{ "name": "Elon Mails", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails", "mcp": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/mcp", "updated": "2026-10-02", "count": 156, "emails": [ { "id": "2006-07-18-musk-to-harrigan-press-coverage", "date": "2006-07-18", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Mike Harrigan" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "The way that my role as been portrayed to date, where I am referred to merely as \"an early investor\" is outrageous. That would be like Martin [Eberhard] being called an \"early employee.\"\nApart from me leading the Series A & B and co-leading the Series C, my influence on the car itself runs from the headlights to the styling to the door sill to the trunk, and my strong interest in electric transport predates Tesla by a decade. Martin should certainly be the front and center guy, but the portrayal of my role to date has been incredibly insulting.\n\nI'm not blaming you or others at Tesla — the media is difficult to control. However, we need to make a serious effort to correct this perception.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tesla-press-2006", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla press/communications lead", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Eberhard v. Musk court documents, as published by Business Insider (Nov 12, 2014), via Yahoo Finance", "source_url": "https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-sent-angry-emails-210500673.html", "case": "Eberhard v. Musk, Tesla Motors, No. CIV484400 (San Mateo County Super. Ct.)", "context": "Emails Musk sent to Tesla staff in July 2006 about how his role at Tesla was being described in press coverage of the Roadster launch. The excerpt begins mid-email; the opening was not published.", "tags": [ "communication", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 1, "bates": "EMX-000001", "slug": "2006-07-18-musk-to-harrigan-press-coverage", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2006-07-18-musk-to-harrigan-press-coverage" }, { "id": "2006-07-20-musk-to-harrigan-nyt-article", "date": "2006-07-20", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Mike Harrigan" ], "cc": [ "Martin Eberhard" ], "subject": "", "body": "I was incredibly insulted and embarrassed by the NY Times article [...] where I am not merely unmentioned, but where Martin is actually referred to as the chairman. If anything like this happens again, please consider the PCGC [public relations firm] relationship with Tesla to end immediately upon publication of such a piece. Please ensure that the NYT publishes a correction as soon as possible.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tesla-press-2006", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla press/communications lead, cc Tesla CEO", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Eberhard v. Musk court documents, as published by Business Insider (Nov 12, 2014), via Yahoo Finance", "source_url": "https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-sent-angry-emails-210500673.html", "case": "Eberhard v. Musk, Tesla Motors, No. CIV484400 (San Mateo County Super. Ct.)", "context": "Musk wrote after a New York Times report on the July 2006 Tesla Roadster debut party described Martin Eberhard as chairman. Only the segments quoted by Business Insider are reproduced, joined with [...].", "tags": [ "communication", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 2, "bates": "EMX-000002", "slug": "2006-07-20-musk-to-harrigan-nyt-article", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2006-07-20-musk-to-harrigan-nyt-article" }, { "id": "2007-08-09-musk-to-board-fw-meeting", "date": "2007-08-09", "time": "8:56 AM PST", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jim Marver", "Ira Ehrenpreis", "Antonio J. Gracias", "Kimbal Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Fw: meeting", "body": "This is not good. Sounds like there are more issues that the board was not informed about. I will send out a note as soon as I talk with Marks and will ask him to email an assessment to the board as soon as he can.\n\nMartin seems to be focused on his public image and position within Tesla, rather than solving these critical problems. If you should speak with Martin, please urge him to spend all his energy on making sure that the Roadster works and arrives on time. He doesn’t seem to understand that the best way to maximize his reputation and position within the company is to help get this right.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "eberhard-dispute-2007", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla board of directors and CFO-level recipients", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk blog post on Tesla.com responding to Eberhard lawsuit (June 22, 2009), excerpt as quoted by TechCrunch", "source_url": "https://techcrunch.com/2009/06/22/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-sets-the-record-straight-about-pending-lawsuit/", "case": null, "context": "One of several emails Musk included in a June 2009 Tesla blog post answering Martin Eberhard’s lawsuit; it concerns the Roadster program in 2007. TechCrunch reproduced selected excerpts of the post.", "tags": [ "management", "manufacturing", "legal" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 3, "bates": "EMX-000003", "slug": "2007-08-09-musk-to-board-fw-meeting", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2007-08-09-musk-to-board-fw-meeting" }, { "id": "2008-08-02-musk-to-spacex-employees-falcon1-flight3", "date": "2008-08-02", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "SpaceX employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Plan Going Forward\nIt was obviously a big disappointment not to reach orbit on this flight [Falcon 1, Flight 3]. On the plus side, the flight of our first stage, with the new Merlin 1C engine that will be used in Falcon 9, was picture perfect. Unfortunately, a problem occurred with stage separation, causing the stages to be held together. This is under investigation and I will send out a note as soon as we understand exactly what happened.\nThe most important message I’d like to send right now is that SpaceX will not skip a beat in execution going forward. We have flight four of Falcon 1 almost ready for flight and flight five right behind that. I have also given the go ahead to begin fabrication of flight six. Falcon 9 development will also continue unabated, taking into account the lessons learned with Falcon 1. We have made great progress this past week with the successful nine engine firing.\nAs a precautionary measure to guard against the possibility of flight 3 not reaching orbit, SpaceX recently accepted a significant investment. Combined with our existing cash reserves, that ensures we will have more than sufficient funding on hand to continue launching Falcon 1 and develop Falcon 9 and Dragon. There should be absolutely zero question that SpaceX will prevail in reaching orbit and demonstrating reliable space transport. For my part, I will never give up and I mean never.\nThanks for your hard work and now on to flight four.\n--Elon--", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "SpaceX", "audience": "All SpaceX employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Universe Today, 'Elon Musk: \"I Will Never Give Up\" After Falcon 1 Loss' (Aug 3 2008), full text of Musk's statement to employees, credited 'Source: SpaceX'", "source_url": "https://www.universetoday.com/articles/elon-musk-i-will-never-give-up-after-falcon-1-loss", "case": null, "context": "Sent to employees on the day of the third Falcon 1 flight, in which the first stage performed as planned but the stages did not separate and the vehicle did not reach orbit.", "tags": [ "strategy", "communication", "engineering" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 4, "bates": "EMX-000004", "slug": "2008-08-02-musk-to-spacex-employees-falcon1-flight3", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2008-08-02-musk-to-spacex-employees-falcon1-flight3" }, { "id": "2008-10-16-musk-to-tesla-customers-extraordinary-times", "date": "2008-10-16", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Tesla customers and reservation holders" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "These are extraordinary times. The global financial system has gone through the worst crisis since the Great Depression, and the effects are only beginning to wind their way through every facet of the economy. It’s not an understatement to say that nearly every business will be impacted by what has unfolded in the past weeks, and this is true for Silicon Valley as well.\n\nAt Tesla, we have decided that the wise course of action is to focus on our two revenue producing business lines — the Roadster and powertrain sales to other car companies. In the Roadster, Tesla has a unique product with a large order book that continues to grow, despite softness in the automobile sector. Our powertrain business is profitable today and is also growing rapidly.\n\nOur goal as a company is to be cash-flow positive within six to nine months. To do so, we must continue to ramp up our production rate, improve Roadster contribution margin and reduce operating expenses. At the same time, we must maintain high production quality and excellent customer service.\n\nFor this critical phase of the company, the scope of my role at Tesla will expand from executive chairman and product architect to CEO. With SpaceX now having reached orbit and about to enter its third year of profitability, I can afford to increase time allocated to Tesla. Ze’ev Drori, who has made extraordinary progress with the company over the last year as CEO, will stay on the board of directors as vice-chairman and continue to help Tesla make the right decisions. It has been and will continue to be a pleasure and an honor working with Ze’ev.\n\nSpecial Forces Philosophy and Consolidation of Operations\n\nOne of the steps I will be taking is raising the performance bar at Tesla to a very high level, which will result in a modest reduction in near term headcount. To be clear, this doesn’t mean that the people that depart Tesla for this reason wouldn’t be considered good performers at most companies — almost all would. However, I believe Tesla must adhere more closely to a special forces philosophy at this stage of its life if we aspire to become one of the great car companies of the 21st century.\n\nThere will also be some headcount reduction due to consolidation of operations. In anticipation of moving vehicle engineering to our new HQ in San Jose, we are ramping down and will close our Rochester Hills office near Detroit. Good communication, tightly knit engineering and a common company culture are of paramount importance as Tesla grows.\n\nWhat Does This Mean for the Model S?\n\nTesla is absolutely committed to development of our next generation vehicle, to be unveiled early next year. However, we are going to reduce activity on detailed production engineering, tooling and commitments to suppliers until our Department of Energy loan guarantee becomes effective.\n\nThe DOE loan guarantee will cover most of the Model S program at a very low cost of capital compared with raising equity financing in what could quaintly be described as a “bear market.” The loan funding can only be drawn down after we receive environmental approval for our new 89-acre consolidated headquarters in the city of San Jose. If all goes reasonably well, we will receive that approval in Q2 next year.\n\nThe net result will be a delay in start of production of the Model S of roughly six months to mid-2011. On the plus side, we will spend the extra time refining the vehicle design and powertrain technology, so the car will end up being slightly better.\n\nFinancing\n\nThe Tesla investors and I are unequivocally dedicated to ensuring the success of Tesla. Please know that I personally stand behind delivering a product that you will love and continuing to develop new models in the future. We are not far from being cash flow positive, but, even if that threshold ends up being further than expected, I will do whatever is needed to ensure that Tesla has more than sufficient capital to get there.\n\nI’d like to thank you, as a loyal customer of Tesla that has stood by us through thick and thin. Beyond delivering a great Roadster, Tesla will find other ways to reward that loyalty, including among other things an exclusive preview of our upcoming Model S sedan.\n\nShould you have any questions about the actions Tesla is taking in these extraordinary times please contact me directly at [email address removed].\n\nElon Musk", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla customers (mass email); this copy republished by a recipient on Medium", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Mass email from Elon Musk to Tesla customers, republished by recipient Alastair Campbell on Medium (Wayback copy)", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/2023/https://medium.com/@alastaircampbell/different-days-back-then-2523a822a593", "case": null, "context": "Sent during the 2008 financial crisis, announcing that Musk was becoming Tesla CEO, a focus on the Roadster and powertrain businesses, headcount reductions and a delay to the Model S.", "tags": [ "fundraising", "strategy", "communication", "firing" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 5, "bates": "EMX-000005", "slug": "2008-10-16-musk-to-tesla-customers-extraordinary-times", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2008-10-16-musk-to-tesla-customers-extraordinary-times" }, { "id": "2012-musk-to-tesla-employees-ultra-hardcore", "date": "2012", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Ultra hardcore", "body": "Please prepare yourself for a level of intensity that is greater than anything most of you have experienced before. Revolutionizing industries is not for the faint of heart.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees, during the Model S production ramp", "source_type": "book", "source_title": "Walter Isaacson, \"Elon Musk\" (2023), passage quoted in Tanay Jaipuria, \"Decoding Elon Musk\" (Tanay's Newsletter, Jan 30 2024); date per Ben Tarnoff, NYRB, \"Ultra Hardcore\" (Jan 18 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.tanayj.com/p/decoding-elon-musk", "case": null, "context": "Isaacson describes this as an email to employees titled \"Ultra hardcore\" sent as the Model S production line ramped up, and the NYRB review places it before a speedup in 2012. Only the portion quoted from the book is reproduced; the full email is not given in the sources fetched.", "tags": [ "management", "culture", "manufacturing", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 6, "bates": "EMX-000006", "slug": "2012-musk-to-tesla-employees-ultra-hardcore", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2012-musk-to-tesla-employees-ultra-hardcore" }, { "id": "2012-11-musk-to-epstein-island-visit", "date": "2012-11", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jeffrey Epstein" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Probably just Talulah and me,\n[...]\nWhat day/night will be the wildest party on =our island?", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "musk-epstein-2012", "company": "Other", "audience": "Jeffrey Epstein (personal correspondence)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "TIME, 'Elon Musk's Emails to Jeffrey Epstein Revealed in Latest File Release' (Jan 31 2026), quoting files released by the U.S. Justice Department Jan 30 2026; web.archive.org copy fetched; quoted fragments only", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/2026/https://time.com/7362868/elon-musk-epstein-emails/", "case": "Epstein Files Transparency Act release, U.S. Department of Justice (Jan 30 2026)", "context": "One of 16 Musk-Epstein emails from 2012-2013 in the DOJ Epstein files release. Replying to a question about how many people would 'heli to island,' per TIME (which dates it Nov 24; CBS dates it Nov 25). TIME and NBC report no indication of wrongdoing by Musk. 'On =our' is as printed by TIME.", "tags": [ "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 7, "bates": "EMX-000007", "slug": "2012-11-musk-to-epstein-island-visit", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2012-11-musk-to-epstein-island-visit" }, { "id": "2012-12-25-musk-to-epstein-parties", "date": "2012-12-25", "time": "6 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jeffrey Epstein" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "any parties planned?\n[...]\nI’ve been working to the edge of sanity this year and so, once my kids head home after Christmas, I really want to hit the party scene in St Barts or elsewhere and let loose. The invitation is much appreciated, but a peaceful island experience is the opposite of what I’m looking for.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "musk-epstein-2012", "company": "Other", "audience": "Jeffrey Epstein (personal correspondence)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "TIME, 'Elon Musk's Emails to Jeffrey Epstein Revealed in Latest File Release' (Jan 31 2026), quoting files released by the U.S. Justice Department Jan 30 2026; web.archive.org copy fetched; quoted fragments only", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/2026/https://time.com/7362868/elon-musk-epstein-emails/", "case": "Epstein Files Transparency Act release, U.S. Department of Justice (Jan 30 2026)", "context": "Christmas Day 2012 email in the DOJ Epstein files release, per TIME. TIME and NBC report no indication of wrongdoing by Musk. Text partial.", "tags": [ "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 8, "bates": "EMX-000008", "slug": "2012-12-25-musk-to-epstein-parties", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2012-12-25-musk-to-epstein-parties" }, { "id": "2013-12-14-musk-to-epstein-good-time-to-visit", "date": "2013-12-14", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jeffrey Epstein" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Will be in the BVI/St Bart’s area over the holidays. Is there a good time to visit?", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "musk-epstein-2013", "company": "Other", "audience": "Jeffrey Epstein (personal correspondence)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "TIME, 'Elon Musk's Emails to Jeffrey Epstein Revealed in Latest File Release' (Jan 31 2026), quoting files released by the U.S. Justice Department Jan 30 2026; web.archive.org copy fetched; quoted fragment only", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/2026/https://time.com/7362868/elon-musk-epstein-emails/", "case": "Epstein Files Transparency Act release, U.S. Department of Justice (Jan 30 2026)", "context": "December 2013 email in the DOJ Epstein files release, per TIME (heading dates it Dec 14). Epstein later cancelled, per TIME. TIME and NBC report no indication of wrongdoing by Musk. Text partial.", "tags": [ "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 9, "bates": "EMX-000009", "slug": "2013-12-14-musk-to-epstein-good-time-to-visit", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2013-12-14-musk-to-epstein-good-time-to-visit" }, { "id": "2015-05-25-musk-to-altman", "date": "2015-05-25", "time": "11:09 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "question", "body": "Probably worth a conversation", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-founding-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Altman's May 25, 2015 proposal for a nonprofit AI lab backed by Y Combinator.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 10, "bates": "EMX-000010", "slug": "2015-05-25-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-05-25-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2015-05-25-altman-to-musk", "date": "2015-05-25", "time": "9:10 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "question", "body": "Been thinking a lot about whether it's possible to stop humanity from developing AI.\n\nI think the answer is almost definitely not.\n\nIf it's going to happen anyway, it seems like it would be good for someone other than Google to do it first.\n\nAny thoughts on whether it would be good for YC to start a Manhattan Project for AI? My sense is we could get many of the top ~50 to work on it, and we could structure it so that the tech belongs to the world via some sort of nonprofit but the people working on it get startup-like compensation if it works. Obviously we'd comply with/aggressively support all regulation.\n\nSam", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-founding-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Sam Altman asks Musk whether Y Combinator should start an AI lab structured as a nonprofit, and Musk replies.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 11, "bates": "EMX-000011", "slug": "2015-05-25-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-05-25-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2015-06-24-altman-to-musk", "date": "2015-06-24", "time": "10:24 AM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "question", "body": "The mission would be to create the first general AI and use it for individual empowerment—ie, the distributed version of the future that seems the safest. More generally, safety should be a first-class requirement.\n\nI think we’d ideally start with a group of 7-10 people, and plan to expand from there. We have a nice extra building in Mountain View they can have.\n\nI think for a governance structure, we should start with 5 people and I’d propose you, Bill Gates, Pierre Omidyar, Dustin Moskovitz, and me. The technology would be owned by the foundation and used “for the good of the world”, and in cases where it’s not obvious how that should be applied the 5 of us would decide. The researchers would have significant financial upside but it would be uncorrelated to what they build, which should eliminate some of the conflict (we’ll pay them a competitive salary and give them YC equity for the upside). We’d have an ongoing conversation about what work should be open-sourced and what shouldn’t. At some point we’d get someone to run the team, but he/she probably shouldn’t be on the governance board.\n\nWill you be involved somehow in addition to just governance? I think that would be really helpful for getting work pointed in the right direction getting the best people to be part of it. Ideally you’d come by and talk to them about progress once a month or whatever. We generically call people involved in some limited way in YC “part-time partners” (we do that with Peter Thiel for example, though at this point he’s very involved) but we could call it whatever you want. Even if you can’t really spend time on it but can be publicly supportive, that would still probably be really helpful for recruiting.\n\nI think the right plan with the regulation letter is to wait for this to get going and then I can just release it with a message like “now that we are doing this, I’ve been thinking a lot about what sort of constraints the world needs for safefy.” I’m happy to leave you off as a signatory. I also suspect that after it’s out more people will be willing to get behind it.\n\nSam", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-founding-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman outlines a mission, governance structure and Musk's possible role for the proposed AI lab.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 12, "bates": "EMX-000012", "slug": "2015-06-24-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-06-24-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2015-06-24-musk-to-altman", "date": "2015-06-24", "time": "11:05 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "question", "body": "Agree on all", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-founding-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Altman's June 24, 2015 outline of the proposed lab's mission and governance.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 13, "bates": "EMX-000013", "slug": "2015-06-24-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-06-24-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2015-10-18-altman-to-musk-100mm-commitment", "date": "2015-10-18", "time": "11:36 AM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "followup", "body": "Good seeing you a couple of weeks ago.\n\nAs discussed I think starting with a $100MM commitment (and leaving the time unspecified) is the way to go.\n\nEveryone we discussed but Gates is committed to donating. Hope to have him locked down next week. I am going to sit down with Zuck, but I still think it's probably too problematic given Facebook AI Research.\n\nTwo big new recruits that we expect to sign offer letters this week: John Schulman and Wojciech Zaremba.\n\nSpecific asks for you:\n\n1) Can you donate $30MM over the next 5 years?\n2) Can we call you an \"advisor\" but leave unspecified what you'll do in detail and figure it out as we go?\n3) Will you be on the Safety Board with me? I'd like it to eventually be 5 of us, adding the next 3 over the year or so. This will be the \"second key\" for releasing anything that could be dangerous.\n\nSam", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-governance-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 351-8, Exhibit 5 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0005439-40), quoted in the Oct 19 2015 thread", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.351.8.