177 pointsby 1vuio0pswjnm77 hours ago24 comments
  • IG_Semmelweiss5 hours ago
    The thesis is as follows:

    OpenAI receives funds as a non-profit.

    Some of those funds are redirected to for profit ventures.

    Critically, the GM (Altman) of the nonprofit owns shares of the for-profit ventures, that OpenAI funds were redirected into.

    A regular company could and does invest in any company even when there's a conflict, as long as the conflict is disclosed and the Board votes in favor of it. There's no criminal element there.

    The problem is introduced in Altman's case if

    (a) there was no disclosure (red flag) and/or

    (b) nonprofit that received the funds, is putting money into things not aligned with the 501(c)(3) mission.

    I'm not sure if either (a) or (b) are criminal, but they don't pass the smell test, which is why Altman is being sued in civil court, unrelated to the congressional investigation talked about in the article

    • JumpCrisscross4 hours ago
      The thesis is Altman ran around saying he was building something that will kill everyone, then backed off to saying he’ll just kill everyone’s jobs.

      When data centers and a war of choice pushed inflation to 7+% [1], Republicans in the Congress were left scrambling for a scapegoat. And Sam is a terrific scapegoat. He has no public shareholders like the more hated Zuckerberg and Bezos [2]. Yet he has carved for himself a uniquely-visibly throne for a private-company boss. (His only rival for scapegoatiness is Musk. But he’s inoculated from Republicans by his blatant partisanship.)

      [1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm 0.6% MoM in April, 0.9% MoM in March

      [2] https://techoversight.org/2025/06/11/tech-ceo-poll-25/

      • mywittyname4 hours ago
        Also, doesn't musk hate him? I have to imagine he's behind this.
        • JumpCrisscross4 hours ago
          > have to imagine he's behind this

          Is Musk probably throwing fuel on the fire? Yes, probably. (Though we have no proof of this.)

          Is Musk causing this? No. This is mainly Altman’s doing. The hyperbole. The lying. The leverage. The pomp. Even Zuckerberg and Bezos haven’t painted a target on themselves like he has. (To the point that I’m borderline sympathetic.)

          • dbreunig3 hours ago
            Elizabeth Lopatto at The Verge makes a strong case we _do_ have proof that Musk is actively gathering and throwing fuel on the fire: https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/929129/s...

            > But the thing is, Molo doesn’t actually have to be good at this job, because the point of this trial isn’t to win — though I’m sure Musk wouldn’t mind a win. The point is to punish Altman, Brockman, and OpenAI. Musk has done that pretty thoroughly — reinforcing in the public’s mind that Altman is a liar and a snake. This morning, I read an exclusive in The Wall Street Journal that assorted Republican AGs and the House Oversight committee wanted to look into Sam Altman’s investments. References to the trial are peppered throughout the article.

            • JumpCrisscross3 hours ago
              Oh sure, the trial is maybe 5% a Hail Mary and 95% about distracting and disrupting OpenAI. I read "behind this" to mean more-clandestine moves, e.g. planting stories, conducting and leaking oppo, amplifying negative media on X, et cetera.
              • keeda2 hours ago
                It does seem like there is a ton of negative PR and sentiment on social media (including HN) about anything Altman and even Dario do. Like, way more than warranted. It looks more and more like a coordinated campaign, a la https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html

                Elon even explicitly threatened the OpenAI guys that they would be "the most hated" people on earth, and given what we've seen him do with Twitter, I strongly suspect there indeed is a submarine with Elon at the periscope.

                Altman may be getting the brunt of the AI backlash, but the impact of AI is still extremely preliminary, and it will happen regardless of anything he does. As you mentioned, it doesn't help that these guys are telling the world AI will disrupt all the jobs but... at this point, I think they're just being honest.

                As shifty as Altman is, I wonder how he gets more hate than Elon, who has objectively done way more concrete damage to the world.

