Decoding Elon Musk's Hilariously Flawed Case Against OpenAI

Elon Musk is taking OpenAI to court today, claiming some pretty wild stuff. He says that GPT-4 is more than just smart; it's actually as smart as a human. He's basically saying that OpenAI, led by Sam Altman, isn't really a charity for the greater good of humanity like it claims. Instead, Musk thinks they're just another tech company trying to make a ton of money. And you know what? He might have a point there!

But here's the thing: Musk isn't exactly the most reliable guy when it comes to these matters. His lawyers seem to think it's more profitable to file lawsuits than to stick to the facts.

Let's break down the lawsuit. Musk says OpenAI breached a contract. But here's the kicker: there's no actual contract! Musk talks about a "Founding Agreement," but there's no solid proof of its existence. They're going off vibes from emails, which isn't exactly a legal foundation.

Then there's this whole thing about an email exchange between Altman and Musk where they talk about using AI for the world's good. Musk says it's like a contract, but most lawyers would scratch their heads at that idea.

The lawsuit gets even weirder with something called "promissory estoppel," which is a fancy legal term but hardly ever comes up in real life. Musk's claim is basically that he trusted OpenAI's promises when he donated money, even though there was no formal agreement. It's pretty hilarious, to be honest.

And the rest of the lawsuit? Well, it's a bit of a mess. There are some state claims and a desperate attempt at an "accounting" claim, where Musk thinks OpenAI owes him money. But expecting a nonprofit to pay back donations? That's a stretch.

In the end, this lawsuit might become a case study in law schools because OpenAI will probably respond with a motion to dismiss the whole thing. It's like something out of a law school exam rather than a serious lawsuit.

Signal Introduces Usernames for Encrypted Messaging: A Secure Way to Connect

Signal, the encrypted messaging service, is launching a new feature in the coming weeks: support for usernames. This beta feature allows users to establish unique usernames, enabling connections without divulging phone numbers. source: Signal Blog To create a username, navigate to your settings and select "Profile." Once you've chosen a unique username, generate a QR code or link to share with others. Recipients can connect by entering your username into the chat bar. Usernames can be changed at any time, though previous usernames may be claimed by others. Signal began testing usernames last fall. Unlike social media platforms, Signal usernames do not serve as logins or public handles. They offer a discreet means of communication without revealing personal phone numbers. While a phone number is required to register for Signal, sharing it is optional. Usernames remain private and do not appear on profiles or in chats unless shared explicitly. As Randall Sarafa, Signal'

AT&T Resets Millions of Customer Passcodes After Data Leak: What You Need to Know

AT&T recently confirmed a significant data breach affecting over 7.6 million current customers and 65 million former customers. The leaked information, which dates back to 2019 or earlier, includes personal details like names, addresses, phone numbers, and social security numbers. Fortunately, financial information and call history were not compromised. In response to the breach, AT&T has reset passcodes for affected customers. Passcodes, usually four-digit numbers, serve as an additional layer of security when accessing accounts. However, security experts warn that the encrypted passcodes leaked alongside customer information could be easily deciphered, posing a risk of unauthorized account access. Affected customers are advised to set up free fraud alerts with major credit bureaus and remain vigilant for any suspicious activity related to their accounts. AT&T is proactively reaching out to impacted customers via email or letter to inform them about the breach and the meas

Safeguarding Internet Privacy: Supreme Court of Canada Upholds Protection of IP Addresses

In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the significance of privacy rights concerning internet addresses. The court declared that police cannot simply obtain a suspect’s IP address without a court order, emphasizing the expectation of privacy that Canadian residents hold for such information. The court's decision stemmed from a case in 2017 involving Calgary police investigating fraudulent online activities at a liquor store. Initially, police demanded IP addresses from a credit card processor, which eventually led to obtaining subscriber information from Telus. This information was pivotal in making arrests and securing convictions in multiple offenses. Despite previous convictions, the accused contested the legality of obtaining IP addresses without proper authorization. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, asserted that IP addresses carry a reasonable expectation of privacy, necessitating judicial approval before access. The ruling emphasizes that obtaining jud

THEHACKCITY

Search This Blog