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman asks Musk for a $100 million commitment, a $30 million donation over five years, an advisor title and a seat on a safety board; Musk replies the next day.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 14, "bates": "EMX-000014", "slug": "2015-10-18-altman-to-musk-100mm-commitment", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-10-18-altman-to-musk-100mm-commitment" }, { "id": "2015-10-19-musk-to-altman-governance", "date": "2015-10-19", "time": "3:27 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: followup", "body": "Let's discuss governance. This is critical. I don't want to fund something that goes in what turns out to be the wrong direction.\n\nBtw, great move on the continuity fund!", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-governance-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 351-8, Exhibit 5 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0005439-40)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.351.8.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Altman's request for a $100 million commitment by asking to discuss governance before funding.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 15, "bates": "EMX-000015", "slug": "2015-10-19-musk-to-altman-governance", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-10-19-musk-to-altman-governance" }, { "id": "2015-11-14-musk-to-altman-acton-quotes", "date": "2015-11-14", "time": "5:19 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Great Acton quotes", "body": "“Liberty consists in the division of power. Absolutism, in concentration of power.”\n\nAnd\n\n\"There is no error so monstrous that it fails to find defenders among the ablest men\"", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-founding-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-61, Exhibit 6 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0010043)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.61.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk sends Altman two quotations attributed to Lord Acton, about a week before the OpenAI structure discussion; Altman replies that the second is one of his favorites.", "tags": [ "ai", "politics", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 16, "bates": "EMX-000016", "slug": "2015-11-14-musk-to-altman-acton-quotes", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-14-musk-to-altman-acton-quotes" }, { "id": "2015-11-20-altman-to-musk", "date": "2015-11-20", "time": "10:48AM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: AI docs", "body": "Elon–\n\nPlan is to have you, me, and Ilya on the Board of Directors for YC AI, which will be a Delaware non-profit. We will also state that we plan to elect two other outsiders by majority vote of the Board.\n\nWe will write into the bylaws that any technology that potentially compromises the safety of humanity has to get consent of the Board to be released, and we will reference this in the researchers’ employment contracts.\n\nAt a high level, does that work for you?\n\nI’m cc’ing our GC [redacted] here–is there someone in your office he can work with on the details?\n\nSam", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-structure-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Altman proposes Musk, Altman and Ilya Sutskever as the board of \"YC AI\", a Delaware nonprofit, with bylaws requiring board consent to release technology that could compromise humanity's safety.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 17, "bates": "EMX-000017", "slug": "2015-11-20-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-20-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2015-11-20-musk-to-altman", "date": "2015-11-20", "time": "12:29PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: AI docs", "body": "I think this should be independent from (but supported by) YC, not what sounds like a subsidiary.\n\nAlso, the structure doesn’t seem optimal. In particular, the YC stock along with a salary from the nonprofit muddies the alignment of incentives. Probably better to have a standard C corp with a parallel nonprofit.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-structure-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk responds to Altman's proposed structure for the lab and suggests it be independent of Y Combinator, with a C corporation and a parallel nonprofit.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 18, "bates": "EMX-000018", "slug": "2015-11-20-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-20-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2015-11-22-brockman-to-musk", "date": "2015-11-22", "time": "6:11 PM", "from": "Greg Brockman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman" ], "subject": "follow up from call", "body": "Hey Elon,\n\nNice chatting earlier.\n\nAs I mentioned on the phone, here's the latest early draft of the blog post: https://quip.com/6YnqA26RJgKr. (Sam, Ilya, and I are thinking about new names; would love any input from you.)\n\nObviously, there's a lot of other detail to change too, but I'm curious what you think of that kind of messaging. I don't want to pull any punches, and would feel comfortable broadcasting a stronger message if it feels right. I think it's mostly important that our messaging appeals to the research community (or at least the subset we want to hire). I hope for us to enter the field as a neutral group, looking to collaborate widely and shift the dialog towards being about humanity winning rather than any particular group or company. (I think that's the best way to bootstrap ourselves into being a leading research institution.)\n\nI've attached the offer letter template we've been using, with a salary of $175k. Here's the email template I've been sending people:\n\nAttached is your official YCR offer letter! Please sign and date the your convenience. There will be two more documents coming:\n\n- A separate letter offering you 0.25% of each YC batch you are present for (as compensation for being an Advisor to YC).\n\n- The At-Will Employment, Confidential Information, Invention Assignment and Arbitration Agreement\n\n(As this is the first batch of official offers we've done, please forgive any bumpiness along the way, and please let me know if anything looks weird!)\n\nWe plan to offer the following benefits:\n\n- Health, dental, and vision insurance\n\n- Unlimited vacation days with a recommendation of four weeks per year\n\n- Paid parental leave\n\n- Paid conference attendance when you are presenting YC AI work or asked to attend by YC AI\n\nWe're also happy to provide visa support. When you're ready to talk about visa-related questions, I'm happy to put you in touch with Kirsty from YC.\n\nPlease let me know if you have any questions — I'm available to chat any time! Looking forward to working together :).\n\n- gdb", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-launch-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Greg Brockman sends Musk a draft announcement blog post, the offer letter template and the recruiting email template being used for the new lab.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 19, "bates": "EMX-000019", "slug": "2015-11-22-brockman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-22-brockman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2015-11-22-musk-to-altman-thought-summary", "date": "2015-11-22", "time": "6:54 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Thought Summary", "body": "Had a great call with Greg. I'm super impressed with everyone so far. This is a great team.\n\nDoing this as an independent, pure play 501c3, but with a crystal clear focus on the positive advent of strong AI distributed widely to humanity does seem to make the most sense to me. Please correct me if we aren't on the same page. The company would still aim to bring in revenue in excess of costs at some point, but positive net revenue would just flow to cash reserves.\n\nOn the comp front, I think having the default approach be a cash salary and a cash bonus that vests over four years and stacks with refresher vesting bonuses every year is the way to go. People could, at their option, if you are amenable, convert that cash amount to YC stock. I'm also fine if they want to convert some or all to SpaceX stock. I can pretty much do what I want on the SpaceX side, as it is private (thank goodness).\n\nAlso, we will have insane amounts of real world sensor data -- several orders of magnitude greater than any other company -- at Tesla that the team could use when helpful.\n\nWas thinking a bit about names. It is always super hard to come up with one that doesn't suck and isn't already taken by someone that won't give it up. Least bad name I have thought of so far is Freemind. Conveys the sense that we are trying to create digital intelligence that will be freely available to all -- the opposite of Deepmind's one-ring-to-rule-them-all approach. Having \"mind\" in there isn't great, but the synonyms suck and their name has been subsumed in the public sphere by Google/Alphabet. You come up with anything?\n\nOn the time allocation front, I've decided to dedicate whatever amount of my time that is materially useful, even though it will come at some cost to SpaceX and Tesla. If I really believe that this is potentially the biggest near-term existential threat, then action should follow belief. That said, this probably amounts to half a day per week (higher in the beginning), with more time allocated when we hit a key decision point or crisis.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-name-structure-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-61, Exhibit 6 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0010041-43)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.61.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk lays out his views on OpenAI's legal structure, compensation, the name 'Freemind' and the time he will commit.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "hiring", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 20, "bates": "EMX-000020", "slug": "2015-11-22-musk-to-altman-thought-summary", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-22-musk-to-altman-thought-summary" }, { "id": "2015-11-22-altman-to-musk-thought-summary", "date": "2015-11-22", "time": "7:08 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Thought Summary", "body": "Yes--I think an independent 501c3 is correct. Are you ok if, initially, it shares a building with YC and YC helps with legal stuff etc? I think that will save us a few months while we hire dedicated people.\n\nI like the idea of defaulting to a cash bonus that stacks each year--I'd independently come to that same conclusion after talking to Greg yesterday. Offering them the option to convert it to SpaceX or YC stock sounds great to me.\n\nMaking Tesla data available would be incredible. I think most YC companies will offer to do the same.\n\nFreemind seems pretty good to me but I'd to keep thinking--it may be a little too close to Deepmind. I really like the word free here thought--freethink? freemerge?\n\nBest idea I've had so far is Axon, which I think we could get .com for from TPG-Axon. Intelligence.com looks getable, but perhaps too generic.\n\nI'll keep thinking.\n\nHalf a day per week sounds awesome. I assume that if gets to the point where AGI looks like it's about to happen, you and I will both find a way to spend a lot of time on it. And if it seems further off, then I expect you'll be very busy getting to Mars.\n\nHave you given any thought to how you want to describe you involvement? I'm fine with anything from \"advisor\" to \"co-CEO\" but think it's probably good to have a clear answer.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-name-structure-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-61, Exhibit 6 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0010041-42)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.61.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman replies to Musk's 'Thought Summary' email on structure, compensation, names and Musk's title.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 21, "bates": "EMX-000021", "slug": "2015-11-22-altman-to-musk-thought-summary", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-22-altman-to-musk-thought-summary" }, { "id": "2015-11-22-musk-to-altman-axon-co-chair", "date": "2015-11-22", "time": "7:32 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Thought Summary", "body": "Great, sounds like we are independently following the same thought tracks.\n\nNo problem with YC support in the beginning. That's normal for a lot of companies, so I don't think it materially affects the neutrality position.\n\nThe \"mind' part of Freemind is partly an intentional philosophical counter to Deepmind and also, as mentioned, I couldn't find a synonym for \"mind\" that wasn't terrible.\n\nI like Axon as an option, although it does slightly sound like Google Brain or, more generally, that we think digital intelligence consists of brain emulation. Pretty much all names suck in the beginning though. Given several choices, I tend to favor names that convey the mission of the company and hopefully have a positive impact on recruitment.\n\nYeah, my role should be clear and I have to bite the bullet on admitting real involvement. This will come as a shocker to many, but so be it. Can't be lukewarm about this.\n\nIn terms of title, what about me as chair and you as CEO or us both as co-chairs? My main concern about being called a co-CEO, even if that is de facto true, is that it might cause problems at SpaceX and Tesla, where they know I'm already overbooked.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-name-structure-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-61, Exhibit 6 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0010041)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.61.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk responds to Altman on YC support, the 'Freemind' and 'Axon' names, his own role and the chair/CEO titles.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 22, "bates": "EMX-000022", "slug": "2015-11-22-musk-to-altman-axon-co-chair", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-22-musk-to-altman-axon-co-chair" }, { "id": "2015-11-22-musk-to-brockman", "date": "2015-11-22", "time": "7:48PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman" ], "subject": "follow up from call", "body": "Blog sounds good, assuming adjustments for neutrality vs being YC-centric.\n\nI'd favor positioning the blog to appeal a bit more to the general public -- there is a lot of value to having the public root for us to succeed -- and then having a longer, more detailed and inside-baseball version for recruiting, with a link to it at the end of the general public version.\n\nWe need to go with a much bigger number than $100M to avoid sounding hopeless relative to what Google or Facebook are spending. I think we should say that we are starting with a $1B funding commitment. This is real. I will cover whatever anyone else doesn't provide.\n\nTemplate seems fine, apart from shifting to a vesting cash bonus as default, which can optionally be turned into YC or potentially SpaceX (need to understand how much this will be) stock.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-launch-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Greg Brockman, Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk responds to Brockman's draft announcement, proposing a $1 billion funding commitment and a vesting cash bonus in the offer template.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "hiring", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 23, "bates": "EMX-000023", "slug": "2015-11-22-musk-to-brockman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-22-musk-to-brockman" }, { "id": "2015-11-23-musk-to-altman-turing-name", "date": "2015-11-23", "time": "3:50 AM (UTC)", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Thought Summary", "body": "Great.\n\nSomething Turing-related that doesn't sound too ominous might be good. Want to avoid the Turing Test association though, as that sounds too much like we are replacing humans.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-name-structure-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-61, Exhibit 6 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0010041)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.61.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk answers Altman's naming ideas, asking for a Turing-related name that avoids the Turing Test association.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 24, "bates": "EMX-000024", "slug": "2015-11-23-musk-to-altman-turing-name", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-11-23-musk-to-altman-turing-name" }, { "id": "2015-12-08-musk-to-altman", "date": "2015-12-08", "time": "9:29 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Draft opening paragraphs", "body": "It is super important to get the opening summary section right. This will be what everyone reads and what the press mostly quotes. The whole point of this release is to attract top talent. Not sure Greg totally gets that.\n\n---- OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company with the goal of advancing digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unencumbered by an obligation to generate financial returns.\n\nThe underlying philosophy of our company is to disseminate AI technology as broadly as possible as an extension of all individual human wills, ensuring, in the spirit of liberty, that the power of digital intelligence is not overly concentrated and evolves toward the future desired by the sum of humanity.\n\nThe outcome of this venture is uncertain and the pay is low compared to what others will offer, but we believe the goal and the structure are right. We hope this is what matters most to the best in the field.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-launch-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk sends Altman proposed opening paragraphs for the public announcement of OpenAI. Altman replied with a revised draft the same morning.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 25, "bates": "EMX-000025", "slug": "2015-12-08-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-12-08-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2015-12-11-musk-to-altman", "date": "2015-12-11", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "just got word...", "body": "Has Ilya come back with a solid yes?\n\nIf anyone seems at all uncertain, I’m happy to call them personally too. Have told Emma this is my absolute top priority 24/7.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-recruiting-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk asks whether Ilya Sutskever has committed to joining OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 26, "bates": "EMX-000026", "slug": "2015-12-11-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-12-11-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2015-12-11-altman-to-musk", "date": "2015-12-11", "time": "11:30AM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "just got word...", "body": "that deepmind is going to give everyone in openAI massive counteroffers tomorrow to try to kill it.\n\ndo you have any objection to me proactively increasing everyone's comp by 100-200k per year? i think they're all motivated by the mission here but it would be a good signal to everyone we are going to take care of them over time.\n\nsounds like deepmind is planning to go to war over this, they've been literally cornering people at NIPS.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-recruiting-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman tells Musk that DeepMind is expected to make counteroffers to OpenAI researchers the next day and asks about raising compensation.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 27, "bates": "EMX-000027", "slug": "2015-12-11-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-12-11-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2015-12-11-altman-to-musk-2", "date": "2015-12-11", "time": "12:15 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "just got word...", "body": "yes committed committed. just gave his word.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-recruiting-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman answers Musk's question about Sutskever's commitment.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 28, "bates": "EMX-000028", "slug": "2015-12-11-altman-to-musk-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-12-11-altman-to-musk-2" }, { "id": "2015-12-11-musk-to-altman-2", "date": "2015-12-11", "time": "12:32 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "just got word...", "body": "awesome", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-recruiting-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Altman's confirmation that Sutskever had committed.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 29, "bates": "EMX-000029", "slug": "2015-12-11-musk-to-altman-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-12-11-musk-to-altman-2" }, { "id": "2015-12-11-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2015-12-11", "time": "4:41 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "Pamela Vagata", "Vicki Cheung", "Diederik Kingma", "Andrej Karpathy", "John D. Schulman", "Trevor Blackwell", "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman" ], "subject": "The OpenAI Company", "body": "Congratulations on a great beginning!\n\nWe are outmanned and outgunned by a ridiculous margin by organizations you know well, but we have right on our side and that counts for a lot. I like the odds.\n\nOur most important consideration is recruitment of the best people. The output of any company is the vector sum of the people within it. If we are able to attract the most talented people over time and our direction is correctly aligned, then OpenAI will prevail.\n\nTo this end, please give a lot of thought to who should join. If I can be helpful with recruitment or anything else, I am at your disposal. I would recommend paying close attention to people who haven't completed their grad or even undergrad, but are obviously brilliant. Better to have them join before they achieve a breakthrough.\n\nLooking forward to working together,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-launch-2015", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "OpenAI founding research team", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk writes to the founding OpenAI team on the day OpenAI was publicly announced.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 30, "bates": "EMX-000030", "slug": "2015-12-11-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2015-12-11-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2016-01-02-redacted-to-musk", "date": "2016-01-02", "time": "10:12 AM CST", "from": "[redacted]", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Fwd: congrats on the falcon 9", "body": "Hi Elon Happy new year to you, [redacted]! \n\nCongratulations on landing the Falcon 9, what an amazing achievement. Time to build out the fleet now! \n\nI've seen you (and Sam and other OpenAI people) doing a lot of interviews recently extolling the virtues of open sourcing AI, but I presume you realise that this is not some sort of panacea that will somehow magically solve the safety problem? There are many good arguments as to why the approach you are taking is actually very dangerous and in fact may increase the risk to the world. Some of the more obvious points are well articulated in this blog post, that I'm sure you've seen, but there are also other important considerations: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/12/17/should-ai-be-open/ \n\nI'd be interested to hear your counter-arguments to these points. \n\nBest,\n[redacted]\n\n[Elon forwards the above email to Sam Altman, Ilya Sutskever and Greg Brockman on Jan 2, 2016 8:18AM]", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-open-source-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "An unnamed correspondent writes to Musk questioning the safety of open-sourcing AI. Musk forwarded it to Altman, Sutskever and Brockman on Jan 2, 2016 at 8:18 AM.", "tags": [ "ai", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 31, "bates": "EMX-000031", "slug": "2016-01-02-redacted-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-01-02-redacted-to-musk" }, { "id": "2016-01-02-sutskever-to-musk", "date": "2016-01-02", "time": "9:06 AM", "from": "Ilya Sutskever", "to": [ "Elon Musk", "Sam Altman", "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Fwd: congrats on the falcon 9", "body": "The article is concerned with a hard takeoff scenario: if a hard takeoff occurs, and a safe AI is harder to build than an unsafe one, then by opensorucing everything, we make it easy for someone unscrupulous with access to overwhelming amount of hardware to build an unsafe AI, which will experience a hard takeoff. As we get closer to building AI, it will make sense to start being less open. The Open in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built, but it's totally OK to not share the science (even though sharing everything is definitely the right strategy in the short and possibly medium term for recruitment purposes).", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-open-source-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Sutskever replies to the email Musk forwarded about open-sourcing AI.", "tags": [ "ai", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 32, "bates": "EMX-000032", "slug": "2016-01-02-sutskever-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-01-02-sutskever-to-musk" }, { "id": "2016-01-02-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2016-01-02", "time": "9:11 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Fwd: congrats on the falcon 9", "body": "Yup", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-open-source-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Sutskever's explanation of OpenAI's approach to openness.", "tags": [ "ai", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 33, "bates": "EMX-000033", "slug": "2016-01-02-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-01-02-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2016-02-18-sutskever-to-teller-musk-meetings", "date": "2016-02-18", "time": "11:28 AM", "from": "Ilya Sutskever", "to": [ "Sam Teller", "Elon Musk", "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Regular infrequent meetings with Elon", "body": "Hi Sam,\n\nGreg and I think that it will be useful for OpenAI's long term success if the two of us had a 30 minute meeting with Elon every two weeks. Elon has built incredible organizations before, and the more of his lessons and experience could be applied to OpenAI, the more effective we will be.