    • voncheese31 minutes ago
      The problem with the current political situation/administration in the US is that there's so much existing conflict of interest going on that anytime the government investigates concerns about conflict of interest, it feels politically motivated because of the uneven investigation.
    • boringg5 hours ago
      Doesn't Sam Altman famously not own OpenAI? His whole arrangement is so shady.
      • s1artibartfastan hour ago
        So a non-profit can absolute invest in or own a for-profit subsidary. This is extremely common. The idea is that the for-profit returns will flow back to the non-profit and remain dedicated to the non-profit mission.

        Where things get really shady and run the risk of IRS violations is when the leadership of the non-profit has a seperate for profit stake in the subsidary.

        • boringgan hour ago
          When your public position is that you don't own equity in the company it implies that you aren't making money off of it. However if you have all sorts of side deals through intermediaries and you are making money off the entity it looks quite bad.
      • meowface5 hours ago
        Is there a more benign explanation for these things? Altman is undeniably famously cagey and political but despite most of the tech and non-tech worlds at this point seeing him as some kind of con artist, I still kind of want to try to believe he's not.

        No doubt some of OpenAI's founding principles like "stop + assist if a competitor gets to AGI first" are likely flying out the window, perhaps in part due to him and also as one might anticipate of initial lofty ideals and promises, but even with the recent New Yorker and other articles he seems like someone who maybe regularly placates people to avoid personal problems and lies to get out of trouble rather than a Machiavellian tech baron.

        • mcmcmc4 hours ago
          > he seems like someone who maybe regularly placates people to avoid personal problems and lies to get out of trouble rather than a Machiavellian tech baron.

          This would be more plausible were it not for the staggering amount of wealth he’s amassed through those lies.

        • mrhottakes4 hours ago
          When someone tells you who they are, you should believe them.
        • jjulius4 hours ago
          > ... I still kind of want to try to believe he's not.

          Asking genuinely - why?

          • hx84 hours ago
            What if it's actually super-intelligence and a human aligned visionary is at the helm. The good case is very good.
            • deaton27 minutes ago
              If he's our representative in the era of superintelligence, we are all screwed.
            • saulpwan hour ago
              I mean what if he's actually the second coming of Christ. We can make up "what if"s all day but it's meaningless to even discuss them if you don't have a shred of evidence to support the claim.
              • hx8an hour ago
                Exactly. The second coming of Christ would be a very good case.

                Why people want to believe Altman is good is about the same reason people want to believe in the second coming.

                • hluskaan hour ago
                  I’m really struggling to see how Christian apocalyptic ideas are even remotely relevant.

                  We used to be capable of so much.

              • latexr12 minutes ago
                > I mean what if he's actually the second coming of Christ.

                Makes sense. Cue Don LaFontaine: In a world, where one man sacrificed himself for all of humanity… And they learned nothing of his lessons… In a country where people lie in his name as an excuse to hate their fellow man… Where they mock him by wearing his moment of death as jewellery¹… He’s back and adopted a new identity to slowly fuck them all and make the world burn… Johnny W Pussyfoot is Jesus in: The Second Coming.

                ¹ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJSZcxXe7IQ

            • estearum2 hours ago
              Uhh literally what is one thing Sam has done or said that demonstrates he's either human-aligned or visionary?
            • latexr2 hours ago
              Come on… The guy who said he can’t imagine caring for his child without consulting ChatGPT… The guy who said he didn’t know how to make revenue with ChatGPT, and made a “soft promise” to investors they’d somehow achieve AGI then ask it how to make money… The guy who made a cryptocurrency scam that was banned in multiple countries… The guy who everyone around him says he’s a con artist and a sociopath… That guy? Really?
        • grey-areaan hour ago
          His own sister accused him of sexual assault.

          He was fired from his first startup.

          He was abruptly fired from ycombinator in shady circumstances.

          He was accused by the OpenAI board of lying to them, ousted, and somehow managed to regain control.

