How the Musk v. Altman lawsuit could shape the future of AI — Global News Podcast

[0:00] Welcome to the Global News Podcast from the BBC World Service. I'm Will Chalk and today we are [0:05] talking to Mark Chislak, our AI correspondent, because of the court battle that's been called [0:09] a battle between Godzilla and King Kong. Now I'm not sure if the person who coined that phrase [0:14] worked out who was who in that scenario, but it is Elon Musk and Sam Altman. And this is all to do [0:20] with the founding of OpenAI 10 years ago. So take us back. Yeah, it's a tale as old as time, [0:26] or at least a tale as old as a decade. A tale between two tech bros, Musk and Altman. Now Musk [0:33] is suing OpenAI and its co-founder, Greg Brotman and Sam Altman, as well as Microsoft. And he's [0:40] claiming that he's been misled or that he was misled, effectively swindled out of something like [0:47] $38 million in donations. He argues that the company, that OpenAI has abandoned its founding [0:55] principles, that it set out as a not-for-profit, had a non-profit mission. And it was to ensure [1:03] that the company, if it ever managed to develop artificial general intelligence, AGI as it's [1:08] known, that this will be done for the benefit of humanity. Now he's asking for billions of dollars [1:16] in wrongful gains. And he even wants a major restructuring of OpenAI. I think he's also asked [1:22] for Sam Altman to potentially be removed, which would be a very, very big move. Now OpenAI rejects [1:29] all of these claims. It's saying that the shift towards a for-profit structure was agreed in 2017, [1:36] and that Musk himself pushed for control of the company at the time, something that OpenAI's board [1:43] actually refused. Now the case is being heard in federal court in California before a nine-person [1:48] jury. And it could run for up to something like a month. Now a lot of people who use AI will use [1:53] it for everyday things, you know, almost like a glorified search engine at the moment. But actually [1:57] at the core of this argument is the ultimate purpose of AI. And also this push for general [2:04] intelligence, this AI that will surpass human intelligence. So this isn't just a dramatic [2:09] battle, is it? There's quite a lot at stake here. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, it isn't just about [2:15] money. It's about that race towards AGI, artificial general intelligence. And this is where technology [2:22] broadly becomes smarter than people and has capabilities beyond human capabilities. A lot [2:30] of the tech bros are selling it as it's just around the corner. It's just around the corner. Just [2:33] give me five billion more dollars to invest in this and we'll achieve it. And then you have some really, [2:39] really noted experts in the field who say it's a long way away from being developed. And that some of [2:45] the technologies at the moment, things like large language models, things like chatbots and stuff [2:49] like that, that they are perhaps a technological cul-de-sac. And they're not the right way to go [2:55] if we want to see this technology which arrives, which is smarter than we are. [2:58] But practically it matters as well, because that theoretically is the moment when we start living [3:03] in a sci-fi movie, when we get AGI, right? And AI starts to be able to do all these things. [3:07] We've got to, but then you've got to think about society, as far as society is concerned, [3:12] you've got to think about, is it desirous to have the society or have a society where so many aspects [3:19] of it are automated? What do you get from having a completely automated society? What does that mean [3:25] for employment? What are people going to do? And you have to start asking yourself and governments [3:31] have to start asking themselves, and we as a society have to start asking ourselves, [3:34] is that something that we want? These are really big philosophical questions. [3:40] And to bring this back to the trial then, OpenAI's argument is that Elon Musk is essentially using [3:45] this trial to try and knock them out the water so he has more power in the AI world. [3:51] And it's this idea that you've got these billionaires competing for what will eventually [3:55] be this incredibly powerful technology that they're going to have control over. [3:59] I don't know if you saw the banner that was held up outside the courtroom by a protester. [4:04] It said, everyone sucks here. Musk equals Altman. [4:09] I can see why people who aren't keen on the tech industry might think that. And they think of [4:16] tech billionaires as all being one homogenous group of people who are in control of very, [4:23] very powerful technologies and are guiding the way that society is evolving in certain respects. [4:29] And there's a school of thought that says, yeah, that's true. They wield an enormous amount of [4:35] power over society. And they have connections to and relationships with governments across the world. [4:42] And as a consequence of that, what they want to happen, as far as their business is concerned, [4:46] tends to tends to happen. Or at least when we think of things like regulation, [4:52] a lot of companies, a lot of countries around the world or the governments around the world are taking a very soft touch [4:57] as far as regulation of technologies like AI is concerned. And that's leading to the speeding up of [5:05] the development of the tech, if you like. But it also comes with significant risk because in the race [5:11] to make this