\n\nPlease let me know if it is possible.\n\nIlya", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-deepmind-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Teller, Elon Musk, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 351-33, Exhibit 30 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0006119)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.351.33.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Sutskever asks for a recurring 30-minute meeting with Musk; Musk answers that afternoon.", "tags": [ "ai", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 34, "bates": "EMX-000034", "slug": "2016-02-18-sutskever-to-teller-musk-meetings", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-18-sutskever-to-teller-musk-meetings" }, { "id": "2016-02-18-musk-to-sutskever-puppy-bowl", "date": "2016-02-18", "time": "2:46 PM (19:46 UTC)", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "Sam Teller", "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "RE: Regular infrequent meetings with Elon", "body": "I think I should probably do this every week. My dinner with Demis was extremely alarming. I feel like they are playing the Super Bowl and we are playing the Puppy Bowl. Unless we want to have our ass handed to us, we need to step up our game dramatically.\n\nLet's have a conf call later today with the key people of OpenAI later today, if possible, otherwise tomorrow.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-deepmind-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Sam Teller, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 351-33, Exhibit 30 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0006119)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.351.33.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk responds to Sutskever's meeting request after a dinner with DeepMind's Demis Hassabis, asking for a call with OpenAI's key people.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 35, "bates": "EMX-000035", "slug": "2016-02-18-musk-to-sutskever-puppy-bowl", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-18-musk-to-sutskever-puppy-bowl" }, { "id": "2016-02-19-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2016-02-19", "time": "12:05 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "Greg Brockman", "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Followup thoughts", "body": "Frankly, what surprises me is that the AI community is taking this long to figure out concepts. It doesn't sound super hard. High-level linking of a large number of deep nets sounds like the right approach or at least a key part of the right approach. [redacted]\n\nThe probability of DeepMind creating a deep mind increases every year. Maybe it doesn't get past 50% in 2 to 3 years, but it likely moves past 10%. That doesn't sound crazy to me, given their resources.\n\nIn any event, I have found that it is far better to overestimate than underestimate competitors.\n\nThis doesn't mean we should rush out and hire weak talent. I agree that nothing good would be achieved by that. What we need to do is redouble our efforts to seek out the best people in the world, do whatever it takes to bring them on board and imbue the company with a high sense of urgency.\n\nIt will be important for OpenAI to achieve something significant in the next 6 to 9 months to show that we are for real. Doesn't need to be a whopper breakthrough, but it should be enough for key talent around the world to sit up and take notice.\n\n[redacted]", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-followup-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman, Sam Altman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk writes to OpenAI's leaders about competition with DeepMind, recruiting and the need for results within 6 to 9 months. Parts of the original email are redacted in the exhibit.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "hiring", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 36, "bates": "EMX-000036", "slug": "2016-02-19-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-19-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2016-02-21-brockman-to-musk", "date": "2016-02-21", "time": "11:34 AM", "from": "Greg Brockman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman" ], "subject": "compensation framework", "body": "Hi all,\n\nWe're currently doing our first round of full-time offers post-founding. It's obviously super important to get these right, as the implications are very long-term. I don't yet feel comfortable making decisions here on my own, and would love any guidance.\n\nHere's what we're currently doing:\n\nFounding team: $275k salary + 25bps of YC stock\n\n- Also have option of switching permanently to $125k annual bonus or equivalent in YC or SpaceX stock. I don't know if anyone's taken us up on this.\n\nNew offers: $175k annual salary + $125k annual bonus || equivalent in YC or SpaceX stock. Bonus is subject to performance review, where you may get 0% or significantly greater than 100%.\n\nSpecial cases: gdb + Ilya + Trevor\n\nThe plan is to keep a mostly flat salary, and use the bonus multiple as a way to reward strong performers.\n\nSome notes:\n\n- We use a 20% annualized discount for the 8 years until the stock becomes liquid, the $125k bonus equates to 12bps in YC. So the terminal value is more like $750k. This number sounds a lot more impressive, though obviously it's hard to value exactly.\n\n- The founding team was initially offered $175k each. The day after the lab launched, we proactively increased everyone's salary by $100k, telling them that we are financially committed to them as the lab becomes successful, and asking for a personal promise to ignore all counteroffers and trust we'll take care of them.\n\n- We're currently interviewing Ian Goodfellow from Brain, who is one of the top 2 scientists in the field we don't have (the other being Alex Graves, who is a DeepMind loyalist). He's the best person on Brain, so Google will fight for him. We're grandfathering him into the founding team offer.\n\nSome salary datapoints:\n\n- John was offered $250k all-in annualized at DeepMind, thought he could negotiate to $300k easily.\n\n- Wojciech was verbally offered ~$1.25M/year at FAIR (no concrete letter though)\n\n- Andrew Tulloch is getting $800k/year at FB. (A lot is stock which is vesting.)\n\n- Ian Goodfellow is currently getting $165k cash + $600k stock/year at Google.\n\n- Apple is a bit desperate and offering people $550k cash (plus stock, presumably). I don't think anyone good is saying yes.\n\nTwo concrete candidates that are on my mind:\n\n- Andrew is very close to saying yes. However, he's concerned about taking such a large paycut.\n\n- Ian has stated he's not primarily concerned with money, but the Bay Area is expensive / wants to make sure he can buy a house. I don't know what will happen if/when Google starts throwing around the numbers they threw at Ilya.\n\nMy immediate questions:\n\n1. I expect Andrew will try to negotiate up. Should we stick to his offer, and tell him to only join if he's excited enough to take that kind of paycut (and that others have left more behind)?\n\n2. Ian will be interviewing + (I'm sure) getting an offer on Wednesday. Should we consider his offer final, or be willing to slide depending on what Google offers?\n\n3. Depending on the answers to 1 + 2, I'm wondering if this flat strategy makes sense. If we keep it, I feel we'll have to really sell people on the bonus multiplier. Maybe one option would be using a signing bonus as a lever to get people to sign?\n\n4. Very secondary, but our intern comp is also below market: $9k/mo. (FB offers $9k + free housing, Google offers like $11k/mo all-in.) Comp is much less important to interns than to FT people, since the experience is primary. But I think we may have lost a candidate who was on the edge to this. Given the dollar/hour is so much lower than for FT, should we consider increasing the amount?\n\nI'm happy to chat about this at any time.\n\n- gdb", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-compensation-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Brockman describes OpenAI's current offer structure and competing offers for researchers, and asks Musk for guidance on compensation.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 37, "bates": "EMX-000037", "slug": "2016-02-21-brockman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-21-brockman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2016-02-22-musk-to-brockman", "date": "2016-02-22", "time": "12:09 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman" ], "subject": "compensation framework", "body": "We need to do what it takes to get the top talent. Let's go higher. If, at some point, we need to revisit what existing people are getting paid, that's fine.\n\nEither we get the best people in the world or we will get whipped by Deepmind.\n\nWhatever it takes to bring on ace talent is fine by me.\n\nDeepmind is causing me extreme mental stress. If they win, it will be really bad news with their one mind to rule the world philosophy. They are obviously making major progress and well they should, given the talent level over there.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-compensation-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Greg Brockman, Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk responds to Brockman's compensation questions.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 38, "bates": "EMX-000038", "slug": "2016-02-22-musk-to-brockman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-22-musk-to-brockman" }, { "id": "2016-02-25-altman-to-musk-20mm-a-year", "date": "2016-02-25", "time": "6:13 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "cash", "body": "I think we're going to need more than I was originally budgeting given a) the salaries in the field and b) the speed at which you want to grow.\n\nCan you do $20MM a year for the each of the next 3 years? I can do $10MM/year, and we'll have brought $5MM a year from other donors.\n\nSam", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-funding-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 391-13, Exhibit 55 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version filed Jan 16 2026; BMO_00000103-104)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.391.13.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman asks Musk to raise his annual funding to $20 million for each of the next three years.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 39, "bates": "EMX-000039", "slug": "2016-02-25-altman-to-musk-20mm-a-year", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-25-altman-to-musk-20mm-a-year" }, { "id": "2016-02-25-musk-to-altman-agreed", "date": "2016-02-25", "time": "6:30 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: cash", "body": "Agreed\n\nYes", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-funding-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 391-13, Exhibit 55 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version filed Jan 16 2026; BMO_00000104)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.391.13.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk agrees to Altman's request for $20 million a year.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 40, "bates": "EMX-000040", "slug": "2016-02-25-musk-to-altman-agreed", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-25-musk-to-altman-agreed" }, { "id": "2016-02-25-musk-to-altman-gong-5m-per-quarter", "date": "2016-02-25", "time": "6:36 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman", "Ronald Gong" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: cash", "body": "Ron, we need to wire $5M per quarter to OpenAI, starting April 1. This is a non-profit.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-funding-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman, Ronald Gong (Musk's wealth manager at BMO/myCFO)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 391-13, Exhibit 55 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version filed Jan 16 2026; BMO_00000103)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.391.13.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk instructs his wealth manager to wire $5 million per quarter to OpenAI beginning April 1, 2016.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 41, "bates": "EMX-000041", "slug": "2016-02-25-musk-to-altman-gong-5m-per-quarter", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-02-25-musk-to-altman-gong-5m-per-quarter" }, { "id": "2016-03-21-brockman-to-musk", "date": "2016-03-21", "time": "12:53 AM", "from": "Greg Brockman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "wired article", "body": "Hi Elon,\n\nI was interviewed for a Wired article on OpenAI, and the fact checker sent me some questions. Wanted to sync with you on two in particular to make sure they sound reasonable / aligned with what what you'd say:\n\nWould it be accurate to say that OpenAI is giving away ALL of its research?\n\nAt any given time, we will take the action that is likely to most strongly benefit the world. In the short term, we believe the best approach is giving away our research. But longer-term, this might not be the best approach: for example, it might be better not to immediately share a potentially dangerous technology. In all cases, we will be giving away all the benefits of all of our research, and want those to accrue to the world rather than any one institution.\n\nDoes OpenAI believe that getting the most sophisticated AI possible in as many hands as possible is humanity's best chance at preventing a too-smart AI in private hands that could find a way to unleash itself on the world for malicious ends?\n\nWe believe that using AI to extend individual human wills is the most promising path to ensuring AI remains beneficial. This is appealing because if there are many agents with about the same capabilities they could keep any one bad actor in check. But I wouldn't claim we have all the answers: instead, we're building an organization that can both seek those answers, and take the best possible action regardless of what the answer turns out to be.\n\nThanks!\n\n- gdb", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-wired-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Brockman asks Musk to confirm two answers he drafted for a Wired fact-checker about OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 42, "bates": "EMX-000042", "slug": "2016-03-21-brockman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-03-21-brockman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2016-03-21-musk-to-brockman", "date": "2016-03-21", "time": "6:53:47 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "wired article", "body": "Sounds good", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-wired-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Greg Brockman, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Brockman's draft answers for the Wired article.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 43, "bates": "EMX-000043", "slug": "2016-03-21-musk-to-brockman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-03-21-musk-to-brockman" }, { "id": "2016-04-13-musk-to-huang-dgx-1", "date": "2016-04-13", "time": "12:01 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jensen Huang" ], "cc": [], "subject": "DGX-1", "body": "can OpenAI buy one of the early units? The team was asking me about this earlier today.\n\nOpenAI is unaffiliated with Tesla. It is a non-profit funded by me and a few others with the goal of developing safe AGI (and hopefully not paving the road to hell with good intentions).", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-nvidia-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Jensen Huang (Nvidia)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-74, Exhibit 34 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0004103), quoted in the Apr 20 2016 reply", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.74.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk asks Nvidia's CEO whether OpenAI can buy one of the first DGX-1 supercomputers.", "tags": [ "ai", "engineering", "product" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 44, "bates": "EMX-000044", "slug": "2016-04-13-musk-to-huang-dgx-1", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-04-13-musk-to-huang-dgx-1" }, { "id": "2016-04-19-huang-to-musk-dgx-1", "date": "2016-04-19", "time": "10:11 AM", "from": "Jensen Huang", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: DGX-1", "body": "I've not forgotten.\n\nThis is the first supercomputer that's selling itself off the web! Demand coming from all over.\n\nFirst shipment starts end next month. And already taking orders for delivery in September.\n\nI will make sure OpenAI gets one of the first ones.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-nvidia-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-74, Exhibit 34 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0004103)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.74.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Nvidia's CEO says OpenAI will get one of the first DGX-1 units.", "tags": [ "ai", "engineering" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 45, "bates": "EMX-000045", "slug": "2016-04-19-huang-to-musk-dgx-1", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-04-19-huang-to-musk-dgx-1" }, { "id": "2016-04-20-musk-to-huang-much-appreciated", "date": "2016-04-20", "time": "8:20 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jensen Huang" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: DGX-1", "body": "Much appreciated", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-nvidia-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Jensen Huang (Nvidia)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-74, Exhibit 34 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0004103)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.74.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk thanks Nvidia's CEO for the commitment of an early DGX-1 for OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 46, "bates": "EMX-000046", "slug": "2016-04-20-musk-to-huang-much-appreciated", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-04-20-musk-to-huang-much-appreciated" }, { "id": "2016-04-27-musk-to-teller", "date": "2016-04-27", "time": "12:24 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Teller" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Maureen Dowd", "body": "History unequivocally illustrates that a powerful technology is a double-edged sword. It would be foolish to assume that AI, arguably the most powerful of all technologies, only has a single edge.\n\nThe recent example of Microsoft's AI chatbot shows how quickly it can turn incredibly negative. The wise course of action is to approach the advent of AI with caution and ensure that its power is widely distributed and not controlled by any one company or person.\n\nThat is why we created OpenAI.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "musk-ai-press-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk gives Teller language to use in response to the New York Times question about Zuckerberg's comments on AI.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 47, "bates": "EMX-000047", "slug": "2016-04-27-musk-to-teller", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-04-27-musk-to-teller" }, { "id": "2016-04-27-thompson-to-teller", "date": "2016-04-27", "time": "7:25 AM", "from": "Alex Thompson", "to": [ "Sam Teller" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Maureen Dowd", "body": "Hi Sam,\n\nI hope you are having a great day and I apologize for interrupting it with another question. Maureen wanted to see if Mr. Musk had any reaction to some of Mr. Zuckerberg's public comments since their interview. In particular, his labelling of Mr. Musk as \"hysterical\" for his A.I. fears and lectured those who \"fearmonger\" about the dangers of A.I.. I have included more details below of Mr. Zuckerberg's comments.\n\nAsked in Germany recently about Musk’s forebodings, Zuckerberg called them “hysterical’’ and praised A.I. breakthroughs, including one system he claims can make cancer diagnoses for skin lesions on a mobile phone with the accuracy of “the best dermatologist.’’\n\n“Unless we really mess something up,’’ he said, the machines will always be subservient, not “superhuman.”\n\n“I think we can build A.I. so it works for us and helps us...Some people fearmonger about how A.I. is a huge danger, but that seems farfetched to me and much less likely than disasters due to widespread disease, violence, etc.’’ Or as he put his philosophy at an April Facebook developers conference: “Choose hope over fear.’’\n\n--\nAlex Thompson\nThe New York Times", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "musk-ai-press-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Teller, then forwarded to Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "A New York Times reporter writing for Maureen Dowd asks Musk's office for a reaction to Mark Zuckerberg's comments calling Musk's AI concerns \"hysterical\". Teller forwarded it to Musk.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 48, "bates": "EMX-000048", "slug": "2016-04-27-thompson-to-teller", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-04-27-thompson-to-teller" }, { "id": "2016-06-13-musk-to-birchall-pioneer-building", "date": "2016-06-13", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jared Birchall" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Pioneer building lease", "body": "This building will be used for more than OpenAI. My control of OpenAI is limited. There is more than one donor and there will ultimately be many donors.\n\nI'm personally on the hook for the building, so it needs to be a building over which I have full control.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-pioneer-building-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Jared Birchall (Musk family office)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 391-8, Exhibit 38 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version filed Jan 16 2026; BMO_00000800-801; forwarded by Birchall to Musk's wealth managers)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.391.8.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to his family-office head about who should sign the lease for the Pioneer Building in San Francisco, which housed OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 49, "bates": "EMX-000049", "slug": "2016-06-13-musk-to-birchall-pioneer-building", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-06-13-musk-to-birchall-pioneer-building" }, { "id": "2016-07-09-musk-to-birchall-openai-payments", "date": "2016-07-09", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jared Birchall" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Weekly Update", "body": "Did we pay the last OpenAI installment at beginning of quarter? If so, we should continue on that track. I committed to $5M per quarter. It's fine to take the actions necessary for that support. Just need to know in advance if anything is going to generate press.\n\nPlease ask for (ideally electronic) copies of everything at OpenAI, including all offer letters plus anything else and lmk if there is anything concerning. Who is responsible for administrative work there? I have had very little bandwidth to think about the company and am a little worried that it is being managed as an extension of YCombinator. The YC stock as comp for many who joined obviously incents them in that direction. Does everyone have YC stock? That would be weird.\n\nWhen exactly does the building become available and the rent start? I would like to use part of the building for Neuralink at some point, so no YC stuff.