          He took OpenAI from being a non-profit to a for-profit, with obvious benefits to whoever controls it.

          He was massively misleading about the capabilities of his product and predicted AGI within years.

          At some point the pattern of all these events should have some weight in your judgement of him, no?

        • elmomle4 hours ago
          He will say whatever it takes to get the result he wants. That's manipulative and, when pursued as a lifestyle, sociopathic.

          Living like that is corrupting. When you treat humans like objects, the question of your starting intentions is really secondary.

          • genxya minute ago
            I like his tactic of talking to everyone individually to be able to tell each person exactly what they want to hear. I now use that one all the time.
          • s1artibartfast4 hours ago
            what did he do to you?
        • bfivyvysj4 hours ago
          We already reached agi a while ago.
    • fauigerzigerk4 hours ago
      >The problem is introduced in Altman's case if (a) there was no disclosure (red flag)

      The article says the investments were disclosed:

      "OpenAI board chairman Bret Taylor defended Altman in a court hearing Monday, testifying that Altman had been “forthright” and “proactive and transparent” about his involvements in other companies. Altman recused himself from recent discussions about a deal between OpenAI and Helion as well, The Wall Street Journal reported."

    • randerson5 hours ago
      Even if the board votes in favor, wouldn't it be tax evasion to fund a for-profit corporation using a 503(c)(3) - which is tax deductible for donors?
      • yieldcrv4 hours ago
        No, non profits can invest in anything. Publicly traded stocks are c-corps too, thats how endowments grow. There is nothing that distinguishes liquid vs illiquid c-corp shares.

        Regarding founder ownership, the rules are extremely flexible like a non profit director can’t own more than 20 voting or 35% total of the business venture

        but if it happens then it just needs to be remedied within 3 years

        so for venture style deals that’s plenty of time to dilute down, and the little known secret in the startup space is that the founders non profit steps in as the lead investor, so all the other investors arent just twiddling their thumbs waiting for a founder to convince someone, it just closes. Other investors dilute founder and non profit, everything is compliant, value is created. Both for profit and non profit side will be tax free, due to QSBS

      • s1artibartfast4 hours ago
        some of the largest for profit investors are non-profits.

        It is all about if you can get the money back out.

    • cyanydeez4 hours ago
      no, the thesis is: can the fascists control sam altman.
    • ajross4 hours ago
      That is emphatically NOT the thesis of the linked article. That's the argument made by the politicians being quoted and enumerated. What the article is trying to tell you is that these actions are entirely partisan, and reflect the desires and statements of the largest and wealthiest republican donor, who happens to own a competing interest.

      You can think Altman is a bad person and OpenAI is something of a scam and still recognize that using the government as a tool to corruptly hobble your competition is a horrifyingly bad thing.

      These are awful times we live in, I really fear what we'll have to be telling our grandkids. Will it be just a cautionary tale about the dangers of populism and partisanship or will it be sad, wistful tales about how much better things were... "before"?

  • SkipperCat6 hours ago
    I can't help but think that this is due to Musk putting pressure on the current administration to help him win his lawsuit and punish Altman.
    • avaer6 hours ago
      Personal vendettas between the world's most powerful psychopaths playing out in the stock market while everyone else suffers does seem like the current meta. So it makes sense.
      • shimman4 hours ago
        I'm all for it, let them attack each other and hopefully the backlash will elect a labor President to turn the final screws on knee capping big tech for the next 50 years.
        • steve_adams_862 hours ago
          How do you knee cap big tech when other countries continue to push forward with it?
          • _verandaguy24 minutes ago
            IMHO: when an emerging technology threatens the livelihoods of millions, it's responsible and ethical to step away from seeing this stuff through a purely competitive lens.

            Out of the three big geographic players, the US and China are jockeying for "most performant" models (whatever that means) with two separate approaches; the EU is trying to develop models that work best within their privacy, human rights and labour rights frameworks and laws.

