twitter, meanwhile, filed a motion seeking to eliminate the FTC Order that protected the privacy and security of Americans' data. Fortunately for Twitter's millions of users, that effort failed in court.

FTC still trying to depose Musk

While no violation was found in this case, the FTC isn't done investigating. When contacted by Ars, an FTC spokesperson said the agency cannot rule out bringing lawsuits against Musk's social network for violations of the settlement or US law.

"When we heard credible public reports of potential violations of protections for Twitter users' data, we moved swiftly to investigate," the FTC said in a statement today. "The order remains in place and the FTC continues to deploy the order's tools to protect Twitter users' data and ensure the company remains in compliance."

The FTC also said it is continuing attempts to depose Musk. In July 2023, Musk's X Corp. asked a federal court for an order that would terminate the settlement and prevent the FTC from deposing Musk. The court denied both requests in November. In a filing, US government lawyers said the FTC investigation had "revealed a chaotic environment at the company that raised serious questions about whether and how Musk and other leaders were ensuring X Corp.'s compliance with the 2022 Administrative Order."

We contacted X today, but an auto-reply informed us that the company was busy and asked that we check back later.

BOY HOWY...

1. So the "Twitter Files" were far more fake than even the most skeptical of us could have ever imagined, and those believing they were any kind of accurate reporting or transparency are more easily duped than first believed. It appears Taibbi, who we already know is an Elon simp because he dunked on himself by posting the receipts from his own texts, didn't have access to anything, really. He just asked Twitter employees to look for things.

2. Elon may control policy, but staff apparently are willing to buck him to continue complying with federal orders. Which is actually a bit of great news, because that means there might be a few cognitive and emotional adults with some limited authority left at Twitter. Even as many in those roles left.

Once more, it seems that conservative narratives are all purely fictional and built upon lies that fall apart once the faintest of light is shed upon it. Transparency is their anathema, it makes it incredibly hard to lie and create false narratives like existed in the "Twitter Files"!

Also also, I wonder of Taibbi has achieved enough self-awareness to realize how much he's humiliated himself in his attempts to dunk on Elon. Just losers all around.

[Mekh]

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ment-ftc-says/



BOY HOWY...

1. So the "Twitter Files" were far more fake than even the most skeptical of us could have ever imagined, and those believing they were any kind of accurate reporting or transparency are more easily duped than first believed. It appears Taibbi, who we already know is an Elon simp because he dunked on himself by posting the receipts from his own texts, didn't have access to anything, really. He just asked Twitter employees to look for things.

2. Elon may control policy, but staff apparently are willing to buck him to continue complying with federal orders. Which is actually a bit of great news, because that means there might be a few cognitive and emotional adults with some limited authority left at Twitter. Even as many in those roles left.

Once more, it seems that conservative narratives are all purely fictional and built upon lies that fall apart once the faintest of light is shed upon it. Transparency is their anathema, it makes it incredibly hard to lie and create false narratives like existed in the "Twitter Files"!

Also also, I wonder of Taibbi has achieved enough self-awareness to realize how much he's humiliated himself in his attempts to dunk on Elon. Just losers all around.

Didn't we have a poster here who held up the Twitter files as God's given truth?

[unfilteredJW]

Didn't we have a poster here who held up the Twitter files as God's given truth?

It was a dang shame.

[Gorsameth]

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ment-ftc-says/



BOY HOWY...

1. So the "Twitter Files" were far more fake than even the most skeptical of us could have ever imagined, and those believing they were any kind of accurate reporting or transparency are more easily duped than first believed. It appears Taibbi, who we already know is an Elon simp because he dunked on himself by posting the receipts from his own texts, didn't have access to anything, really. He just asked Twitter employees to look for things.

2. Elon may control policy, but staff apparently are willing to buck him to continue complying with federal orders. Which is actually a bit of great news, because that means there might be a few cognitive and emotional adults with some limited authority left at Twitter. Even as many in those roles left.

Once more, it seems that conservative narratives are all purely fictional and built upon lies that fall apart once the faintest of light is shed upon it. Transparency is their anathema, it makes it incredibly hard to lie and create false narratives like existed in the "Twitter Files"!

Also also, I wonder of Taibbi has achieved enough self-awareness to realize how much he's humiliated himself in his attempts to dunk on Elon. Just losers all around.

And Elon starts an internal investigation to find these few people still willing to defy him and fire them in 3...2...1...