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-funding-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Jared Birchall (Musk family office)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 391-42, Exhibit 18 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version filed Jan 16 2026; 2024MUSK-0009615), quoted in Birchall's Jul 10 2016 reply", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.391.42.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Replying to his family-office head's weekly update, Musk confirms the $5 million quarterly commitment and asks for OpenAI's documents.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 50, "bates": "EMX-000050", "slug": "2016-07-09-musk-to-birchall-openai-payments", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-07-09-musk-to-birchall-openai-payments" }, { "id": "2016-07-10-musk-to-birchall-credibility", "date": "2016-07-10", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jared Birchall" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Weekly Update", "body": "So I haven't sent anything to OpenAI?\n\nThat's a really big deal. My credibility is at stake here.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-funding-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Jared Birchall (Musk family office)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 391-42, Exhibit 18 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version filed Jan 16 2026; 2024MUSK-0009615), quoted in Birchall's Jul 10 2016 reply", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.391.42.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk reacts on learning that no payment had yet gone to OpenAI because the organization had no entity able to receive it.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 51, "bates": "EMX-000051", "slug": "2016-07-10-musk-to-birchall-credibility", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-07-10-musk-to-birchall-credibility" }, { "id": "2016-08-29-altman-to-musk-microsoft-donation", "date": "2016-08-29", "time": "10:00 AM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "microsoft/openAI", "body": "I have negotiated a $50 million compute donation from them over the next 3 years!\n\nDo you have any reason not to like them, or care about us switching over from Amazon?", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016-08", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-38, Exhibit 4 to Cohen Declaration ISO Microsoft's Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0008763), quoted in the Aug 30 2016 reply", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.38.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman reports a $50 million Microsoft compute donation over three years and asks whether Musk objects to moving from Amazon.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 52, "bates": "EMX-000052", "slug": "2016-08-29-altman-to-musk-microsoft-donation", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-08-29-altman-to-musk-microsoft-donation" }, { "id": "2016-08-29-musk-to-altman-microsoft-marketing", "date": "2016-08-29", "time": "10:15 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: microsoft/openAI", "body": "I'm ok with this only if they don't use it in marketing. I would also like to see the exact terms and conditions.\nGifts are only as good as the T&C.\n\nWhat happened to Amazon?\n\nI think Jeff is a bit of a tool and Satya is not, so I slightly prefer Microsoft, but I hate their marketing dept.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016-08", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-38, Exhibit 4 to Cohen Declaration ISO Microsoft's Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0008763), quoted in the Aug 30 2016 reply", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.38.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk answers Altman's news of a Microsoft compute donation, asking what happened to Amazon and about marketing terms.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 53, "bates": "EMX-000053", "slug": "2016-08-29-musk-to-altman-microsoft-marketing", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-08-29-musk-to-altman-microsoft-marketing" }, { "id": "2016-08-29-altman-to-musk-amazon-tc", "date": "2016-08-29", "time": "10:18 AM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: microsoft/openAI", "body": "Amazon started really dicking us around on the T+C, especially on marketing commits.\n\nAnd their offering wasn't that good technically anyway.\n\nWill send you detailed terms by end of this week or so, still going back on forth on that part. So far looking clean though.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016-08", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-38, Exhibit 4 to Cohen Declaration ISO Microsoft's Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0008763)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.38.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman explains why OpenAI moved away from Amazon.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 54, "bates": "EMX-000054", "slug": "2016-08-29-altman-to-musk-amazon-tc", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-08-29-altman-to-musk-amazon-tc" }, { "id": "2016-08-30-musk-to-altman-call-satya", "date": "2016-08-30", "time": "6:25 AM (UTC)", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: microsoft/openAI", "body": "Sounds good\n\nI will call Satya if we get to decent terms. A simple text blog expressing appreciation of Microsoft's donation on our website will help them a lot. They can always point people to that.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016-08", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-38, Exhibit 4 to Cohen Declaration ISO Microsoft's Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0008763)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.38.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk agrees to call Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella if the terms are decent.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 55, "bates": "EMX-000055", "slug": "2016-08-30-musk-to-altman-call-satya", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-08-30-musk-to-altman-call-satya" }, { "id": "2016-09-16-musk-to-altman-2", "date": "2016-09-16", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "MSFT hosting deal", "body": "We should just do this low key. No certainty either way. No contract.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk follows up on the Microsoft compute arrangement.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 56, "bates": "EMX-000056", "slug": "2016-09-16-musk-to-altman-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-16-musk-to-altman-2" }, { "id": "2016-09-16-altman-to-musk", "date": "2016-09-16", "time": "2:37 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "MSFT hosting deal", "body": "Here are the MSFT terms. $60MM of compute for $10MM, and input from us on what they deploy in the cloud. LMK if you have any feedback.\n\nSam\n\nMicrosoft/OpenAI Terms\n\nMicrosoft and OpenAI: Accelerate the development of deep learning on Azure and CNTK\n\nThis non-binding term sheet (“Term Sheet”) between Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) and OpenAI (“OpenAI”) sets forth the terms for a potential business relationship between the parties. This Term Sheet is intended to form a basis of discussion and does not state all matters upon which agreement must be reached before executing a legally binding commercial agreement (“Commercial Agreement”). The existence and terms of this Term Sheet, and all discussions related thereto or to a Commercial Agreement, are Confidential Information as defined and governed by the Non-Disclosure Agreement between the parties dated 17 March, 2016 (“NDA”). Except for the binding nature of the foregoing confidentiality obligations, this Term Sheet is non-binding.\n\nDeal Purpose\nOpenAI is focused on deep learning in such a way as to benefit humanity. Microsoft and OpenAI desire to partner to enable the acceleration of deep learning on Microsoft Azure. Towards this goal, Microsoft will provide OpenAI with Azure compute capabilities at a favorable price that would enable OpenAI to continue their mission effectively.\n\nDeal Business Goal\nMicrosoft\n· Accelerate deep learning environment on Azure\n· Attract a net new audience of next generation developers\n· Joint PR and evangelism of deep learning on Azure\nOpenAI\n· Deeply discounted GPU compute offering over the deal term (3 years) for use in their nonprofit research: $60m of Compute for $10m\n· Joint PR and evangelism of OpenAI on Azure\n\nParties (Legal entities) Microsoft OpenAI\n\nProposed Deal Execution Date September 19, 2016\n\nProposed Deal Commencement Date Same as deal execution date\n\nLegal Authoring Microsoft holds the pen.\n\nDeal Term 3 years\n\nEngineering Terms\n- Compute: Microsoft will provide OpenAI GPU core hours of compute at the agreed upon price for OpenAI’s workloads to run in Azure.\n- Geographic Location: Geographic location decisions will be at Microsoft discretion depending on capacity and availability. Microsoft will also be responsible for sharing the deployment strategy and timelines with OpenAI.\n- SLA: For all Virtual Machines that have two or more instances deployed in the same availability set, Microsoft guarantee OpenAI will have virtual machine connectivity to at least one instance at least 99.95% of the time. Microsoft will be held accountable to the SLA’s provided on https://azure.microsoft.com/enus/support/legal/sla/virtual-machines/v1_2/\n\n- Evaluation, Evangelization, and Usage of CNTK v2, Azure Batch and HD-Insight: OpenAI will evaluate CNTK v2, Azure Batch, and HDInsight for their research, provide feedback on how Microsoft can improve these products. OpenAI will work with Microsoft to evangelize these products to their research and developer ecosystems, and evangelize Microsoft Azure as their preferred public cloud provider. At their sole discretion, and as it makes sense for their research, OpenAI will adopt these products\n\n- Ramp: Microsoft and OpenAI will work together for creating a ramp plan that balances capacity per clusters. The initial timeline for ramp is a minimum of 30 days that will be augmented by Microsoft’s capacity expansion plans in the coming months.\n\n- Capacity: OpenAI will be given an allocation of capacity in the preview cluster (located in US South Central) for short term requirements and Microsoft will provide quota access to the subsequent K80 GPU clusters that go live in the 4th quarter of 2016 with the intention of more capacity in Q1 2017 (calendar year).\n\nFinancial Terms\n· Financial Terms: Microsoft will offer $60m worth of List Compute (including GPU) at a deep discount which results in a price of $10m to be paid by OpenAI over the course of the deal. In the event OpenAI consumes less than $10m worth of Azure compute, OpenAI will be responsible for paying the balance between the used amount and $10m at the end of the deal term to Microsoft.\n\nMarketing & PR Terms\nMicrosoft and OpenAI commit to jointly evangelizing deep learning capabilities on Azure as agreed upon by both parties.\n- Ignite: Announce the partnership at Microsoft’s Ignite event with executives (Sam Altman from OpenAI and Satya Nadella from Microsoft) from both parties inaugurating the collaboration\n- PR: Microsoft and OpenAI will work together to issue a joint press release about the partnership including any materials such as blog posts and videos.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman sends Musk the terms of a proposed Microsoft Azure compute agreement for OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 57, "bates": "EMX-000057", "slug": "2016-09-16-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-16-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2016-09-16-musk-to-altman", "date": "2016-09-16", "time": "3:10 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "MSFT hosting deal", "body": "This actually made me feel nauseous. It sucks and is exactly what I would expect from them.\n\nEvaluation, Evangelization, and Usage of CNTK v2, Azure Batch and HD-Insight: OpenAI will evaluate CNTK v2, Azure Batch, and HD-Insight for their research, provide feedback on how Microsoft can improve these products. OpenAI will work with Microsoft to evangelize these products to their research and developer ecosystems, and evangelize Microsoft Azure as their preferred public cloud provider. At their sole discretion, and as it makes sense for their research, OpenAI will adopt these products\n\nLet’s just say that we are willing to have Microsoft donate spare computing time to OpenAI and have that be known, but we want do any contract or agree to “evangelize”. They can turn us off at any time and we can leave at any time.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk responds to the proposed Microsoft term sheet.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 58, "bates": "EMX-000058", "slug": "2016-09-16-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-16-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2016-09-16-altman-to-musk-2", "date": "2016-09-16", "time": "3:33 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "MSFT hosting deal", "body": "I had the same reaction after reading that section and they've already agreed to drop.\n\nWe had originally just wanted space cycles donated but the team wanted more certainty that capacity will be available. But I'll work with MSFT to make sure there are no strings attached", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman replies that Microsoft had agreed to drop the contested section.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 59, "bates": "EMX-000059", "slug": "2016-09-16-altman-to-musk-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-16-altman-to-musk-2" }, { "id": "2016-09-20-teller-to-musk", "date": "2016-09-20", "time": "8:05 PM", "from": "Sam Teller", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "MSFT hosting deal", "body": "Microsoft is now willing to do the agreement for a full $50m with “good faith effort at OpenAI's sole discretion” and full mutual termination rights at any time. No evangelizing. No strings attached. No looking like lame Microsoft marketing pawns. Ok to move ahead?", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Teller relays Microsoft's revised offer for the OpenAI compute agreement and asks whether to proceed.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 60, "bates": "EMX-000060", "slug": "2016-09-20-teller-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-20-teller-to-musk" }, { "id": "2016-09-21-musk-to-teller", "date": "2016-09-21", "time": "12:09 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Teller" ], "cc": [], "subject": "MSFT hosting deal", "body": "Fine by me if they don't use this in active messaging. Would be worth way more than $50M not to seem like Microsoft's marketing bitch.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk answers Teller's question about Microsoft's revised offer.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 61, "bates": "EMX-000061", "slug": "2016-09-21-musk-to-teller", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-21-musk-to-teller" }, { "id": "2016-09-24-musk-to-sutskever-technical-issues", "date": "2016-09-24", "time": "11:16 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: BTW", "body": "Cool, I certainly enjoy them too. Also, really want to learn more at a detailed level about the technical issues that we are wrestling with. Really interesting.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-meetings-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-72, Exhibit 31 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; OPENAI_MUSK00000214), quoted in Sutskever's reply", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.72.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Sutskever, who had said their meetings were very helpful for running OpenAI and setting medium-term goals.", "tags": [ "ai", "engineering", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 62, "bates": "EMX-000062", "slug": "2016-09-24-musk-to-sutskever-technical-issues", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-24-musk-to-sutskever-technical-issues" }, { "id": "2016-09-24-musk-to-sutskever-solarcity-rocket", "date": "2016-09-24", "time": "11:55 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: BTW", "body": "Once the SolarCity merger is done and the rocket is flying again, I will should be able to do so.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-meetings-2016", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-72, Exhibit 31 to Hawes Declaration ISO Plaintiff's Opposition to OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; OPENAI_MUSK00000214)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.72.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk says he could lengthen his visits to OpenAI once the SolarCity merger closes and SpaceX's rocket is flying again.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 63, "bates": "EMX-000063", "slug": "2016-09-24-musk-to-sutskever-solarcity-rocket", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2016-09-24-musk-to-sutskever-solarcity-rocket" }, { "id": "2017-musk-to-neuralink-cofounder-hire-from-openai", "date": "2017", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "hire independently or directly from OpenAI", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-tesla-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "A Neuralink cofounder (unnamed in the report)", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman trial exhibit shown to the jury, as quoted by MIT Technology Review, \"Musk v. Altman week 1\" (May 1 2026); exhibit number and exact date not stated; only the quoted portion is available", "source_url": "https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/05/01/1136800/musk-v-altman-week-1-musk-says-he-was-duped-warns-ai-could-kill-us-all-and-admits-that-xai-distills-openais-models/", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Per trial testimony reported by MIT Technology Review, Musk wrote to a Neuralink cofounder in 2017 that they could hire independently or directly from OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 64, "bates": "EMX-000064", "slug": "2017-musk-to-neuralink-cofounder-hire-from-openai", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-musk-to-neuralink-cofounder-hire-from-openai" }, { "id": "2017-musk-to-tesla-vp-karpathy-openai-guys", "date": "2017", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "The OpenAI guys are gonna want to kill me. But it had to be done", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-tesla-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "A Tesla vice president (unnamed in the report)", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman trial exhibit shown to the jury, as quoted by MIT Technology Review, \"Musk v. Altman week 1\" (May 1 2026); exhibit number and exact date not stated; only the quoted portion is available", "source_url": "https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/05/01/1136800/musk-v-altman-week-1-musk-says-he-was-duped-warns-ai-could-kill-us-all-and-admits-that-xai-distills-openais-models/", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Sent after Musk hired OpenAI founding member Andrej Karpathy to work at Tesla, per trial testimony reported by MIT Technology Review.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 65, "bates": "EMX-000065", "slug": "2017-musk-to-tesla-vp-karpathy-openai-guys", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-musk-to-tesla-vp-karpathy-openai-guys" }, { "id": "2017-02-24-musk-to-all-tesla-working-conditions", "date": "2017-02", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "For Tesla to become and remain one of the great companies of the 21st century, we must have an environment that is as safe, fair and fun as possible. It is incredibly important to me that you look forward to coming to work every day. For that, we must be a fair and just company – the only kind worth creating.\n\nThis is vital to succeed in our mission to accelerate the advent of a clean, sustainable energy future. The forces arrayed against us are many and incredibly powerful. This is David vs Goliath if David were six inches tall! Only by being smarter, faster and working well as a tightly integrated team do we have any chance of success. We should never forget the history of car startups originating in the United States: dozens have gone bankrupt and only two, Tesla and Ford, have not. Despite the odds being strongly against us, my faith in you is why I am confident that we will succeed.\n\nThat is why I was so distraught when I read the recent blog post promoting the UAW, which does not share our mission and whose true allegiance is to the giant car companies, where the money they take from employees in dues is vastly more than they could ever make from Tesla.\n\nThe tactics they have resorted to are disingenuous or outright false. I will address their underhanded attacks below. While this discussion focuses on Fremont, these same principles apply to every Tesla facility worldwide.\n\nSafety First\n\nThe workplace issue that comes before any other is safety. If you do not have your health, then nothing else matters. Simply due to size and bad luck, there will always be some injuries in a company with over 30,000 employees, but our goal is simple: to have as close to zero injuries as possible and be the safest factory in the auto industry by far. The Tesla executive team and I are absolutely committed to this goal.\n\nThat is why I was particularly troubled by the safety claim in last week’s blog post, which said: “A few months ago, six out of eight people in my work team were out on medical leave at the same time due to various work-related injuries. I hear the ergonomics are even more severe in other areas of the factory.”\n\nObviously, this cannot be true: if three quarters of his team suddenly went on medical leave, we would not be able to operate that part of the factory. Furthermore, if things were really even worse in other departments, that would mean something like 80% or more of the factory would be out on injury, production would drop to virtually nothing and the parking lot would be almost empty. As you know firsthand, we have the *opposite* problem – there is never enough room to park! In fact, we are working at top speed to build more parking. Also, hopefully our darn BART train station will open before all hell freezes over!\n\nAfter looking into this claim, not only was it untrue for this individual’s team, it was untrue for any of the hundreds of teams in the factory.\n\nThat said, reducing excess overtime and improving safety are extremely important. This is why we hired thousands of additional team members to create a third shift, which has reduced the burden on everyone. Moreover, since the beginning of Tesla production at Fremont five years ago, there have been dedicated health and safety experts covering the factory and we hold regular safety meetings with operations leaders. Since the majority of the injuries in the factory are ergonomic in nature, we have an ergonomics department focused exclusively on this issue.\n\nThe net result is that since January 1st, our total recordable incident rate (TRIR) is under 3.3, which is less than half the industry average of 6.7.\n\nOf course, the goal is to have as close to zero injuries as humanly possible, so we need to keep improving. If you have a safety concern or an idea on how to make things better, please let your manager, safety representative or HR partner know. You can also send an anonymous note through the Integrity Hotline (this applies broadly to any problems you notice at our company) or you can email [email address removed]\n\nCompensation\n\nAt Tesla, we believe it is important for everyone to be an owner of the company. This is your company. That is why, unlike other car companies, everyone is awarded shares and you get to buy stock at a discount compared to the public through the employee stock purchase program. Last year, stock equity grants were increased significantly and it will happen again later this year once Model 3 achieves high volume.\n\nThe chart below contrasts the total comp received by a Tesla production team member who started on January 1, 2013 against the total comp received over the same period at GM, Ford, and Fiat Chrysler. A four year period is used because that’s the vesting length of a new hire equity grant. I believe the equity gain over the next four years will be similar. As shown below, a Tesla team member earned between $70,000 and $100,000 more in total compensation than the employees at other US auto companies!\n\nWork Hours\n\nAnother issue raised in the UAW blog was hours worked. First, I want to recognize how hard you worked to make our company successful. Those hours mattered to you, to your family and to our company, and I can’t tell you how much I appreciate them.\n\nHowever, the pace needs to be sustainable. This is why the third shift was established and why we created alternate work schedules based on feedback from various teams in the factory.