Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:'Waited too long' is a lame cop-out. (Score 0) 75

I guess now everyone will be acting like sue it or lose it because penalizing continued wrong-doing now has a time limit from the starting date of the initial wrong-doing.

1) If there was not any statute of limitations, your neighbor from 50 years ago can sue because you never returned his hammer as he claims. Good luck trying to find witnesses and documents from that long ago. 2) The time limit is from when the wrong-doing is found out, not when it happens.

Comment Re:What a waste of time (Score 1) 75

Normally a statute of limitations question would have been addressed earlier in the case. I can only guess a main point of contention is when did Musk know that OpenAI was going to convert to for-profit. If the defense had to establish at trial Musk knew in 2019, then that would be why the trial was needed. If Musk can claim he found out in 2021, then he was within the statiute.

Comment Re:Technicality (Score 2) 75

The core issue for civil cases is whether or not the plaintiff was damaged. Filing a lawsuit years after the limitations ran out would undercut any argument Musk had that he was damaged. He was aware of the conversion to for-profit. He had the money to sue. He wasn't damaged enough to sue before the limitations ran out would be a conclusion by the court.

Comment Re:Wasn't he right though? (Score 1) 75

Kind of weird how stealing an entire non-profit worth billions, maybe hundreds of billions of dollars only has a statue of limitations of 2-3 years.

The principle is if there were not any limitations, people could sue for things that happened long in the past and bog down the courts. The limitations by the way is governed when something can be known not when it happens. In this case, however, Musk knew OpenAI was turning for-profit as it was public knowledge back in 2019. He waited until 2024. If Musk was so damaged by the change he could have sued earlier. It's not like he didn't have the money to sue.

Comment Re:Will it catch the president? (Score 1) 35

But they do. Congresspeople from both parties who sit in closed door committees regularly engage in trading in the very industries they're (ostensibly) regulating. They've publicly admitted as much, and have said "So what, big deal. We have the right to make investments." So the issue isn't *catching* them, it's completely changing the system so that they can't do it as a "matter of course" with total impunity, and (I'm not holding my breath) holding the POTUS and other high-level officials to that same standard when it comes to trading immediately before/after geopolitical/military maneuvers.

If they then want to play games with blind trusts and sharing inside information with the people in charge of those trusts, they're free to commit crimes, like anyone else, if they think they're worth the risk, but if the SEC and other bodies actually had any power (or at least willingness) to hold them accountable, I'd imagine they'd at least think twice. I think most of them probably don't even see what they're doing as criminal. In their minds, they're just using their privileged positions to "strategic advantage". In a much less insane world, such actions would be *easily* traceable and would, at worst, result in public disgrace for those involved, and at best, doing hard time.

I realize that this may (at this point at least) be a pipe dream, since the whole bloody thing is stacked in favor of the people making the rules. It's always been that way, but nowadays it's approaching totality.

Submission + - Musk loses OpenAI case due to statute of limitations (nbcnews.com)

UnknowingFool writes: A jury has found that Elon Musk waited too long to bring his lawsuit and found in favor of OpenAI in the case of Musk v Altman. OpenAI was founded in 2015 by Musk and Altman. In 2019, OpenAI converted from a non-profit to for-profit model. Musk filed a lawsuit in 2024 claiming the conversion of OpenAI violated the agreements that had been made on the company’s founding. The jury deliberating for less than two hours found that Musk had exceeded the 3 year statute of limitations.

Comment Re:Linus with his weekly rant (c)(tm) (Score 1) 59

He needs to start thinking about what to do with all these security bugs/issues as they are not AI hallucinations.

And no one said they were hallucinations. That's a strawman argument. What he's saying is these bugs are duplicative, misclassified, and already known.

Maybe he should spend more time fixing his processes instead of spending useless time on his weekly rant (c)(tm)

Why don't you fix his processes since you seem to have all the answers.

Comment Re:What's the problem? (Score 1) 47

The problem is that he is an artist and needs to keep making money to get opportunities like this, so when critics pan his work and audiences react negatively, he feels the need to defend his decisions.

It sounds like he ripped off those people who take a podcast, add AI slop images, and upload a video to YouTube.

Comment Re:Rent-seeking (Score 2, Insightful) 341

The problem is Israel. Israel is everything the US claims to oppose Iran for.

- Nuclear armed, with the ability to deliver those warheads to Europe and beyond.

- The world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism.

- An existential threat to every other nation in the region, constantly attacking and invading them.

- Openly genocidal, has the means to actually do it, and is doing it.

- Abuses its own people.

If Israel wasn't based by the US and European nations, if we didn't tolerate Israel violating international law every single day for decades, Iran wouldn't be the problem that it is.

Comment Re:Rent-seeking (Score 1, Troll) 341

If the fees are lower than the cost of mitigating the problems it causes, they will probably just pay.

Trump and Netanyahu have opened a can of worms here. Iran is now looking at what else it can tax, since it's become apparent that the US can't actually win and Iran does in fact have the upper hand.

The most powerful military in the world is of little use if the political will isn't there.

Slashdot Top Deals

Promising costs nothing, it's the delivering that kills you.

Working...