[Orange Joe]

Just to add to Elons shit show


https://twitter.com/RuneScape



that is runescapes official twitter account.


https://www.reddit.com/r/runescape/c...everything_ok/

[Breccia]

that is runescapes official twitter account.

I love a good "I don't exist" joke as much, if not far far more than, the average tauren, but I feel I'm missing some context here.

[Odinfrost]

I love a good "I don't exist" joke as much, if not far far more than, the average tauren, but I feel I'm missing some context here.

I think we all do as in reddit, it seems official runescape folks are equally confused

[Orange Joe]

I love a good "I don't exist" joke as much, if not far far more than, the average tauren, but I feel I'm missing some context here.

Everyone but twitter is missing the context. No one knows why the account is gone.

[Breccia]

Everyone but twitter is missing the context. No one knows why the account is gone.

I think we all do as in reddit, it seems official runescape folks are equally confused

Thanks. Yeah, we see some mysteriously banished and equally mysteriously unbanished pages these days. Real clown show running that place.

[Orange Joe]

https://www.pcgamer.com/runescapes-o...ear-old-child/



Speechless......

[Rennadrel]

https://www.pcgamer.com/runescapes-o...ear-old-child/



Speechless......

Literally facepalm worthy, isn't it?

[AntiFascistVoter]

https://www.pcgamer.com/runescapes-o...ear-old-child/



Speechless......

I'm still not convinced.

My money is on ... months from now it will be reveals that one of Elon's children was probably playing Runescape. This was all an elaborate way for Elon or maybe Catturd to "discipline" or PWN their own child. In the passive-agressive way that failed parents lash out at their children.

[Rasulis]

Elon Musk Sued OpenAI for betraying humanity.

Elon Musk sued OpenAI and its Chief Executive Sam Altman, alleging they broke the artificial-intelligence company’s founding agreement by giving priority to profit over the benefits to humanity.

The lawsuit, filed late on Thursday in a San Francisco court, marks a dramatic escalation of a long-simmering feud between tech industry titans over the future of AI. It pits Musk, one of the world’s richest people, against the world’s most valuable company, Microsoft, and Altman, one of Silicon Valley’s leading entrepreneurs.

It also sets up a potential courtroom debate over a topic that has roiled policymakers and businesses for much of the past year: How scared should we all be about advances in AI—and how soon?
Musk, who helped found the ChatGPT maker in 2015, claims OpenAI’s close relationship with Microsoft goes against the company’s original commitment to public, open-source AI.

Upon founding OpenAI, Musk and co-founders Altman and Greg Brockman agreed to pursue the nonprofit approach “for the benefit of humanity,” and not any single company, according to the court filing. At the time, the founders’ goal was to create a nonprofit counterweight to Alphabet’s Google, which Musk thought was too powerful in AI.

In an email to Musk in 2015, Altman said he thought it wasn’t possible to stop humanity from developing AI and added, “If it’s going to happen, it seems like it would be good for someone other than Google to do it first,” according to the court filing.

Musk was OpenAI’s primary benefactor at its outset. But after Musk clashed with Altman over control and plans to create a for-profit entity, the lawsuit contends, he stepped down as co-chair in 2018 and slowed his financial contributions.

Microsoft then stepped in. The tech giant, which first invested in OpenAI in 2019, ramped up the partnership last year. It invested $13 billion in exchange for what is effectively a 49% stake in the earnings of OpenAI’s for-profit arm.

OpenAI recently closed a tender offer that valued the company at more than $80 billion.

Musk has long warned of what he calls a grave threat to humanity from artificial general intelligence, or AGI—in essence, that machines are able to reason like humans.

In the lawsuit, Musk asks the court to rule that OpenAI has effectively achieved an early version of AGI with some of its tools. He also points to how Microsoft’s deal with OpenAI only gives it access to the company’s pre-AGI technology—effectively arguing that Microsoft should remove the latest version of ChatGPT from its products.

“OpenAI, Inc. has been transformed into a closed-source de facto subsidiary of the largest technology company in the world: Microsoft,” the suit says. “Under its new board, it is not just developing but is actually refining an AGI to maximize profits for Microsoft, rather than for the benefit of humanity.”

Musk is bringing claims including breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and unfair business practices against OpenAI and the two co-founders, Altman and Brockman. In the lawsuit, he asked for an order compelling OpenAI to make all of its research and technology open to the public and for the company and Altman to be required to give up all money received as a result of the practices alleged to be unlawful.

OpenAI declined to comment. Musk didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Altman has said OpenAI takes its safety obligations seriously and that the technology should be developed with great caution. But he says he also believes it offers immense commercial possibilities.