\n\nThese changes have had a big impact. The average amount of hours worked by production team members this year is about 43 hours per week. The percentage of overtime hours has declined by almost 50% since the super tough time we had last year achieving rate on the Model X, which is probably the hardest car to build in history. What an amazing accomplishment! It is also a lesson learned, which is why Model 3 is designed to be dramatically easier to manufacture.\n\nFun\n\nAs we get closer to being a profitable company, we will be able to afford more and more fun things. For example, as I mentioned at the last company talk, we are going to hold a really amazing party once Model 3 reaches volume production later this year. There will also be little things that come along like free frozen yogurt stands scattered around the factory and my personal favorite: a Tesla electric pod car roller coaster (with an optional loop the loop route, of course!) that will allow fast and fun travel throughout our Fremont campus, dipping in and out of the factory and connecting all the parking lots. It’s going to get crazy good 🙂\n\nThanks again for all your effort and I look forward to working alongside you to create an amazing future!\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "TechCrunch, \"Elon Musk addresses working condition claims in Tesla staff-wide email\" (Feb 24, 2017)", "source_url": "https://techcrunch.com/2017/02/24/elon-musk-addresses-working-condition-claims-in-tesla-staff-wide-email/", "case": null, "context": "Staff-wide response to a Medium post by a Fremont employee about safety, pay and hours. Date is the TechCrunch publication date; the email’s send date and subject line were not given. The email refers to a chart that is not reproduced in the source text. The exact send date is not public; the month shown is when it was published.", "tags": [ "safety", "culture", "communication", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 66, "bates": "EMX-000066", "slug": "2017-02-24-musk-to-all-tesla-working-conditions", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-02-24-musk-to-all-tesla-working-conditions" }, { "id": "2017-05-31-musk-to-all-tesla-injury-reporting", "date": "2017-05-31", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "No words can express how much I care about your safety and wellbeing. It breaks my heart when someone is injured building cars and trying their best to make Tesla successful.\n\nGoing forward, I’ve asked that every injury be reported directly to me, without exception. I’m meeting with the safety team every week and would like to meet every injured person as soon as they are well, so that I can understand from them exactly what we need to do to make it better. I will then go down to the production line and perform the same task that they perform.\n\nThis is what all managers at Tesla should do as a matter of course. At Tesla, we lead from the front line, not from some safe and comfortable ivory tower. Managers must always put their team’s safety above their own.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla employees (Fremont factory focus)", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Elon Musk wants all Tesla factory injuries reported directly to him\" (June 2, 2017)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2017/06/02/elon-musk-tesla-injury-factory/", "case": null, "context": "Email on factory safety sent May 31, 2017 per Teslarati; Electrek published an excerpt shortly after a report on Fremont injury rates.", "tags": [ "safety", "management", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 67, "bates": "EMX-000067", "slug": "2017-05-31-musk-to-all-tesla-injury-reporting", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-05-31-musk-to-all-tesla-injury-reporting" }, { "id": "2017-06-12-sutskever-to-brockman", "date": "2017-06-12", "time": "10:39 PM", "from": "Ilya Sutskever", "to": [ "Greg Brockman", "[redacted]", "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Bi-weekly updates", "body": "This is the first of our bi-weekly updates. The goal is to keep you up to date, and to help us make greater use from your visits.\n\nCompute:\n\n- Compute is used in two ways: it is used to run a big experiment quickly, and it is used to run many experiments in parallel.\n\n- 95% of progress comes from the ability to run big experiments quickly. The utility of running many experiments is much less useful.\n\n- In the old days, a large cluster could help you run more experiments, but it could not help with running a single large experiment quickly.\n\n- For this reason, an academic lab could compete with Google, because Google's only advantage was the ability to run many experiments. This is not a great advantage.\n\n- Recently, it has become possible to combine 100s of GPUs and 100s of CPUs to run an experiment that's 100x bigger than what is possible on a single machine while requiring comparable time. This has become possible due to the work of many different groups. As a result, the minimum necessary cluster for being competitive is now 10–100x larger than it was before.\n\n- Currently, every Dota experiment uses 1000+ cores, and it is only for the small 1v1 variant, and on extremely small neural network policies. We will need more compute to just win the 1v1 variant. To win the full 5v5 game, we will need to run fewer experiments, where each experiment is at least 1 order of magnitude larger (possibly more!).\n\n- TLDR: What matters is the size and speed of our experiments. In the old days, a big cluster could not let anyone run a larger experiment quickly. Today, a big cluster lets us run a large experiment 100x faster.\n\n- In order to be capable of accomplishing our projects even in theory, we need to increase the number of our GPUs by a factor of 10x in the next 1–2 months (we have enough CPUs). We will discuss the specifics in our in-person meeting.\n\nDota 2:\n\n- We will solve the 1v1 version of the game in 1 month. Fans of the game care about 1v1 a fair bit.\n\n- We are now at a point where a single experiment consumes 1000s of cores, and where adding more distributed compute increases performance.\n\n- Here is a cool video of our bot doing something rather clever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-vxbREX5ck&feature=youtu.be&t=99.\n\nRapid learning of new games:\n\n- Infra work is underway\n\n- We implemented several baselines\n\n- Fundamentally, we're not where we want to be, and are taking action to correct this.\n\nRobotics:\n\n- Current status: The HER algorithm (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz_HuzgMzxo) can learn to solve many low-dimensional robotics tasks that were previously unsolvable very rapidly. It is non-obvious, simple, and effective.\n\n- In 6 months, we will accomplish at least one of: single-handed Rubik's cube, pen spinning (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDavyRnEPrI), Chinese balls spinning (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9N1duIl4Fc) using the HER algorithm and using a sim2real method [such as https://blog.openai.com/spam-detection-in-the-physical-world/].\n\n- The above will be deployed on the robotic hand: [Link to Google Drive] [this video is human controlled, not algorithmic controlled. Need to be logged in to the OpenAI account to see the video].\n\nSelf play as a key path to AGI:\n\n- Self play in multiagent environments is magical: if you place agents into an environment, then no matter how smart (or not smart) they are, the environment will provide them with the exact level of challenge, which can be faced only by outsmarting the competition. So for example, if you have a group of children, they will find each other's company to be challenging; likewise for a collection of super intelligences of comparable intelligence. So the \"solution\" to self-play is to become more and more intelligent, without bound.\n\n- Self-play lets us get \"something out of nothing.\" The rules of a competitive game can be simple, but the best strategy for playing this game can be immensely complex. [motivating example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2T77mQmJYI].\n\n- Training agents in simulation to develop very good dexterity via competitive fighting, such as wrestling. Here is a video of ant-shaped robots that we trained to struggle: [redacted]\n\n- Current work on self-play: getting agents to learn to develop a language [gifs in https://blog.openai.com/learning-to-cooperate-compete-and-communicate/].Agents are doing \"stuff,\" but it's still work in progress.\n\nWe have a few more cool smaller projects. Updates to be presented as they produce significant results.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-biweekly-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Sutskever sends the first of OpenAI's bi-weekly research updates to Musk, covering compute, Dota 2, robotics and self-play.", "tags": [ "ai", "engineering" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 68, "bates": "EMX-000068", "slug": "2017-06-12-sutskever-to-brockman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-06-12-sutskever-to-brockman" }, { "id": "2017-06-12-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2017-06-12", "time": "10:52 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman", "[redacted]" ], "subject": "Bi-weekly updates", "body": "Thanks, this is a great update.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-biweekly-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk replies to the first bi-weekly update.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 69, "bates": "EMX-000069", "slug": "2017-06-12-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-06-12-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2017-06-13-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2017-06-13", "time": "10:24 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman", "[redacted]" ], "subject": "Bi-weekly updates", "body": "Ok. Let's figure out the least expensive way to ensure compute power is not a constraint...", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-biweekly-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk responds to Sutskever's request for more compute.", "tags": [ "ai", "cost", "engineering" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 70, "bates": "EMX-000070", "slug": "2017-06-13-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-06-13-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2017-06-28-musk-to-sutskever-brockman-the-10000", "date": "2017-06-28", "time": "2:11 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman" ], "subject": "The 10,000", "body": "Just spoke to Satya and talked about OpenAI needing one the order of 10,000 servers with the latest Nvidia GPUs to beat the best human players at competitive eSports games.\n\nThis would obviously be a major opportunity for Microsoft to promote Azure relative to other cloud systems.\n\nHe said he'd talk internally and get back to me soon. Please send me the ideal spec for the individual servers and how they are connected. What ideally do we want Microsoft to do? Sounds like there is a good chance they will do it.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-microsoft-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman, Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-39, Exhibit 5 to Cohen Declaration ISO Microsoft's Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0000169); also Dkt. 351-36 and 353-15", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.39.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "After a call with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, Musk asks OpenAI's leaders for the server specifications needed to train an esports-playing AI.", "tags": [ "ai", "engineering", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 71, "bates": "EMX-000071", "slug": "2017-06-28-musk-to-sutskever-brockman-the-10000", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-06-28-musk-to-sutskever-brockman-the-10000" }, { "id": "2017-07-21-brockman-to-musk", "date": "2017-07-21", "time": "1:18 PM", "from": "Greg Brockman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "subject": "Beijing Wants A.I. to Be Made in China by 2030 - NYTimes.com", "body": "100% agreed. We think the path must be:\n\n- AI research non-profit (through end of 2017)\n\n- AI research + hardware for-profit (starting 2018)\n\n- Government project (when: ??)\n\n[redacted]\n\n-gdb", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-structure-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Ilya Sutskever", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Brockman replies to Musk's email about China's AI plans with a proposed path for OpenAI's structure.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 72, "bates": "EMX-000072", "slug": "2017-07-21-brockman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-07-21-brockman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2017-07-21-musk-to-brockman-2", "date": "2017-07-21", "time": "1:18 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "[redacted]" ], "subject": "Beijing Wants A.I. to Be Made in China by 2030 - NYTimes.com", "body": "Let's talk Sat or Sun. I have a tentative game plan that I'd like to run by you.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-structure-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk responds to Brockman's proposed path for OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 73, "bates": "EMX-000073", "slug": "2017-07-21-musk-to-brockman-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-07-21-musk-to-brockman-2" }, { "id": "2017-07-21-musk-to-openai-founder-series-model-3", "date": "2017-07-21", "time": "1:25 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Beijing Wants A.I. to Be Made in China by 2030 - NYTimes.com", "body": "By the way, in appreciation for what you've done to get OpenAI to where it is today, I would like to give you each a Founder Series Model 3. These are the earliest cars produced and are not available to the public.\n\nIf there are a few others at OpenAI who you think also really deserve one (maybe Wojciech?), I am happy to do the same for them.\n\nHope you like it!\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-beijing-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "OpenAI founding team (recipients not shown in the quoted header)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 328-55, Exhibit 51 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; OPENAI_MUSK00020777), quoted in Musk's 8:53 PM reply", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.328.55.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk offers OpenAI's founders Founder Series Tesla Model 3 cars, in the same thread where Brockman lays out a plan for a for-profit stage in 2018.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 74, "bates": "EMX-000074", "slug": "2017-07-21-musk-to-openai-founder-series-model-3", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-07-21-musk-to-openai-founder-series-model-3" }, { "id": "2017-07-21-musk-to-brockman", "date": "2017-07-21", "time": "3:34 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Greg Brockman", "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Beijing Wants A.I. to Be Made in China by 2030 - NYTimes.com", "body": "They will do whatever it takes to obtain what we develop. Maybe another reason to change course. [Link to news article]", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-structure-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk forwards a New York Times article about China's AI plans to Brockman and Sutskever.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "politics" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 75, "bates": "EMX-000075", "slug": "2017-07-21-musk-to-brockman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-07-21-musk-to-brockman" }, { "id": "2017-07-21-musk-to-sutskever-consider-it-done", "date": "2017-07-21", "time": "8:53 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman", "John Schulman", "Wojciech Zaremba", "Jared Birchall" ], "subject": "Re: Beijing Wants A.I. to Be Made in China by 2030 - NYTimes.com", "body": "Consider it done!\n\nJared, please facilitate. Let's try to slot these four cars into next month's production.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-beijing-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman, John Schulman, Wojciech Zaremba, Jared Birchall", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 328-55, Exhibit 51 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; OPENAI_MUSK00020777)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.328.55.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk confirms the Model 3 gifts after Sutskever thanks him and suggests adding Wojciech Zaremba and John Schulman.", "tags": [ "ai", "hiring", "manufacturing" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 76, "bates": "EMX-000076", "slug": "2017-07-21-musk-to-sutskever-consider-it-done", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-07-21-musk-to-sutskever-consider-it-done" }, { "id": "2017-07-30-musk-to-maron-my-comp-stuff", "date": "2017-07-30", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Todd Maron" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: My comp stuff", "body": "on hold for a few weeks[.] [...] [j]ust want[ed] to make sure Tesla interests come first. [...] [t]he added comp is just so that I can put as much as possible towards minimizing existential risk by putting the money towards Mars if I am successful in leading Tesla to be one of the world’s most valuable companies. This is kinda crazy, but it is true.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tornetta-2018-grant", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla General Counsel", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Tornetta v. Musk post-trial opinion (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024), quoting JX-564 (footnote 283 dates it 7/30/17; the text of the opinion also says June 30)", "source_url": "https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340", "case": "Tornetta v. Musk, C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024)", "context": "Musk asked Tesla’s General Counsel to put work on his compensation plan on hold, then agreed to let it continue. Only the fragments quoted in the court’s opinion are reproduced, joined with [...].", "tags": [ "legal", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 77, "bates": "EMX-000077", "slug": "2017-07-30-musk-to-maron-my-comp-stuff", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-07-30-musk-to-maron-my-comp-stuff" }, { "id": "2017-08-musk-to-all-tesla-communication-within-tesla", "date": "2017-08", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Communication Within Tesla", "body": "There are two schools of thought about how information should flow within companies. By far the most common way is chain of command, which means that you always flow communication through your manager. The problem with this approach is that, while it serves to enhance the power of the manager, it fails to serve the company.\n\nInstead of a problem getting solved quickly, where a person in one dept talks to a person in another dept and makes the right thing happen, people are forced to talk to their manager who talks to their manager who talks to the manager in the other dept who talks to someone on his team. Then the info has to flow back the other way again. This is incredibly dumb. Any manager who allows this to happen, let alone encourages it, will soon find themselves working at another company. No kidding.\n\nAnyone at Tesla can and should email/talk to anyone else according to what they think is the fastest way to solve a problem for the benefit of the whole company. You can talk to your manager's manager without his permission, you can talk directly to a VP in another dept, you can talk to me, you can talk to anyone without anyone else's permission. Moreover, you should consider yourself obligated to do so until the right thing happens. The point here is not random chitchat, but rather ensuring that we execute ultra-fast and well. We obviously cannot compete with the big car companies in size, so we must do so with intelligence and agility.\n\nOne final point is that managers should work hard to ensure that they are not creating silos within the company that create an us vs. them mentality or impede communication in any way. This is unfortunately a natural tendency and needs to be actively fought. How can it possibly help Tesla for depts to erect barriers between themselves or see their success as relative within the company instead of collective? We are all in the same boat. Always view yourself as working for the good of the company and never your dept.\n\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Inc.com, Justin Bariso, \"This Email From Elon Musk to Tesla Employees Describes What Great Communication Looks Like\" (Aug 30, 2017; Tesla verified it was sent to all employees)", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/2017/https://www.inc.com/justin-bariso/this-email-from-elon-musk-to-tesla-employees-descr.html", "case": null, "context": "Inc. described it as a previously unpublished email sent \"a few years ago\"; Tesla confirmed it went to all employees. The send date is not given, so the date field is the Inc. publication month. Later emails (April 2018) restate parts of it. The exact send date is not public; the month shown is when it was published.", "tags": [ "communication", "management", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 78, "bates": "EMX-000078", "slug": "2017-08-musk-to-all-tesla-communication-within-tesla", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-08-musk-to-all-tesla-communication-within-tesla" }, { "id": "2017-08-11-musk-to-brockman", "date": "2017-08-11", "time": "9:17 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Greg Brockman", "Ilya Sutskever", "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "[redacted]", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "Tomorrow afternoon", "body": "[redacted] Are you guys able to meet or do a conf call tomorrow afternoon?\n\nTime to make the next step for OpenAI. This is the triggering event.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-structure-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever, Sam Altman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk asks OpenAI's leaders to meet the next day about the organization's next step.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 79, "bates": "EMX-000079", "slug": "2017-08-11-musk-to-brockman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-08-11-musk-to-brockman" }, { "id": "2017-08-28-zilis-to-musk", "date": "2017-08-28", "time": "12:01 AM", "from": "Shivon Zilis", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "OpenAI notes", "body": "Elon,\n\nAs I'd mentioned, Greg had asked to talk through a few things this weekend. Ilya ended up joining, and they pretty much just shared all of what they are still trying to think through. This is the distillation of that random walk of a conversation... came down to 7 unanswered questions with their commentary below. Please note that I'm not advocating for any of this, just structuring and sharing the information I heard.\n\n1. Short-term control structure? \n\n-Is the requirement for absolute control? They wonder if there is a scenario where there could be some sort of creative overrule provision if literally everyone else disagreed on direction (not just the three of them, but perhaps a broader board)?\n\n2. Duration of control and transition? \n\n-*The* non-negotiable seems to be an ironclad agreement to not have any one person have absolute control of AGI if it's created. Satisfying this means a situation where, regardless of what happens to the three of them, it's guaranteed that power over the company is distributed after the 2-3 year initial period.\n\n3. Time spent?\n\n-How much time does Elon want to spend on this, and how much time can he actually afford to spend on this? In what timeframe? Is this an hour a week, ten hours a week, something in between?\n\n4. What to do with time spent?\n\n-They don't really know how he prefers to spend time at his other companies and how he'd want to spend his time on this. Greg and Ilya are confident they could build out SW / ML side of things pretty well. They are not confident on the hardware front. They seemed hopeful Elon could spend some time on that since that's where they are weak, but did want his help in all domains he was interested in.\n\n5. Ratio of time spent to amount of control?\n\n-They are cool with less time / less control, more time / more control, but not less time / more control. Their fear is that there won't be enough time to discuss relevant contextual information to make correct decisions if too little time is spent.\n\n6. Equity split?\n\n-Greg still instinctually anchored on equal split. I personally disagree with him on that instinct and he asked for and was receptive to hearing other things he could use to recalibrate his mental model.\n\n-Greg noted that Ilya in some ways has contributed millions by leaving his earning potential on the table at Google.\n\n-One concern they had was the proposed employee pool was too small.\n\n7. Capitalization strategy?\n\n-Their instinct is to raise much more than $100M out of the gate. They are of the opinion that the datacenter they need alone would cost that so they feel more comfortable raising more.