            All of these have have merits, though arguably the US's (de-facto) strategy of market dominance at any cost with as few restraints as possible will be the worst for society at large. The prudent thing to do would be to first determine if this is something that will actually live up to the hype (which IMO is still very much in the air), and then if it does, turns this into an international collaboration rather than a competitive enterprise.

            It's not lost on me that this is a terminally naive point of view.

          • jayd16an hour ago
            You don't need to cap the technological process. You can simply curb the power of corrupt individuals. If anything it would accelerate progress.
          • mindslightan hour ago
            Why did we knee cap CIA/NSA/DOD from nominally operating on Americans when the Soviet Union continued to push forward with it?

            For what it's worth, our once-and-(hopefully)-future allies the European Union are already on board with reigning in the surveillance industry (leading by example, even). So your question is more like how can we constrain our domestic technological authoritarians when China continues to embrace theirs. And the answer is that it's not a "how". The "how" is straightforwardly enforcing longstanding concepts like personal information, antitrust bundling, unauthorized access (backdoors in sold products), etc. So your question comes down to more of a why, and the why is because it is in line with our values based around individual liberty.

        • mindslight2 hours ago
          Democrats being only slightly less beholden to corporate interests and functioning as controlled opposition is exactly how we've gotten to the point we're at. I'd like to be optimistic and say that the backlash from the second Trump catastrophe will be a full 8 years of simmering authoritarianism rather than the current rolling boil, but that wasn't even true after 2020. I think media saturation has gotten so strong that people are just so much easier to lead around by the nose. For example look at how many continuing hardcore Trump supporters there still are, even in the face of appalling abject failures like his choosing to simply give away the Strait of Hormuz of Iran. They've got ever-shifting rationalizations streaming into their brains 24/7.
          • platevoltage2 minutes ago
            Yup. that's why we need new Democrats.
      • ourmandave2 hours ago
        If only there were some way to bet on the outcome...
      • threethirtytwo5 hours ago
        God why do people frame things in such extremes? Neither person is a psychopath. If anyone is closer to a psychopath it’s Altman, but he doesn’t completely fit the monicker.
        • aerhardt3 hours ago
          For all his weirdness and moral failings, I don’t see Altman saying things like whites being under apartheid in the US. And worse. Multiple times a day. Every day.
        • danaw3 hours ago
          would you prefer sociopath? they're willing to lie to accumulate massive wealth irrespective of the harm.
        • thinkingtoilet4 hours ago
          They are absolutely psychopaths. These are people that will flagrantly lie to your face and feel no remorse. They cause mass suffering and feel no remorse. They don't have empathy. They don't have normal human emotions.
        • skeeter20204 hours ago
          When you're arguing the degree to which such powerful people fit the definition of psychopath, you're at extremes. You've just been in the warming pot too long to see it.
          • threethirtytwo4 hours ago
            [flagged]
            • mrhottakes4 hours ago
              Have you asked all the legit clinical psychologists? Or are you just making things up because you're emotional?
            • hgoel4 hours ago
              So, now we need a clinical diagnosis to call evil people psychopaths or we're unhinged? Do you apply the same high standards to any of the garbage these guys spew or to the impacts of their projects?
              • shimman4 hours ago
                The people that have made decisions leading to the direct deaths of millions of people AREN'T evil! There's no clinical definition of evil in the DSM, so they can't be evil you see.
            • CamperBob23 hours ago
              At least one clinical psychologist might disagree with you there: https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/08/opinions/mary-trump-book-dang...
        • tremon4 hours ago
          Haven't you heard? Psychopath, like Pedophile, is a mere epithet these days, to indicate a person's favoured status with the in-crowd. In contrast to the equally meaningless epithet "woke".
          • JumpCrisscross4 hours ago
            > like Pedophile

            I really wouldn’t conflate these two. People with documented allegations of child rape are in a separate category from diagnosed-over-the-TV types.