technology, in the race to try and realise AGI or try and at least get the technology, [5:17] make it even more powerful than it currently is, there's a lot of risk of the things that can go [5:22] wrong and the things that get broken along the way. And the effect of that could be quite dramatic [5:28] and be quite catastrophic as well. You mentioned regulation there. Is there a sense that maybe in [5:34] the absence of any extremely strong regulation from governments that the tech companies, the AI [5:39] companies are actually using the courts to slog it out amongst each other and almost regulate [5:44] themselves and work out who comes out top doc? I think there's a slightly different question [5:48] around regulation and what's going on with this court case. When it comes to the notion of regulation, [5:54] the tech companies, and they have said this to me, you know, very, very senior executives from [5:59] a lot of these companies have said to me that they frame the race towards AGI or they frame the evolution [6:04] of this technology as thinking about it in terms of global dominance. Who do you want to be globally [6:10] dominant as far as this technology is concerned? Do you want it to be broadly the West or do you want it [6:16] to exist in China? Do you want the Chinese state to have absolute control over this technology, [6:23] which has enormous potential to affect all of our lives? Or do you want that to exist in the West [6:28] and predominantly in the United States? And as a consequence of that, they have argued that stronger [6:34] regulations restrict the development of the technology in the West. It's regulations that [6:39] won't be restricting companies in China and that the Chinese state isn't concerned with those kind [6:44] of regulations. So as a consequence of that, that the Chinese state might be able to catch a lead [6:49] on the West and it might be able to end up being the dominant power as it were, as far as, as far [6:54] as AI is concerned, which is something that Western tech companies have said that they really, really [6:58] don't want. And they put the question out to everybody in the West is that, is that something [7:04] that we want? And because so many governments around the world are taking a very, very soft touch, [7:10] as far as AI companies are concerned, at the moment, it would appear that a lot of regulators [7:16] are in agreement with those tech companies. What's it mean? You said Musk is asking for, [7:21] well, quite big damages that he wants to reinvest back into the non-profit arm, [7:25] but also the removal of Sam Altman potentially. What will it mean if Elon Musk is victorious in this? [7:32] It would be a really big deal if he is victorious. I mean, Sam Altman isn't just a figurehead. Sam Altman [7:39] is intrinsic to OpenAI. When you think of OpenAI, you think of Sam Altman as its CEO. So his [7:46] removal would be absolutely seismic for the company. But at the moment, it's anybody's guess [7:53] which way this is going to go. This nine person jury has got to decide who is more credible. [7:58] Is Elon Musk more credible or is Sam Altman more credible? And you've got to be in the courtroom. [8:04] I don't know if you've ever been in a courtroom and you've weighed those things up and it's up to [8:09] those nine people to make that decision. But what would it mean for OpenAI? It would mean, well, [8:15] it has the potential to mean that OpenAI becomes a very, very different company. It looks like a [8:19] very, very different company. It has the potential to mean it has to pay out, make a big, big payout [8:22] to Elon Musk. But whether that's likely to happen, who knows? [8:26] And just to put that in context, this is a company that is planning to value itself, [8:31] hopefully at one trillion dollars later this year when it floats publicly. [8:35] So it's got big implications for business as well. [8:38] Yes. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. There is the race to float it. And industry experts have been observing [8:47] it and looking at it very closely. And everybody knows that this is what they want to do, that this [8:50] is what's going on in the space, broadly in the space. Anthopik is trying to do the same thing. [8:55] OpenAI are trying to do the same thing. So yes, it does have an effect on things like valuations [9:00] and on the business of AI. But the business of AI at the moment is one which is slightly in flux. [9:07] Talk of a bubble is perhaps inflated. But then when we look at valuations of some of these companies, [9:15] they're also quite inflated as well. These are companies where it's quite difficult for them [9:21] to show anything approaching a return on investment for any length of time. [9:25] Because they cost so much money to run. [9:27] Yeah, they cost an enormous amount of money to run them. It cost an enormous amount of [9:30] money to develop these technologies. So as a consequence, seeing any kind of profit from them [9:35] isn't likely to occur for a very, very long time. So what's investors' appetite for waiting to see [9:42] that? Yeah, there's the potential that these could be the most powerful companies in the world. These [9:45] could be the next Googles, the next Apples, all of these kind of things. But that's potential and [9:50] that's risk. But hey, that's the markets. It's all risk. [9:53] Mark, thank you very much. That was Mark Chislak, [9:56] our AI correspondent. And if you want to hear more from us, [9:58] you can listen to the Global News Podcast. Just click the link below.