We now know how much Tesla paid as it released its annual proxy statement on Wednesday morning, which includes a section on “related person transactions” the company has made.
Tesla has also paid X around $50,000 in 2023 and $30,000 through February 2024 for “commercial, consulting and support agreements.” Likewise, X paid Tesla $1 million in 2023 and around $20,000 through February 2024 for the same unspecified work.
Tesla paid Musk’s tunneling effort, The Boring Company, $200,000 in 2023 and $1 million through February 2024.
“The Committee and its counsel are aware of the media narrative regarding Musk, Tesla, and its Board,” the committee writes in the proxy.
“And the Committee’s work was conducted against a backdrop of unrelenting public interest in whether Tesla would reincorporate and in Musk’s compensation.
Elon Musk’s decision to green light a robotaxi over an affordable EV might cost the company its lead.
Last week, Musk reportedly canned the effort in favor of a robotaxi, the sort of pie-in-the-sky project that defined his first decade at the helm.
Tesla was reportedly on the cusp of building a $25,000 EV.
Given flagging sales of the company’s existing product line, it would have been a welcome shot in the arm.
It also would have given the company a product to hold its ground against a predicted onslaught of inexpensive Chinese EVs.
Following Elon Musk’s xAI’s move to open source its Grok large language model earlier in March, the X owner on Tuesday said that the company formerly known as Twitter will soon offer the Grok chatbot to more paying subscribers.
In a post on X, Musk announced Grok will become available to Premium subscribers this week, not just those on the higher-end tier, Premium+, as before.
Previously, Grok was only available to Premium+ subscribers, at $16 per month or a hefty $168 per year.
Most notably, Grok has the ability to access real-time X data — something rivals can’t offer.
Of course, the value of that data under Musk’s reign may be diminishing if X is losing users.
A federal judge sided against Elon Musk today, dismissing a lawsuit brought by Musk and X that targeted a nonprofit that researches online hate.
In the lawsuit, X claimed that it lost “tens of millions of dollars” as a direct result of the CCDH’s research.
Musk, who personally directed the lawsuit, called the CCDH “an evil propaganda machine” in replies on X.
The nonprofit, formed in 2018, researches trends in hate speech, extremism and misinformation on major social networks.
Unlike the CCDH lawsuit, X is suing Media Matters for America in Texas, which doesn’t share California’s protections against frivolous lawsuits designed to stifle free speech.
Elon Musk’s xAI released its Grok large language model as “open source” over the weekend.
But does releasing the code for something like Grok actually contribute to the AI development community?
This isn’t the first time the terms “open” and “open source” have been questioned or abused in the AI world.
So where does xAI’s Grok release fall on this spectrum?
Is his nascent AI company really dedicated to open source development?
Listen here or wherever you get your podcasts.
Hello, and welcome back to Equity, the podcast about the business of startups, where we unpack the numbers and nuance behind the headlines.
This is our Monday show, in which we take a look back at the weekend and what’s ahead in the week.
Over the weekend, we dropped an interview with Roger Lee that is well worth your time, and here’s our take on Reddit’s IPO financials.
Here’s what we got into today:
Elon Musk’s crusade against the extremism research organization the Center for Countering Digital Hate will have its day in court on Thursday.
After Musk’s takeover of Twitter, the CCDH published reports detailing rising hate speech on X and how unbanned accounts, including neo-Nazi Andrew Anglin, stood to make the company millions in ad revenue.
Unlike the CCDH lawsuit, X is suing Media Matters for America in Texas, which doesn’t have California’s anti-SLAPP protections.
A loss in court for the CCDH would likely have an immediate chilling effect on researchers who track hate speech and misinformation on social media.
“This ridiculous lawsuit is a textbook example of a wealthy, unaccountable company weaponizing the courts to silence researchers, simply for studying the spread of hate speech, misinformation and extremism online,” Ahmed said.
X, formerly known as Twitter, said Wednesday it is withholding specific accounts and posts in India, action it said the firm disagrees with, in response to executive orders issued by the Indian government.
Non-compliance with the executive orders, X said, would have subjected the firm to “potential penalties including significant fines and imprisonment.”X’s Global Government Affairs said legal restrictions prevent it from publishing the executive orders, but “we believe that making them public is essential for transparency.” X will file a writ appeal challenging the Indian government’s blocking orders, it said, and has notified users who are impacted by the orders.
The disclosure from X follows New Delhi ordering to temporarily block about 177 accounts and posts surrounding farmers’ protests in the country.
As privacy advocate Apar Gupta wrote in a recent post on X:Blocking orders for Twitter accounts of farm leaders have been issued in advance.
This is not surprising, what does provide anguish is the vile commentary against farmers on social media.
In an announcement today, X shared its roadmap for the year ahead, which will include AI-powered experiences and the launch of peer-to-peer payments, among other initiatives.
In Musk’s vision, X users will be able to send money to others on the platform and extract those funds to authenticated bank accounts.
In the X blog post published today, the company claims it will launch peer-to-peer payments this year, to unlock “more user utility and new opportunities for commerce,” suggesting a tie-in with other X products, like creator revenue sharing and online shopping.
The latter has been a particular source of concern for X advertisers, who have found that despite X’s measures, their ads were placed next to toxic content or hate speech, leading many to withdraw.
80,000+ creators have also received payouts via X’s revenue-sharing program in under a year’s time, but X did not provide a figure.
The bill also mandates biometric verification for subscribers and restricts the number of SIM cards each subscriber uses to limit fraud.
The legacy of the old scammers in the telecom sector will be left behind, and arrangements will be made through this bill to make the telecom sector a sunrise sector,” Ashwini Vaishnaw, the Indian telecom minister, said while introducing the bill in the parliament.
Interestingly, the telecom bill excludes the term “OTT,” available in its initial draft last year, indicating regulations for over-the-top (OTT) messaging apps such as WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram.
“The bill is regressive as it enhances the government’s colonial-era powers to intercept communications and shut down the internet.
It undermines end-to-end encryption, which is crucial for privacy,” said Namrata Maheshwari, Asia Pacific Policy Counsel at Access Now, in a prepared statement.