          • danaw3 hours ago
            who's calling people pedos that don't at least have credible allegations against them of that crime (eg trump)?
            • lawn22 minutes ago
              Musk has a history.
          • tombert3 hours ago
            Outside of Elon Musk's Twitter, I think pedophile is actually used pretty appropriately in most spots.
      • MrBuddyCasino5 hours ago
        How does everyone else suffer? We’re getting subsidized compute.
        • mrhottakes5 hours ago
          Look around at the country right now
          • boringg5 hours ago
            Nothing to do with Altman v Musk. That would be an AI boom that would be going full steam ahead without either of them.
            • Arainach4 hours ago
              Almost no one in the country is feeling a boom. Everyone is feeling the consequences of their greed and recklessness.
              • scottyahan hour ago
                AI is the only thing keeping the S&P afloat. You don't want to see what it would look like when all pensions numbers start going down. So far it's fake numbers from inflation and the value is decreasing dramatically, but at least they still go up.
                • Arainachan hour ago
                  I very much do want to see. A necessary step to fix our problems is for people to stop lying to themselves and thinking things are "going fine".

                  A plurality of American voters are stubborn and stupid and won't change their ways until they feel direct pain, so bring the pain.

              • boringg4 hours ago
                huh? What are you are referring to is the lasting impacts of multiple years of inflation after living without it for 10 years. Those issues predate Musk v. Altman and would be happening without them.

                AI build out / boom would be full bore without them.

                • Arainach2 hours ago
                  There is no boom. There are massive layoffs, massive inflation, and massive cuts to government services - all caused by the actions of Musk, Altman, and those like them.
                  • boringgan hour ago
                    Saying there is no AI boom? You are either lying to yourself or not paying attention to whats whappening.

                    Are there problems? Absolutely - there have been problems at every single second of humanity. We will always be plagued with problems at some times worse than others. That does not mean that there isn't a boom at the same time.

            • ambicapter4 hours ago
              The AI boom started a war with Iran and dismantled American public institutions?
              • 4 hours ago
                undefined
            • mrhottakes4 hours ago
              Musk has a lot to do with the state of the country right now. Do you read the news?
              • boringg4 hours ago
                You are really giving him a lot of credit here. Thats mostly the news cycle doing what it does - focusing on the big stories and loudest speakers.
                • manphone4 hours ago
                  He ran a government institution that recklessly cut public spending and hurt us all. What are you talking about?
                  • swingboy2 hours ago
                    DOGE only cut like $7 billion dollars which is nothing in the bigger picture.
                    • kccoder26 minutes ago
                      Their ineffectiveness at reducing the debt doesn't indicate the changes they made didn't have an outsized effect on many lives. USAID for example.
                • mrhottakes2 hours ago
                  He was the de facto head of an effort to drastically cut the federal government, and he's donated hundreds of millions of dollars to get Trump and Trump-adjacent people elected. I ask again: do you read the news?
          • MrBuddyCasino2 hours ago
            These are the kind of hot takes Bluesky needs to hear. And lets be honest you already have an account there.
            • solid_fuelan hour ago
              Yeah good job man, stick your head back in the sand. That'll help.
        • jayd16an hour ago
          Would be nice if we could just afford things instead.
        • latexr2 hours ago
  • graemep5 hours ago
    > The moves follow an April article in The Wall Street Journal that detailed Altman’s efforts to have OpenAI back companies he personally invested in.

    Sounds a bit like Wework.

    • bombcar4 hours ago
      To be fair, a big part of being in Y Combinator itself is being "heavily encouraged" to use products from other Y Combinators. You just have to do it openly.
      • graemep4 hours ago
        Networking and relationship building is fine. its when it goes beyond that, and in particular when there are conflicts of interest, it becomes a problem. Altman seems to have had similar issues when he was at YC: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may...

        Doing business with companies connected to the CEO often creates a conflict of interest. it could all be OK, of course, but OpenAI investing in companies that Altman has already invested in does not look great and needs to be investigated.