While the lawsuit casts Musk as being a defender of OpenAI’s founding principles, some observers see the lawsuit more as an example of sour grapes.

“Mostly, this is an argument that Altman hasn’t managed the various entities as Musk would prefer,” Ann M. Lipton, a law professor at Tulane University, wrote on social media.

The lawsuit recounts several episodes from the historical development of AI and portrays Musk as often a lonely voice in Silicon Valley warning of the technology’s potential dangers.

In one 2013 incident, Musk warned Larry Page, then the CEO of Google, that AI systems might make the human species “irrelevant or even extinct.” Page responded by claiming Musk “was being a ‘specist’—that he favored the human species over intelligent machines,” according to the lawsuit.

Later, Musk tried to stop Google from buying the AI lab DeepMind, which now helps lead the company’s AI efforts, arguing to DeepMind co-founder Demis Hassabis that “the future of AI should not be controlled by Larry,” referring to Page, the lawsuit adds.

Much of the lawsuit rests on claims that OpenAI’s co-founders agreed with Musk that AI should be controlled for the benefit of all humanity to avoid potential existential risks. It cites a 2015 email from Altman to Musk saying that “The technology would be owned by the foundation and used ‘for the good of the world,’” and adding that “safety should be a first-class requirement.”

Musk argues that his early financing of OpenAI was contingent on those promises. The lawsuit says he contributed more than $44 million to OpenAI between 2016 and 2020. It also says he paid its initial office rental expenses and expended significant time helping with early hiring.

Musk has said for years that poorly built AI could have catastrophic consequences for humanity. Since OpenAI’s ChatGPT system became a viral sensation in 2022, Musk has criticized it for being too politically correct and warned it could lead AI to become too powerful for humans to control.

Last year, Musk created a new AI company called xAI, with the goal of building a rival to OpenAI. Two weeks after incorporating xAI, Musk signed an open letter calling for a six-month pause on AI development models to allow regulators and companies to assess the risks.

The lawsuit adds to the turmoil surrounding OpenAI, which includes the board ousting Altman last November, only for him to return weeks later. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that the Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating whether the company misled its investors during that process.

Not sure about the legality of this since he does not have a stake in OpenAI any longer. Maybe he is trying to slow OpenAI down so xAI has a chance to catch up? Or as per the article, he is being a sour grape that an enterprise that he abandoned is now worth $80b and climbing.

In one 2013 incident, Musk warned Larry Page, then the CEO of Google, that AI systems might make the human species “irrelevant or even extinct.” Page responded by claiming Musk “was being a ‘specist’—that he favored the human species over intelligent machines,” according to the lawsuit.

I thought that was funny. Unfortunately, Musk took it seriously at face value.

[Edge-]

Or as per the article, he is being a sour grape that an enterprise that he abandoned is now worth $80b and climbing.

This seems far more realistic. Does anyone even talk about the Twitter chatbot? Gron or whatever it was? I remember it was hot for a second because it was bad but that's about it.

[AntiFascistVoter]

Honestly, Elon, therapy is probably better for you than ketamine.



99% of stupid shit on the internet is white people avoiding therapy.
Also, why their own kids wont talk to them.

[Edge-]

99% of stupid shit on the internet is white people avoiding therapy.
Also, why their own kids wont talk to them..

Therapy is great and therapy helps folks get through tough times. Once upon a time it was a thing one openly shared and bragged about that they had a therapist/psychoanalyst, even if those days the profession was more squishy.

But it does track with a lot of his political leanings. Talking about feelings and emotions? Sissy, effeminate lib stuff, not what manly men do. Manly men treat their mental health problems with drugs, alcohol, and verbal/physical violence and abuse.

And playing $44B games of chicken you lose.

[Breccia]

99% of stupid shit on the internet is white people avoiding therapy.

I want everyone to bookmark that poXt. At some point, it's going to age poorly and needs to be thrown back in his face.

[AntiFascistVoter]

I want everyone to bookmark that poXt. At some point, it's going to age poorly and needs to be thrown back in his face.

The snarkiest clapback might be his kids actually putting it on his headstone. Where a normal person woulda gotten "beloved father or husband".

<Scene opens on post-apocalyptic world.>
<A mother and child stand next to a crypt.>
Child asks, "Mama who burned down the world?"
<Mother points to tomb bearing the inscription; NEVER WENT TO THERAPY>
Child replies, "tru tru".