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

A jury rejected Elon Musk’s claims against Sam Altman after about two hours of deliberation, dismissing the case on statute-of-limitations grounds after three weeks of testimony. The bigger takeaway is that the Musk-Altman fight exposed how much control over AI sits with powerful figures whose credibility and temperament look badly unfit for steering the field.

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 OpenAI, 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 … Read the full story at The Verge.