\n\nTakeaways:\n\nUnsure if any of this is amenable but just from listening to all of the data points they threw out, the following would satisfy their current sticky points:\n\n-Spending 5-10 hours a week with near full control, or spend less time and have less control.\n\n-Having a creative short-term override just for extreme scenarios that was not just Greg / Sam / Ilya.\n\n-An ironclad 2-3yr minority control agreement, regardless of the fates of Greg / Sam / Ilya.\n\n-$200M-$1B initial raise.\n\n-Greg and Ilya's stakes end up higher than 1/10 of Elon's but not significantly (this remains the most ambiguous).\n\n-Increasing employee pool.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-structure-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Shivon Zilis summarizes seven open questions that Brockman and Sutskever raised about control, time commitment, equity and funding for a restructured OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 80, "bates": "EMX-000080", "slug": "2017-08-28-zilis-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-08-28-zilis-to-musk" }, { "id": "2017-08-28-musk-to-zilis", "date": "2017-08-28", "time": "12:08 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Shivon Zilis" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "OpenAI notes", "body": "This is very annoying. Please encourage them to go start a company. I've had enough.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-structure-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Shivon Zilis, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Zilis's summary of Brockman and Sutskever's questions.", "tags": [ "ai", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 81, "bates": "EMX-000081", "slug": "2017-08-28-musk-to-zilis", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-08-28-musk-to-zilis" }, { "id": "2017-08-29-musk-to-birchall-q3-grant", "date": "2017-08-29", "time": "7:18 AM (UTC)", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Jared Birchall" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: Q3 2017 Grant", "body": "Yes", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-funding-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Jared Birchall (Musk family office)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-29, Exhibit 71 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; 2024MUSK-0009625)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.29.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Birchall asks whether to keep holding the quarterly $5 million payment to OpenAI after OpenAI asked about the Q3 2017 grant; Musk answers 'Yes'.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 82, "bates": "EMX-000082", "slug": "2017-08-29-musk-to-birchall-q3-grant", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-08-29-musk-to-birchall-q3-grant" }, { "id": "2017-09-13-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2017-09-13", "time": "12:40 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman" ], "subject": "Re: Current State", "body": "Sounds good. The three common stock seats (you, Greg and Sam) should be elected by common shareholders. They will de facto be yours, but not in the unlikely event that you lose the faith of a huge percentage of common stockholders over time or step away from the company by choice.\n\nI think that the Preferred A investment round (supermajority me) should have the right to appoint four (not three) seats. I would not expect to appoint them immediately, but, like I said I would unequivocally have initial control of the company, but this will change quickly.\n\nThe rough target would be to get to a 12 person board (probably more like 16 if this board really ends up deciding the fate of the world) where each board member has a deep understanding of technology, at least a basic understanding of AI and strong & sensible morals.\n\nApart from the Series A four and the Common three, there would likely be a board member with each new lead investor/ally. However, the specific individual new board members can only be added if all but one existing board member agrees. Same for removing board members.\n\nThere will also be independent board members we want to add who aren't associated with an investor. Same rules apply: requires all but one of existing directors to add or remove.\n\nI'm super tired and don't want to overcomplicate things, but this seems approx right. At the sixteen person board level, we would have 7/16 votes and I'd have a 25% influence, which is my min comfort level. That sounds about right to me. If everyone else we asked to join our board is truly against us, we should probably lose.\n\nAs mentioned, my experience with boards (assuming they consist of good, smart people) is that they are rational and reasonable. There is basically never a real hardcore battle where an individual board vote is pivotal, so this is almost certainly (sure hope so) going to be a moot point.\n\nAs a closing note, I've been really impressed with the quality of discussion with you guys on the equity and board stuff. I have a really good feeling about this.\n\nLmk if above seems reasonable.\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-structure-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk describes a proposed board structure and his level of control for a for-profit OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 83, "bates": "EMX-000083", "slug": "2017-09-13-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-09-13-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2017-09-20-sutskever-to-musk", "date": "2017-09-20", "time": "2:08 PM", "from": "Ilya Sutskever", "to": [ "Elon Musk", "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman", "Sam Teller", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "Honest Thoughts", "body": "Elon, Sam,\n\nThis process has been the highest stakes conversation that Greg and I have ever participated in, and if the project succeeds, it'll turn out to have been the highest stakes conversation the world has seen. It's also been a deeply personal conversation for all of us.\n\nYesterday while we were considering making our final commitment given the non-solicit agreement, we realized we'd made a mistake. We have several important concerns that we haven't raised with either of you. We didn't raise them because we were afraid to: we were afraid of harming the relationship, having you think less of us, or losing you as partners.\n\nThere is some chance that our concerns will prove to be unresolvable. We really hope it's not the case, but we know we will fail for sure if we don't all discuss them now. And we have hope that we can work through them and all continue working together.\n\nElon:\n\nWe really want to work with you. We believe that if we join forces, our chance of success in the mission is the greatest. Our upside is the highest. There is no doubt about that. Our desire to work with you is so great that we are happy to give up on the equity, personal control, make ourselves easily firable — whatever it takes to work with you.\n\nBut we realized that we were careless in our thinking about the implications of control for the world. Because it seemed so hubristic, we have not been seriously considering the implications of success.\n\nThe current structure provides you with a path where you end up with unilateral absolute control over the AGI. You stated that you don't want to control the final AGI, but during this negotiation, you've shown to us that absolute control is extremely important to you.\n\nAs an example, you said that you needed to be CEO of the new company so that everyone will know that you are the one who is in charge, even though you also stated that you hate being CEO and would much rather not be CEO.\n\nThus, we are concerned that as the company makes genuine progress towards AGI, you will choose to retain your absolute control of the company despite current intent to the contrary. We disagree with your statement that our ability to leave is our greatest power, because once the company is actually on track to AGI, the company will be much more important than any individual.\n\nThe goal of OpenAI is to make the future good and to avoid an AGI dictatorship. You are concerned that Demis could create an AGI dictatorship. So do we. So it is a bad idea to create a structure where you could become a dictator if you chose to, especially given that we can create some other structure that avoids this possibility.\n\nWe have a few smaller concerns, but we think it's useful to mention it here:\n\nIn the event we decide to buy Cerebras, my strong sense is that it'll be done through Tesla. But why do it this way if we could also do it from within OpenAI? Specifically, the concern is that Tesla has a duty to shareholders to maximize shareholder return, which is not aligned with OpenAI's mission. So the overall result may not end up being optimal for OpenAI.\n\nWe believe that OpenAI the non-profit was successful because both you and Sam were in it. Sam acted as a genuine counterbalance to you, which has been extremely fruitful. Greg and I, at least so far, are much worse at being a counterbalance to you. We feel this is evidenced even by this negotiation, where we were ready to sweep the long-term AGI control questions under the rug while Sam stood his ground.\n\nSam:\n\nWhen Greg and I are stuck, you've always had an answer that turned out to be deep and correct. You've been thinking about the ways forward on this problem extremely deeply and thoroughly. Greg and I understand technical execution, but we don't know how structure decisions will play out over the next month, year, or five years.\n\nBut we haven't been able to fully trust your judgements throughout this process, because we don't understand your cost function.\n\nWe don't understand why the CEO title is so important to you. Your stated reasons have changed, and it's hard to really understand what's driving it.\n\nIs AGI truly your primary motivation? How does it connect to your political goals? How has your thought process changed over time?\n\nGreg and Ilya:\n\nWe had a fair share of our own failings during this negotiation, and we'll list some of them here (Elon and Sam, I'm sure you'll have plenty to add...):\n\nDuring this negotiation, we realized that we have allowed the idea of financial return 2-3 years down the line to drive our decisions. This is why we didn't push on the control — we thought that our equity is good enough, so why worry? But this attitude is wrong, just like the attitude of AI experts who don't think that AI safety is an issue because they don't really believe that they'll build AGI.\n\nWe did not speak our full truth during the negotiation. We have our excuses, but it was damaging to the process, and we may lose both Sam and Elon as a result.\n\nThere's enough baggage here that we think it's very important for us to meet and talk it out. Our collaboration will not succeed if we don't. Can all four of us meet today? If all of us say the truth, and resolve the issues, the company that we'll create will be much more likely to withstand the very strong forces it'll experience.\n\n- Greg & Ilya", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-honest-thoughts-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Sutskever and Brockman write to Musk and Altman about concerns over control of a for-profit OpenAI.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 84, "bates": "EMX-000084", "slug": "2017-09-20-sutskever-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-09-20-sutskever-to-musk" }, { "id": "2017-09-20-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2017-09-20", "time": "2:17PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman", "Greg Brockman", "Sam Teller", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "Honest Thoughts", "body": "Guys, I've had enough. This is the final straw. Either go do something on your own or continue with OpenAI as a nonprofit. I will no longer fund OpenAI until you have made a firm commitment to stay or I'm just being a fool who is essentially providing free funding for you to create a startup. Discussions are over", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-honest-thoughts-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk responds to the \"Honest Thoughts\" email from Sutskever and Brockman.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 85, "bates": "EMX-000085", "slug": "2017-09-20-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-09-20-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2017-09-20-musk-to-sutskever-2", "date": "2017-09-20", "time": "3:08PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman", "Sam Teller", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "Honest Thoughts", "body": "To be clear, this is not an ultimatum to accept what was discussed before. That is no longer on the table.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-honest-thoughts-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Sam Altman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk follows up on his earlier reply in the \"Honest Thoughts\" thread.", "tags": [ "ai", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 86, "bates": "EMX-000086", "slug": "2017-09-20-musk-to-sutskever-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-09-20-musk-to-sutskever-2" }, { "id": "2017-09-22-musk-to-zilis", "date": "2017-09-22", "time": "10:01 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Shivon Zilis" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "Non-profit", "body": "Ok", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-nonprofit-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Shivon Zilis, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Zilis's update on the nonprofit structure.", "tags": [ "ai", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 87, "bates": "EMX-000087", "slug": "2017-09-22-musk-to-zilis", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-09-22-musk-to-zilis" }, { "id": "2017-09-22-zilis-to-musk", "date": "2017-09-22", "time": "9:50 AM", "from": "Shivon Zilis", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "Non-profit", "body": "Hi Elon,\n\nQuick FYI that Greg and Ilya said they would like to continue with the non-profit structure. They know they would need to provide a guarantee that they won't go off doing something else to make it work.\n\nHaven't spoken to Altman yet but he asked to talk this afternoon so will report anything I hear back.\n\nIf anything I can do to help let me know.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-nonprofit-2017", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Zilis tells Musk that Brockman and Sutskever want to continue with the nonprofit structure.", "tags": [ "ai", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 88, "bates": "EMX-000088", "slug": "2017-09-22-zilis-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-09-22-zilis-to-musk" }, { "id": "2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-10-percent-increment", "date": "2017-11-09", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Todd Maron" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "I think the amount should be reduced to a 10% increment in my Tesla ownership if I can get us to a $550B valuation, but that should be a fully diluted 10%, factoring in that it dilutes me too. So if it hypothetical [sic] was awarded to me now and I own (probably) ~20% fully diluted, then I would have ~30%. Of course there will be future dilution due to employee grants and equity raises, so probably this is more like 25% or so in 10 years when it has some chance of being fully awarded.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tornetta-2018-grant", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla General Counsel", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Tornetta v. Musk post-trial opinion (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024), quoting JX-664 (block quote)", "source_url": "https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340", "case": "Tornetta v. Musk, C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024)", "context": "Block-quoted passage from Musk’s Nov. 9, 2017 message describing the size of the revised compensation proposal. The opinion places it later on the same morning as the first Nov. 9 message.", "tags": [ "legal", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 89, "bates": "EMX-000089", "slug": "2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-10-percent-increment", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-10-percent-increment" }, { "id": "2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-reduced-plan", "date": "2017-11-09", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Todd Maron" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "move forward with [his compensation plan] now, but in a reduced manner from before.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tornetta-2018-grant", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla General Counsel", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Tornetta v. Musk post-trial opinion (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024), quoting JX-664", "source_url": "https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340", "case": "Tornetta v. Musk, C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024)", "context": "Email sent in the early hours of Nov. 9, 2017 about proceeding with a smaller version of his compensation plan; only the quoted fragment is available.", "tags": [ "legal", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 90, "bates": "EMX-000090", "slug": "2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-reduced-plan", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-reduced-plan" }, { "id": "2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-ultra-bullish", "date": "2017-11-09", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Todd Maron" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Given that this will all go to causes that at least aspirationally maximize the probability of a good future for humanity, plus all Tesla shareholders will be super happy, I think this will be received well. It should come across as an ultra bullish view of the future, given that this comp package is worth nothing if ‘all’ I do is almost double Tesla’s market cap.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tornetta-2018-grant", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla General Counsel", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Tornetta v. Musk post-trial opinion (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024), quoting JX-664 (block quote)", "source_url": "https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340", "case": "Tornetta v. Musk, C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024)", "context": "Block-quoted follow-up message sent \"moments later\" per the court, about how the revised compensation plan would be received.", "tags": [ "legal", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 91, "bates": "EMX-000091", "slug": "2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-ultra-bullish", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-11-09-musk-to-maron-ultra-bullish" }, { "id": "2017-12-01-musk-to-maron-more-than-intended", "date": "2017-12-01", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Todd Maron" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "That is more than intended. Let’s go with 10% of the current FDS number, so 20.915M.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tornetta-2018-grant", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla General Counsel", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Tornetta v. Musk post-trial opinion (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024), quoting JX-682", "source_url": "https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340", "case": "Tornetta v. Musk, C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2024)", "context": "Musk’s response on Dec. 1, 2017 to a draft share count for his compensation plan, as quoted by the court.", "tags": [ "legal", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 92, "bates": "EMX-000092", "slug": "2017-12-01-musk-to-maron-more-than-intended", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2017-12-01-musk-to-maron-more-than-intended" }, { "id": "2018-01-21-altman-to-musk", "date": "2018-01-21", "time": "5:08 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman", "Ilya Sutskever", "Sam Teller", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "ICO", "body": "Elon—\n\nHeads up, spoke to some of the safety team and there were a lot of concerns about the ICO and possible unintended effects in the future.\n\nPlanning to talk to the whole team tomorrow and invite input. Going to emphasize the need to keep this confidential, but I think it's really important we get buy-in and give people the chance to weigh in early.\n\nSam", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-ico-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman tells Musk that OpenAI's safety team had concerns about an ICO and that he planned to discuss it with the whole team.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 93, "bates": "EMX-000093", "slug": "2018-01-21-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-01-21-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2018-01-21-musk-to-altman", "date": "2018-01-21", "time": "5:56 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "Greg Brockman", "Ilya Sutskever", "Sam Teller", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "ICO", "body": "Absolutely", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-ico-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Altman's note about the safety team's concerns over an ICO.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 94, "bates": "EMX-000094", "slug": "2018-01-21-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-01-21-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2018-01-31-karpathy-to-musk", "date": "2018-01-31", "time": "1:20 PM", "from": "Andrej Karpathy", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "Top AI institutions today", "body": "The ICLR conference (which is the top deep learning - specific conference (NIPS is larger, but more diffuse)) released their decisions for accepted/rejected papers, and someone made some nice plots that show where the current deep learning / AI research happens at. It's an imperfect measure because not every company might prioritize paper publications, but it's indicative.\n\nHere's a plot that shows the total number of papers (broken down by oral/poster/workshop/rejected) from any institution:\n\nLong story short, Google is dominating with 83 paper submissions. The academic institutions (Berkeley / Stanford / CMU / MIT) are next, in 20-30 ranges each.\n\nJust thought it was an interesting snapshot of where all the action is today. The full data is here: http://webia.lip6.fr/~pajot/dataviz.html\n\n-Andrej", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-failure-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Shivon Zilis", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Andrej Karpathy sends Musk a snapshot of paper submissions to the ICLR conference by institution.", "tags": [ "ai", "engineering" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 95, "bates": "EMX-000095", "slug": "2018-01-31-karpathy-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-01-31-karpathy-to-musk" }, { "id": "2018-01-31-karpathy-to-musk-2", "date": "2018-01-31", "time": "11:54 PM", "from": "Andrej Karpathy", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Top AI institutions today", "body": "Working at the cutting edge of AI is unfortunately expensive. For example, DeepMind's operating expenses in 2016 were at around $250M USD (does not include compute). With their growing team today it might be ~0.5B/yr. But then Alphabet in 2016 reported ~20B net income so it's still fairly cheap even if DeepMind had no revenue of its own. In addition to DeepMind, Google also has Google Brain, Research, and Cloud. And TensorFlow, TPUs, and they own about a third of all research (in fact, they hold their own AI conferences).\n\nI also strongly suspect that compute horsepower will be necessary (and possibly even sufficient) to reach AGI. If historical trends are any indication, progress in AI is primarily driven by systems - compute, data, infrastructure. The core algorithms we use today have remained largely unchanged from the ~90s. Not only that, but any algorithmic advances published in a paper somewhere can be almost immediately re-implemented and incorporated. Conversely, algorithmic advances alone are inert without the scale to also make them scary.\n\nIt seems to me that OpenAI today is burning cash and that the funding model cannot reach the scale to seriously compete with Google (an 800B company). If you can't seriously compete but continue to do research in open, you might in fact be making things worse and helping them out \"for free\", because any advances are fairly easy for them to copy and immediately incorporate, at scale.\n\nA for-profit pivot might create a more sustainable revenue stream over time and would, with the current team, likely bring in a lot of investment. However, building out a product from scratch would steal focus from AI research, it would take a long time and it's unclear if a company could \"catch up\" to Google scale, and the investors might exert too much pressure in the wrong directions.