    • baggachipz5 hours ago
      Everything about OpenAI sounds like WeWork. Can't wait to see that S1, I'll need a truckload of popcorn.
  • pj_mukh5 hours ago
    So, the protection racket is not working? [1] Maybe some folks need to re-think whether this administration is worth "donating" to?

    [1]: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/openai-exec-becomes-top-trump...

    • dmix5 hours ago
      This story is about congressmen and state attorneys calling for an SEC investigation, not the executive

      Which was motivated by a WSJ investigation into Sam’s personal dealings https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/chatgpt-openai-ipo-altman-029ae6...

      • pj_mukh5 hours ago
        and famously this executive doesn't over-reach to protect "its own"?
        • dmix4 hours ago
          Your original comment implied that this is a signal that Sam’s influence over the admin hasn’t protected his interests, when that’s still to be seen. The protection racket could still very well benefit him if the SEC ends up taking the case and the admin then tries to interfere with SEC’s independence.
    • laurels-marts5 hours ago
      Are you complaining that government is not corrupt enough?
      • mrhottakes5 hours ago
        That seems like a fairly obvious misreading of the comment.
      • miltonlost5 hours ago
        He's saying "hey, maybe stop donating to Republicans expecting them to help you out when in reality they will screw over anyone but themselves and especially don't donate to them when the GOP is aggressively homophobic and wants to get rid of your existence entirely"
        • tinfoilhatter5 hours ago
          I didn't see anything related to homophobia in the comment or any replies except yours...
          • hdndjsbbs3 hours ago
            There's a strand of white neoliberal gays (Sam, Thiel) who have thrown their lot in with the far-right for economic benefit.

            If any of them read books I would send them a biography of Ernst Röhm

    • throwaway57525 hours ago
      Blackmailers and protection rackets aren't known for being satisfied after a single payment, after they've established someone is willing to pay.

      That is why public corruption is such as plague and one of the reasons the US dollar was seen as a safe store of value once.

  • tlogan4 hours ago
    I am sure that nothing illegal was done here.

    But the fact that OpenAI was a nonprofit and then suddenly became a for-profit is definitely something that does not feel right. I am 100% sure that it is all legal and such, but we have this mental model that “nonprofits are the good guys, run by people who just want to help humanity and nothing else.”

    But that is not true, and probably never was.

    • Petersipoian hour ago
      > I am sure that nothing illegal was done here.

      > I am 100% sure that it is all legal and such

      Why are you so confident on either of these statements? Seems like such a weird thing to be confident about when we know so little about the deals that went down

    • keeganpoppenan hour ago
      could not agree with this take more. it feels like a bait and switch, but not the kind that makes me want to take sharpie to cardboard. it’s just… weird. and i don’t even necessarily think it’s “bad”… it’s just a weird unforced error because openai never “had” to be nonprofit, but they chose that path only to abandon it. just strange. and it makes all their internal docs (especially brockman’s diary, which, as an aside: how the fuck did this shit come up in discovery, and what kind of idiot would say the shit he said in a diary that can come up in discovery like this? i know he is a very smart man, which is what makes it extra hilarious.). but yeah even with how “bad” the various quotes look i’m still mostly on the side of this all being a “nothing-burger”…
    • an0malous3 hours ago
      The whole idea of a non profit never made any sense, it’s conflating the idea of profitability with altruism. These are completely independent things.
      • danaw3 hours ago
        they're not independent; a 501c3 is both a nonprofit and is meant to serve a public good (altruism).
  • voakbasda5 hours ago
    Does anyone really believe this is more than performative? Increasingly the most likely outcome of such scrutiny is… nothing. He hasn’t stolen enough from the rich to earn any sort of punishment, and he’s not doing anything too different from the Congress critters that are “investigating” him.
    • baggachipz5 hours ago
      When his company goes tits-up and connected investors lose billions, he'll suddenly face punishment.
    • boringg5 hours ago
      "hasn’t stolen enough from the rich to earn any sort of punishment". Do you truly believe this is how the world works?
      • bluefirebrand5 hours ago
        Its definitely how America works right now
      • JumpCrisscross5 hours ago
        > Do you truly believe this is how the world works?