\n\nThe most promising option I can think of, as I mentioned earlier, would be for OpenAI to attach to Tesla as its cash cow. I believe attachments to other large suspects (e.g. Apple? Amazon?) would fail due to an incompatible company DNA. Using a rocket analogy, Tesla already built the \"first stage\" of the rocket with the whole supply chain of Model 3 and its onboard computer and a persistent internet connection. The \"second stage\" would be a full self driving solution based on large-scale neural network training, which OpenAI expertise could significantly help accelerate. With a functioning full self-driving solution in ~2-3 years we could sell a lot of cars/trucks. If we do this really well, the transportation industry is large enough that we could increase Tesla's market cap to high O(~100K), and use that revenue to fund the AI work at the appropriate scale.\n\nI cannot see anything else that has the potential to reach sustainable Google-scale capital within a decade.\n\n-Andrej", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-failure-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Karpathy replies with his views on OpenAI's funding needs relative to Google and the option of attaching OpenAI to Tesla.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 96, "bates": "EMX-000096", "slug": "2018-01-31-karpathy-to-musk-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-01-31-karpathy-to-musk-2" }, { "id": "2018-01-31-musk-to-brockman", "date": "2018-01-31", "time": "2:02 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Greg Brockman", "Ilya Sutskever", "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "Top AI institutions today", "body": "OpenAI is on a path of certain failure relative to Google. There obviously needs to be immediate and dramatic action or everyone except for Google will be consigned to irrelevance.\n\nI have considered the ICO approach and will not support it. In my opinion, that would simply result in a massive loss of credibility for OpenAI and everyone associated with the ICO. If something seems too good to be true, it is. This was, in my opinion, an unwise diversion.\n\nThe only paths I can think of are a major expansion of OpenAI and a major expansion of Tesla AI. Perhaps both simultaneously. The former would require a major increase in funds donated and highly credible people joining our board. The current board situation is very weak.\n\nI will set up a time for us to talk tomorrow. To be clear, I have a lot of respect for your abilities and accomplishments, but I am not happy with how things have been managed. That is why I have had trouble engaging with OpenAI in recent months. Either we fix things and my engagement increases a lot or we don’t and I will drop to near zero and publicly reduce my association. I will not be in a situation where the perception of my influence and time doesn’t match the reality.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-failure-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever, Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk forwards Karpathy's ICLR data to OpenAI's leaders along with his view of OpenAI relative to Google, the ICO idea and his future engagement.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "fundraising", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 97, "bates": "EMX-000097", "slug": "2018-01-31-musk-to-brockman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-01-31-musk-to-brockman" }, { "id": "2018-01-31-musk-to-karpathy", "date": "2018-01-31", "time": "2:07 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Andrej Karpathy" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Top AI institutions today", "body": "fyi\n\nWhat do you think makes sense? Happy to talk by phone if that’s better.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-failure-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Andrej Karpathy", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk forwards his message to OpenAI's leaders to Karpathy and asks for his view.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 98, "bates": "EMX-000098", "slug": "2018-01-31-musk-to-karpathy", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-01-31-musk-to-karpathy" }, { "id": "2018-02-01-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2018-02-01", "time": "3:52 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Top AI institutions today", "body": "[Forwarded previous message from Andrej]\n\nAndrej is exactly right. We may wish it otherwise, but, in my and Andrej’s opinion, Tesla is the only path that could even hope to hold a candle to Google. Even then, the probability of being a counterweight to Google is small. It just isn’t zero.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-failure-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk forwards Karpathy's reply to Sutskever and Brockman with his comment on Tesla as a path.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "acquisition" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 99, "bates": "EMX-000099", "slug": "2018-02-01-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-02-01-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2018-04-02-altman-to-musk", "date": "2018-04-02", "time": "1:54 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "The OpenAI Charter", "body": "We are planning to release this next week--any thoughts?\n\nThe OpenAI Charter\n\nOpenAI's mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence (AGI) — by which we mean highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically-valuable creative work — benefits all of humanity. We will attempt to directly build safe and beneficial AGI, but will also consider our mission fulfilled if our work aids others to achieve this outcome. To that end, we commit to the following principles:\n\nBroadly Distributed Benefits\n\nWe commit to use any influence we obtain over AGI’s deployment to ensure it is used for the benefit of all, and to avoid enabling uses of AI or AGI that harm humanity or unduly concentrate power.\n\nOur primary fiduciary duty is to humanity. We anticipate needing to marshal substantial resources to fulfill our mission, but will always assiduously act to minimize conflicts of interest among our employees and stakeholders that could compromise broad benefit.\n\nLong-Term Safety\n\nWe are committed to doing the research required to make AGI safe, and to driving the broad adoption of such research across the AI community.\n\nWe are concerned about late-stage AGI development becoming a competitive race without time for adequate safety precautions. Therefore, if a value-aligned, safety-conscious project comes close to building AGI before we do, we commit to stop competing with and start assisting this project. We will work out specifics in case by case agreements, but a typical triggering condition might be \"a better-than-even chance of success in the next 2 years\".\n\nTechnical Leadership\n\nTo be effective at addressing AGI's impact on society, OpenAI must be on the cutting edge of AI capabilities — policy and safety advocacy alone would be insufficient.\n\nWe believe that AI will have broad societal impact before AGI, and we’ll strive to lead in those areas that are directly aligned with our mission and expertise.\n\nCooperative Orientation\n\nWe will actively cooperate with other research and policy institutions; we seek to create a global community working together to address AGI’s global challenges.\n\nWe are committed to providing public goods that help society navigate the path to AGI. Today this includes publishing most of our AI research, but we expect that safety and security concerns will reduce our traditional publishing in the future, while increasing the importance of sharing safety, policy, and standards research.", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-charter-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Shivon Zilis", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Altman sends Musk the draft OpenAI Charter ahead of its planned release.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 100, "bates": "EMX-000100", "slug": "2018-04-02-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-04-02-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2018-04-02-musk-to-altman", "date": "2018-04-02", "time": "2:45PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "The OpenAI Charter", "body": "Sounds fine", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-charter-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Altman's draft OpenAI Charter.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 101, "bates": "EMX-000101", "slug": "2018-04-02-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-04-02-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2018-04-17-musk-to-all-tesla-progress-precision-profit", "date": "2018-04-17", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Progress, Precision and Profit", "body": "Progress\n\nFirst, congratulations are in order! We have now completed our third full week of producing over 2000 Model 3 vehicles. The first week was 2020, the second was 2070 and we just completed 2250 last week, along with 2000 Model S/X vehicles.\n\nThis is more than double Tesla’s weekly production rate last year and an amazing feat in the face of many challenges! It is extremely rare for an automotive company to grow the production rate by over 100% from one year to the next. Moreover, there has simultaneously been a significant improvement in quality and build accuracy, which is reflected in positive owner feedback.\n\nStarting today at Giga and tomorrow at Fremont, we will be stopping for three to five days to do a comprehensive set of upgrades. This should set us up for Model 3 production of 3000 to 4000 per week next month.\n\nAnother set of upgrades starting in late May should be enough to unlock production capacity of 6000 Model 3 vehicles per week by the end of June. Please note that all areas of Tesla and our suppliers will be required to demonstrate a Model 3 capacity of ~6000/week by building 850 sets of car parts in 24 hours no later than June 30th.\n\nAny Tesla department or supplier that is unable to do this will need to have a very good explanation why not, along with a plan for fixing the problem and present that to me directly. If anyone needs help achieving this, please let me know as soon as possible. We are going to find a way or make a way to get there.\n\nThe reason that the burst-build target rate is 6000 and not 5000 per week in June is that we cannot have a number with no margin for error across thousands of internally and externally produced parts and processes, amplified by a complex global logistics chain. Actual production will move as fast as the least lucky and least well-executed part of the entire Tesla production/supply chain system.\n\nBy having a Model 3 subsystem burst-build requirement of 6k by the end of June, we will lay the groundwork for achieving a steady 6k/week across the whole Model 3 system a few months later.\n\nAs part of the drive towards 6k, all Model 3 production at Fremont will move to 24/7operations. This means that we will be adding another shift to general assembly, body and paint. Please refer anyone you know who you think meets the Tesla bar for talent, drive and trust. Between Fremont and Giga, Tesla will be adding about 400 people per week for several weeks.\n\nPrecision\n\nMost of the design tolerances of the Model 3 are already better than any other car in the world. Soon, they will all be better. This is not enough. We will keep going until the Model 3 build precision is a factor of ten better than any other car in the world. I am not kidding.\n\nOur car needs to be designed and built with such accuracy and precision that, if an owner measures dimensions, panel gaps and flushness, and their measurements don’t match the Model 3 specs, it just means that their measuring tape is wrong.\n\nSome parts suppliers will be unwilling or unable to achieve this level of precision. I understand that this will be considered an unreasonable request by some. That’s ok, there are lots of other car companies with much lower standards. They just can’t work with Tesla.\n\nProfit\n\nA fair criticism leveled at Tesla by outside critics is that you’re not a real company unless you generate a profit, meaning simply that revenue exceeds costs. It didn’t make sense to do that until reaching economies of scale, but now we are there.\n\nGoing forward, we will be far more rigorous about expenditures. I have asked the Tesla finance team to comb through every expense worldwide, no matter how small, and cut everything that doesn’t have a strong value justification.\n\nAll capital or other expenditures above a million dollars, or where a set of related expenses may accumulate to a million dollars over the next 12 months, should be considered on hold until explicitly approved by me. If you are the manager responsible, please make sure you have a detailed, first principles understanding of the supplier quote, including every line item of parts & labor, before we meet.\n\nI have been disappointed to discover how many contractor companies are interwoven throughout Tesla. Often, it is like a Russian nesting doll of contractor, subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, etc. before you finally find someone doing actual work. This means a lot of middle-managers adding cost but not doing anything obviously useful. Also, many contracts are essentially open time & materials, not fixed price and duration, which creates an incentive to turn molehills into mountains, as they never want to end the money train.\n\nThere is a very wide range of contractor performance, from excellent to worse than a drunken sloth. All contracting companies should consider the coming week to be a final opportunity to demonstrate excellence. Any that fail to meet the Tesla standard of excellence will have their contracts ended on Monday.\n\nBtw, here are a few productivity recommendations:\n\n– Excessive meetings are the blight of big companies and almost always get worse over time. Please get of all large meetings, unless you’re certain they are providing value to the whole audience, in which case keep them very short.\n\n– Also get rid of frequent meetings, unless you are dealing with an extremely urgent matter. Meeting frequency should drop rapidly once the urgent matter is resolved.\n\n– Walk out of a meeting or drop off a call as soon as it is obvious you aren’t adding value. It is not rude to leave, it is rude to make someone stay and waste their time.\n\n– Don’t use acronyms or nonsense words for objects, software or processes at Tesla. In general, anything that requires an explanation inhibits communication. We don’t want people to have to memorize a glossary just to function at Tesla.\n\n– Communication should travel via the shortest path necessary to get the job done, not through the “chain of command”. Any manager who attempts to enforce chain of command communication will soon find themselves working elsewhere.\n\n– A major source of issues is poor communication between depts. The way to solve this is allow free flow of information between all levels. If, in order to get something done between depts, an individual contributor has to talk to their manager, who talks to a director, who talks to a VP, who talks to another VP, who talks to a director, who talks to a manager, who talks to someone doing the actual work, then super dumb things will happen. It must be ok for people to talk directly and just make the right thing happen.\n\n– In general, always pick common sense as your guide. If following a “company rule” is obviously ridiculous in a particular situation, such that it would make for a great Dilbert cartoon, then the rule should change.\n\nIf there is something you think should be done to make Tesla execute better or allow you to look forward to coming to work more (same thing in the long term), please send a note to [redacted]\n\nThanks for being such a kickass team and accomplishing miracles every day. It matters. We are burning the midnight oil to burn the midnight oil.\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "model3-ramp-2018", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Tesla Model 3 production aims for 6,000 units per week in June after upgrade in May\" (Apr 17, 2018)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2018/04/17/tesla-model-3-production-goal-6000-units-per-week/", "case": null, "context": "Leaked email sent during a Model 3 production line shutdown at Fremont and Gigafactory 1, setting a 6,000 per week subsystem target and a spending review. Includes the productivity recommendations (meetings, acronyms, chain of command) widely quoted afterwards. Electrek and Jalopnik both obtained it.", "tags": [ "manufacturing", "cost", "management", "communication", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 102, "bates": "EMX-000102", "slug": "2018-04-17-musk-to-all-tesla-progress-precision-profit", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-04-17-musk-to-all-tesla-progress-precision-profit" }, { "id": "2018-04-23-zilis-to-musk-ai-updates", "date": "2018-04-23", "time": "1:49 AM", "from": "Shivon Zilis", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "AI updates", "body": "Updated info per a conversation with Altman. You’re tentatively set to speak with him on Tuesday.\nFinancing:\n-He confirmed again that they are definitely not doing an ICO but rather equity that has a fixed maximum return.\n-Would be a rather unique subsidiary structure for the raise which he wants to walk you through.\n-Wants to move within 4-6 week on first round (probably largely Reid money, potentially some corporates).\nTech:\n-Says Dota 5v5 looking better than anticipated.\n-The sharp rise in Dota bot performance is apparently causing people internally to worry that the timeline to AGI is sooner than they’d thought before.\n-Thinks they are on track to beat Montezuma’s Revenge shortly.\nTime allocation:\n-I’ve reallocated most of the hours I used to spend with OpenAI to Neuralink and Tesla. This naturally happened with you stepping off the board and related factors — but if you’d prefer I pull more hours back to OpenAI oversight please let me know.\n-Sam and Greg asked if I’d be on their informal advisory board (just Gabe Newell so far), which seems fine and better than the formal board given potential conflicts? If that doesn’t feel right let me know what you’d prefer.\nOn Mar 25, 2018, at 11:03 AM, Shivon Zilis [redacted] wrote:\nOpenAI\nFundraising:\n-No longer doing the ICO / “instrument to purchase compute in advance” type structure. Altman is thinking through an instrument where the 4-5 large corporates who are interested can invest with a return capped at 50x if OpenAI does get to some semblance of money-making AGI. They apparently seem willing just for access reasons. He wants to discuss with you in more detail.\nFormal Board Resignation:\n-You're still technically on the board so need to send a quick one liner to Sam Altman saying something like “With this email I hereby resign as a director of OpenAI, effective Feb 20th 2018”.\nFuture Board:\n-Altman said he is cool with me joining then having to step off if I become conflicted, but is concerned that others would consider it a burned bridge if I had to step off. I think best bet is not to join for now and be an ambiguous advisor but let me know if you feel differently. They have Adam D’Angelo as the potential fifth to take your place, which seems great?\nTeslaAI\nAndrej has three candidates in pipeline, may have 1-2 come in to meet you on Tuesday. He will send you a briefing note about them. Also, he’s working on starter language for a potential release that will be ready to discuss Tuesday. It will follow the “full-stack AI lab” angle we talked about but, if that doesn’t feel right, please course correct... is tricky messaging.\nCerebras\nChip should be available in August for them to test, and they plan to let others have remote access in September. The Cerebras guy also mentioned that a lot of their recent customer interest has been from companies upset about the Nvidia change in terms of service (the one that forces companies away from consumer grade GPUs to enterprise Pascals / Voltas). Scott Gray and Ilya continue to spend a bunch of time with them", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-for-profit-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 32-19, Exhibit 18 to Verified First Amended Complaint (filed Nov 14 2024); same email at Dkt. 391-15 (Exhibit 60 to Wiener Declaration, 2024MUSK-0005604-05)", "source_url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.32.19.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Zilis briefs Musk on her talk with Altman about the capped-return fundraising structure, the Dota bot, her board status and Tesla AI recruiting, and repeats her March 25 notes.", "tags": [ "ai", "fundraising", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 103, "bates": "EMX-000103", "slug": "2018-04-23-zilis-to-musk-ai-updates", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-04-23-zilis-to-musk-ai-updates" }, { "id": "2018-04-23-musk-to-zilis-ok-by-me", "date": "2018-04-23", "time": "2:06 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Shivon Zilis" ], "cc": [ "Sam Teller" ], "subject": "Re: AI updates", "body": "Ok by me", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-for-profit-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Shivon Zilis, Sam Teller", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 391-15, Exhibit 60 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted version filed Jan 16 2026; 2024MUSK-0005604); also Dkt. 379-45 and 379-87", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.391.15.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk replies to Zilis's briefing on her conversation with Altman about OpenAI's fundraising structure and her proposed role as an informal advisor.", "tags": [ "ai", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 104, "bates": "EMX-000104", "slug": "2018-04-23-musk-to-zilis-ok-by-me", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-04-23-musk-to-zilis-ok-by-me" }, { "id": "2018-04-28-musk-to-altman-board-resignation", "date": "2018-04-28", "time": "5:54 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [ "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "Re: OpenAI Board", "body": "I hereby resign as a director of OpenAI, Inc., effective February 21, 2018.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-for-profit-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman, Shivon Zilis", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 328-58, Exhibit 54 to Wiener Declaration ISO OpenAI Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (unsealed exhibit; OPENAI_MUSK00000865)", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.328.58.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk sends the one-line formal resignation from OpenAI's board that OpenAI needed in order to seat Adam D'Angelo.", "tags": [ "ai", "management", "legal" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 105, "bates": "EMX-000105", "slug": "2018-04-28-musk-to-altman-board-resignation", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-04-28-musk-to-altman-board-resignation" }, { "id": "2018-06-12-musk-to-all-tesla-reorg-update", "date": "2018-06-12", "time": "10:27 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Reorg Update", "body": "As described previously, we are conducting a comprehensive organizational restructuring across our whole company. Tesla has grown and evolved rapidly over the past several years, which has resulted in some duplication of roles and some job functions that, while they made sense in the past, are difficult to justify today.\n\nAs part of this effort, and the need to reduce costs and become profitable, we have made the difficult decision to let go of approximately 9% of our colleagues across the company. These cuts were almost entirely made from our salaried population and no production associates were included, so this will not affect our ability to reach Model 3 production targets in the coming months.\n\nGiven that Tesla has never made an annual profit in the almost 15 years since we have existed, profit is obviously not what motivates us. What drives us is our mission to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable, clean energy, but we will never achieve that mission unless we eventually demonstrate that we can be sustainably profitable. That is a valid and fair criticism of Tesla’s history to date.\n\nThis week, we are informing those whose roles are impacted by this action. We made these decisions by evaluating the criticality of each position, whether certain jobs could be done more efficiently and productively, and by assessing the specific skills and abilities of each individual in the company. As you know, we are also continuing to flatten our management structure to help us communicate better, eliminate bureaucracy and move faster.\n\nIn addition to this company-wide restructuring, we have decided not to renew our residential sales agreement with Home Depot in order to focus our efforts on selling solar power in Tesla stores and online. The majority of Tesla employees working at Home Depot will be offered the opportunity to move over to Tesla retail locations.