        It’s a popular meme in Silicon Valley. Hence all the stealing.

  • 1vuio0pswjnm73 hours ago
    Alternative to archive.ph

    Text-only, HTTPS optional

    No CAPTCHA, no Javascript, no geo-blocking, no DDoS directed at blog

    https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA22Xx2j...

    Something like

       x=https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA22Xx2j/
       tnftp -4o"|sed 's/.*\"body\":\"/<meta charset=utf-8>/;s/\",\"readTimeMin.*//'" $x > 1.htm
       firefox ./1.htm
    
    or

       links https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA22Xx2j/
       Press "d" then "\"
    
    or

       links -dump https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA22Xx2j/ \
       |sed '1,/\"body\":\"/d;/\"readTimeMin\":/,$d'
  • skeeter20204 hours ago
    The Internet is borked.

    Verification Required

    The visual verification might not be accessible to you. We recommend you to use the audio verification instead. Important: after clicking play, you will hear 6 digits. Please wait until the audio finishes before typing or interacting with the page. No Internet access Why is this verification required? Something about the behaviour of the browser has caught our attention.

    There are various possible explanations for this:

        you are browsing and clicking at a speed much faster than expected of a human being
        something is preventing Javascript from working on your computer
        there is a robot on the same network (IP 96.51.144.101) as you
    
    Need help?

    ID: 85804002-38eb-95f6-1a32-828ec222a8fb

  • ghostlyy3 hours ago
    Timing's also worth nothing. the investments piece has been reported on for over a year. It becomes a probe right before liquidity, which makes both sides look opportunistic rather than principled.
  • bluecheese4524 hours ago
    Ah a shakedown. He will make the required donation and this will go away.
  • ms_anal_tam5 hours ago
    Demand his AI chat history be made public!
  • giwookan hour ago
    Unfortunately whatever scrutiny Sam Altman comes under can be waved away with Trump's magic wand.
  • kevmo2 hours ago
    They aren't going to do a thing to Altman except extract more bribes.
  • righthand3 hours ago
    How can anyone take the GOP seriously when they constantly back one of the biggest frauds of the American people who is also a pedophile rapist? Perhaps Sam should embrace that sexual assault allegation from his sister. That seems to be the type of person the GOP supports.
  • baggachipz3 hours ago
    > Business Dealings Under GOP Scrutiny

    Is this even a thing anymore?

  • 5 hours ago
    undefined
  • noelsusman4 hours ago
    The notion that this GOP Oversight Committee sincerely cares about corruption is obviously laughable, so I can only assume this is all being done at Elon's behest.
  • tithos3 hours ago
    GREAT NEWS!!!
  • jqpabc1236 hours ago
    This can easily be resolved by a sustantial purchase of Trump family crypto.
  • metalliqaz4 hours ago
    Altman is a consummate liar and insatiably greedy. The GOP will welcome him in. The downfall will hurt many.

    In the words of Hitchens, "Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife."

  • emmanuelsemugga6 hours ago
    [flagged]
  • fred_is_fred5 hours ago
    Is this why Claude recommended that I use a Trump phone when I use it?
  • andijati2an hour ago
    Why did we knee cap CIA/NSA/DOD from nominally operating on Americans when the Soviet Union continued to push forward with it? For what it's worth, our once-and-(hopefully)-future allies the European Union are already on board with reigning in the surveillance industry (leading by example, even). So your question is more like how can we constrain our domestic technological authoritarians when China continues to embrace theirs. And the straightforward answer is that it's not a "how" but rather a why - because it is in line with our values based around individual liberty. https://peerlist.io/andifurn_dev/posts