\n\nI would like to thank everyone who is departing Tesla for their hard work over the years. I’m deeply grateful for your many contributions to our mission. It is very difficult to say goodbye. In order to minimize the impact, Tesla is providing significant salary and stock vesting (proportionate to length of service) to those we are letting go.\n\nTo be clear, Tesla will still continue to hire outstanding talent in critical roles as we move forward and there is still a significant need for additional production personnel. I also want to emphasize that we are making this hard decision now so that we never have to do this again.\n\nTo those who are departing, thank you for everything you have done for Tesla and we wish you well in your future opportunities. To those remaining, I would like to thank you in advance for the difficult job that remains ahead. We are a small company in one of the toughest and most competitive industries on Earth, where just staying alive, let alone growing, is a form of victory (Tesla and Ford remain the only American car companies who haven’t gone bankrupt). Yet, despite our tiny size, Tesla has already played a major role in moving the auto industry towards sustainable electric transport and moving the energy industry towards sustainable power generation and storage. We must continue to drive that forward for the good of the world.\n\nThanks,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "restructuring-2018", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Tesla is laying off about 9% of its workforce as it restructures the company\" (June 12, 2018)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2018/06/12/tesla-layoffs-workforce-restructure/", "case": null, "context": "Companywide email announcing a restructuring that cut about 9 percent of staff, mostly salaried roles, and the end of the Home Depot residential sales agreement.", "tags": [ "firing", "cost", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 106, "bates": "EMX-000106", "slug": "2018-06-12-musk-to-all-tesla-reorg-update", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-06-12-musk-to-all-tesla-reorg-update" }, { "id": "2018-06-15-musk-to-all-tesla-only-8-days-left", "date": "2018-06-15", "time": "8:27 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Only 8 days left to reach 700 cars/day or 5k/week", "body": "It's getting very exciting! All parts of the Model 3 production system are now above 500 and some are almost at 700 cars already. Congratulations to all on making so much progress!\nThat said, radical improvements are still needed in paint shop output, GA3, bringing up the new GA4, End of Line and Module Zone 4 at Giga. We also need to achieve sustained, 700+ per week on the body line.\nWherever you are in the company, if you feel you can help out in any of those areas, please check in with Jat Dhillon on GA3, Jerome Guillen on GA4 and Omead on EoL and JB Straubel or Christ Lister on Module Zone 4.\nI will be at our Fremont factory almost 24/7 for the next several days checking in with those groups to make sure they have as many resources as they can handle.\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "model3-ramp-2018", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk e-mails Tesla employees urging 'radical improvements' to hit quarterly targets\" (June 16, 2018)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/16/elon-musk-e-mail-to-tesla-employees-says-radical-improvements-needed.html", "case": null, "context": "Friday-night email during the push to reach 5,000 Model 3 per week by end of June 2018. CNBC received it from a current employee.", "tags": [ "manufacturing", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 107, "bates": "EMX-000107", "slug": "2018-06-15-musk-to-all-tesla-only-8-days-left", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-06-15-musk-to-all-tesla-only-8-days-left" }, { "id": "2018-07-01-musk-to-all-tesla-we-did-it", "date": "2018-07-01", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "We did it!! What an incredible job by an amazing team. Couldn’t be more proud to work with you. It is an honor.\n\nThe level of dedication and creativity was mind-blowing. We either found a way or, by will and inventiveness, created entirely new solutions that were thought impossible.\n\nIntense in tents. Transporting entire production lines across the world in massive cargo planes. Whatever. It worked.\n\nNot only did we factory gate over 5000 Model 3’s, but we also achieved the S & X production target for a combined 7000 vehicle week!\n\nWhat’s more, with the widespread productivity gains throughout Tesla and the new production lines spooling up, we are on track to reach 6K/week for Model 3 next month.\n\nI think we just became a real car company….\n\nThank you for your hard work and dedication,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "model3-ramp-2018", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Fortune (Bloomberg), \"Read the Email Elon Musk Sent to Tesla Employees When They Hit the Model 3 Production Goal\" (July 2, 2018; \"reformatted version\")", "source_url": "https://fortune.com/2018/07/02/elon-musk-email-tesla-employees-model-3-goal", "case": null, "context": "Sunday email after Tesla reached 5,000 Model 3 produced in a week. Bloomberg described the text as a reformatted version.", "tags": [ "manufacturing", "culture", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 108, "bates": "EMX-000108", "slug": "2018-07-01-musk-to-all-tesla-we-did-it", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-07-01-musk-to-all-tesla-we-did-it" }, { "id": "2018-08-02-musk-to-board-offer-to-take-tesla-private", "date": "2018-08-02", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Tesla Board of Directors", "Tesla Chief Financial Officer", "Tesla General Counsel" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Offer to Take Tesla Private at $420", "body": "[s]ubjects Tesla to constant defamatory attacks by the short-selling community, resulting in great harm to our valuable brand. [...] matter be put to a shareholder vote at the earliest opportunity [...] offer expires in 30 days.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "take-private-2018", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla board, CFO and general counsel", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "SEC v. Musk complaint (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2018), para. 23, quoting the email", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/2019/https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2018/comp-pr2018-219.pdf", "case": "SEC v. Musk, No. 1:18-cv-8865 (S.D.N.Y.)", "context": "Email sent after market close on Aug. 2, 2018, five days before the \"funding secured\" tweet. Only fragments quoted in the SEC complaint are reproduced, joined with [...].", "tags": [ "fundraising", "legal", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 109, "bates": "EMX-000109", "slug": "2018-08-02-musk-to-board-offer-to-take-tesla-private", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-08-02-musk-to-board-offer-to-take-tesla-private" }, { "id": "2018-08-07-musk-to-all-tesla-taking-tesla-private", "date": "2018-08-07", "time": "3:16 PM EDT", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Taking Tesla Private", "body": "Earlier today, I announced that I’m considering taking Tesla private at a price of $420/share. I wanted to let you know my rationale for this, and why I think this is the best path forward.\n\nFirst, a final decision has not yet been made, but the reason for doing this is all about creating the environment for Tesla to operate best. As a public company, we are subject to wild swings in our stock price that can be a major distraction for everyone working at Tesla, all of whom are shareholders. Being public also subjects us to the quarterly earnings cycle that puts enormous pressure on Tesla to make decisions that may be right for a given quarter, but not necessarily right for the long-term. Finally, as the most shorted stock in the history of the stock market, being public means that there are large numbers of people who have the incentive to attack the company.\n\nI fundamentally believe that we are at our best when everyone is focused on executing, when we can remain focused on our long-term mission, and when there are not perverse incentives for people to try to harm what we’re all trying to achieve.\n\nThis is especially true for a company like Tesla that has a long-term, forward-looking mission. SpaceX is a perfect example: it is far more operationally efficient, and that is largely due to the fact that it is privately held. This is not to say that it will make sense for Tesla to be private over the long-term. In the future, once Tesla enters a phase of slower, more predictable growth, it will likely make sense to return to the public markets.\n\nHere’s what I envision being private would mean for all shareholders, including all of our employees.\n\nFirst, I would like to structure this so that all shareholders have a choice. Either they can stay investors in a private Tesla or they can be bought out at $420 per share, which is a 20% premium over the stock price following our Q2 earnings call (which had already increased by 16%). My hope is for all shareholders to remain, but if they prefer to be bought out, then this would enable that to happen at a nice premium.\n\nSecond, my intention is for all Tesla employees to remain shareholders of the company, just as is the case at SpaceX. If we were to go private, employees would still be able to periodically sell their shares and exercise their options. This would enable you to still share in the growing value of the company that you have all worked so hard to build over time.\n\nThird, the intention is not to merge SpaceX and Tesla. They would continue to have separate ownership and governance structures. However, the structure envisioned for Tesla is similar in many ways to the SpaceX structure: external shareholders and employee shareholders have an opportunity to sell or buy approximately every six months.\n\nFinally, this has nothing to do with accumulating control for myself. I own about 20% of the company now, and I don’t envision that being substantially different after any deal is completed.\n\nBasically, I’m trying to accomplish an outcome where Tesla can operate at its best, free from as much distraction and short-term thinking as possible, and where there is as little change for all of our investors, including all of our employees, as possible.\n\nThis proposal to go private would ultimately be finalized through a vote of our shareholders. If the process ends the way I expect it will, a private Tesla would ultimately be an enormous opportunity for all of us. Either way, the future is very bright and we’ll keep fighting to achieve our mission.\n\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "take-private-2018", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees (also posted on Tesla blog)", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Tesla blog, \"Taking Tesla Private\" (Aug 7, 2018), Wayback Machine copy", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20180808/https://www.tesla.com/blog/taking-tesla-private", "case": null, "context": "Email sent to employees and posted on the Tesla blog the day Musk tweeted he was considering taking Tesla private at $420 per share. The SEC complaint lists the send time as about 3:16 PM EDT.", "tags": [ "fundraising", "strategy", "communication", "legal" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 110, "bates": "EMX-000110", "slug": "2018-08-07-musk-to-all-tesla-taking-tesla-private", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-08-07-musk-to-all-tesla-taking-tesla-private" }, { "id": "2018-08-24-musk-to-all-tesla-staying-public", "date": "2018-08-24", "time": "8:34 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Staying Public", "body": "After giving this a lot of thought, I have come to the conclusion that the best path for the foreseeable future is for Tesla to remain a public company.\nThere are certainly a number of very compelling reasons to go private, so this is far from an obvious decision, but, on balance, being public appears to best serve the interests of the people of Tesla and those who have invested in our future.\nThanks for being awesome,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "take-private-2018", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Here's how Elon Musk told employees he was abandoning the take-private idea for Tesla\" (Aug 24, 2018)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/24/elon-musk-sent-this-e-mail-to-employees-abandoning-take-private-plan.html", "case": null, "context": "Friday-night email telling employees Tesla would remain public, sent the same night as Tesla’s public announcement.", "tags": [ "strategy", "fundraising", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 111, "bates": "EMX-000111", "slug": "2018-08-24-musk-to-all-tesla-staying-public", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-08-24-musk-to-all-tesla-staying-public" }, { "id": "2018-09-30-musk-to-all-tesla-very-close-to-profitability", "date": "2018-09-30", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All employees of Tesla, Inc." ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "We are very close to achieving profitability and proving the naysayers wrong, but, to be certain, we must execute really well tomorrow (Sunday).\n\nIf we go all out tomorrow, we will achieve an epic victory beyond all expectations.\n\nGo Tesla!!!\n\nThanks for all your hard work,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "sec_filing", "source_title": "Tesla Form 8-K, Exhibit 99.1 (accession 0001564590-18-023716), Wayback Machine copy", "source_url": "https://web.archive.org/web/2019/https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000156459018023716/tsla-ex991_6.htm", "case": null, "context": "End-of-quarter email filed by Tesla with the SEC as an exhibit to a Form 8-K, days after the SEC settlement over the 2018 take-private tweet.", "tags": [ "deadlines", "strategy", "legal" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 112, "bates": "EMX-000112", "slug": "2018-09-30-musk-to-all-tesla-very-close-to-profitability", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-09-30-musk-to-all-tesla-very-close-to-profitability" }, { "id": "2018-11-02-musk-to-newell-very-limited", "date": "2018-11-02", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Gabe Newell" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "very limited [...] I still provide some financial support and get verbal and email updates every few weeks from Sam Altman, but don’t spend time there. I lost confidence that OpenAI could muster the resources to serve as an effective counterweight to Google/Deepmind and decided to attempt that through Tesla instead.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-for-profit-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Gabe Newell (Valve)", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman, Dkt. 379-62, Declaration of C. Paul Wazzan (Exhibit 10 to Hawes Declaration), para. 92, quoting Musk Dep. Ex. 16, \"November 2, 2018 email from Elon Musk to Gabe Newell\" (2024MUSK-0009544); only the quoted portion is available", "source_url": "https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cand.433688/gov.uscourts.cand.433688.379.62.pdf", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "In a Nov 2, 2018 reply to Valve co-founder Gabe Newell, Musk describes his involvement with OpenAI at that point. Quoted in a declaration by plaintiffs' damages expert C. Paul Wazzan.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 113, "bates": "EMX-000113", "slug": "2018-11-02-musk-to-newell-very-limited", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-11-02-musk-to-newell-very-limited" }, { "id": "2018-12-17-altman-to-musk", "date": "2018-12-17", "time": "3:42 PM", "from": "Sam Altman", "to": [ "Elon Musk" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: OpenAI update", "body": "Hey Elon–\n\nIn Q1 of next year, we plan to do a final Dota tournament with any pro team that wants to play for a large cash prize, on an unrestricted game. After that, we'll call model-free RL complete, and a subset of the team will work on re-solving 1v1 Dota with model-based RL.\n\nWe also plan to release a number of robot hand demos in Q1–Rubiks cube, pen tricks, and Chinese ball rotation. The learning speed for new tasks should be very fast. Later in the year, we will try mounting two hands on two arms and see what happens...\n\nWe are also making fast progress on language. My hope is that next year we can generate short stories and a good dialogue bot.\n\n[redacted] The hope is that we can use this unsupervised learning to build models that can do hard things, eg never make an image classification mistake a human wouldn't, which to me would imply some level of conceptual understanding.\n\nWe are also making good progress in the multi-agent environment, with multiple agents now collaborating to build simple structure, play laser tag, etc.\n\nFinally, I am working on a deal to move our computing from Google to Microsoft (in addition to our own data centers).\n\nAlso happy to talk about fundraising (we should have enough for the next ~2 years even with aggressive growth) and evolving hardware thoughts if helpful, would prefer not to put either of those in email but maybe next time you're at Pioneer?\n\nSam", "musk_authored": false, "thread": "openai-update-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Elon Musk", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Altman gives Musk an update on OpenAI's research plans, compute and fundraising.", "tags": [ "ai", "engineering", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 114, "bates": "EMX-000114", "slug": "2018-12-17-altman-to-musk", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-12-17-altman-to-musk" }, { "id": "2018-12-17-musk-to-altman", "date": "2018-12-17", "time": "3:47 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Re: OpenAI update", "body": "Sounds good\n\nCould probably meet Wed eve in SF", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-update-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk replies to Altman's December 2018 OpenAI update.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 115, "bates": "EMX-000115", "slug": "2018-12-17-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-12-17-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2018-12-26-musk-to-sutskever", "date": "2018-12-26", "time": "12:07 PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Ilya Sutskever", "Greg Brockman" ], "cc": [ "Sam Altman", "Shivon Zilis" ], "subject": "I feel I should reiterate", "body": "My probability assessment of OpenAI being relevant to DeepMind/Google without a dramatic change in execution and resources is 0%. Not 1%. I wish it were otherwise.\n\nEven raising several hundred million won't be enough. This needs billions per year immediately or forget it.\n\nUnfortunately, humanity's future is in the hands of [redacted]. [Link to article]\n\n[redacted]\n\nOpenAI reminds me of Bezos and Blue Origin. They are hopelessly behind SpaceX and getting worse, but the ego of Bezos has him insanely thinking that they are not!\n\nI really hope I'm wrong.\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-reiterate-2018", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Ilya Sutskever, Greg Brockman", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024 (email also reproduced in OpenAI blog, Dec 13 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": null, "context": "Musk writes to Sutskever and Brockman with his assessment of OpenAI's position relative to DeepMind and Google and the funding it would need.", "tags": [ "ai", "strategy", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 116, "bates": "EMX-000116", "slug": "2018-12-26-musk-to-sutskever", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2018-12-26-musk-to-sutskever" }, { "id": "2019-01-18-musk-to-all-tesla-7-percent-reduction", "date": "2019-01-18", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "As we all experienced first-hand, last year was the most challenging in Tesla's history. However, thanks to your efforts, 2018 was also the most successful year in Tesla's history: we delivered almost as many cars as we did in all of 2017 in the last quarter alone and nearly as many cars last year as we did in all the prior years of Tesla's existence combined! Model 3 also became the best-selling premium vehicle of 2018 in the US. This is truly remarkable and something that few thought possible just a short time ago.\nLooking ahead at our mission of accelerating the advent of sustainable transport and energy, which is important for all life on Earth, we face an extremely difficult challenge: making our cars, batteries and solar products cost-competitive with fossil fuels. While we have made great progress, our products are still too expensive for most people. Tesla has only been producing cars for about a decade and we're up against massive, entrenched competitors. The net effect is that Tesla must work much harder than other manufacturers to survive while building affordable, sustainable products.\nIn Q3 last year, we were able to make a 4% profit. While small by most standards, I would still consider this our first meaningful profit in the 15 years since we created Tesla. However, that was in part the result of preferentially selling higher priced Model 3 variants in North America. In Q4, preliminary, unaudited results indicate that we again made a GAAP profit, but less than Q3. This quarter, as with Q3, shipment of higher priced Model 3 variants (this time to Europe and Asia) will hopefully allow us, with great difficulty, effort and some luck, to target a tiny profit.\nHowever, starting around May, we will need to deliver at least the mid-range Model 3 variant in all markets, as we need to reach more customers who can afford our vehicles. Moreover, we need to continue making progress towards lower priced variants of Model 3. Right now, our most affordable offering is the mid-range (264 mile) Model 3 with premium sound and interior at $44k. The need for a lower priced variants of Model 3 becomes even greater on July 1, when the US tax credit again drops in half, making our car $1,875 more expensive, and again at the end of the year when it goes away entirely.\nSorry for all these numbers, but I want to make sure that you know all the facts and figures and understand that the road ahead is very difficult. This is not new for us – we have always faced significant challenges – but it is the reality we face. There are many companies that can offer a better work-life balance, because they are larger and more mature or in industries that are not so voraciously competitive. Attempting to build affordable clean energy products at scale necessarily requires extreme effort and relentless creativity, but succeeding in our mission is essential to ensure that the future is good, so we must do everything we can to advance the cause.\nAs a result of the above, we unfortunately have no choice but to reduce full-time employee headcount by approximately 7% (we grew by 30% last year, which is more than we can support) and retain only the most critical temps and contractors. Tesla will need to make these cuts while increasing the Model 3 production rate and making many manufacturing engineering improvements in the coming months. Higher volume and manufacturing design improvements are crucial for Tesla to achieve the economies of scale required to manufacture the standard range (220 mile), standard interior Model 3 at $35k and still be a viable company. There isn't any other way.\nTo those departing, thank you for everything you have done to advance our mission. I am deeply grateful for your contributions to Tesla. We would not be where we are today without you.\nFor those remaining, although there are many challenges ahead, I believe we have the most exciting product roadmap of any consumer product company in the world. Full self-driving, Model Y, Semi, Truck and Roadster on the vehicle side and Powerwall/pack and Solar Roof on the energy side are only the start.\nI am honored to work alongside you.\nThanks for everything,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "cost-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees (also published by Tesla as a company update)", "source_type": "company_published", "source_title": "Tesla company update, as reproduced in full by CNBC, \"Read the email Elon Musk sent to Tesla employees explaining the need for job cuts\" (Jan 18, 2019)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/18/elon-musk-tesla-email-to-employees-about-job-cuts.html", "case": null, "context": "Email announcing a reduction of about 7 percent of full-time headcount. CNBC introduced the text as the company’s update, which stated it was the email sent to all employees that morning.", "tags": [ "firing", "cost", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 117, "bates": "EMX-000117", "slug": "2019-01-18-musk-to-all-tesla-7-percent-reduction", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-01-18-musk-to-all-tesla-7-percent-reduction" }, { "id": "2019-03-11-musk-to-altman", "date": "2019-03-11", "time": "3:04PM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Sam Altman" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Bloomberg: AI Research Group Co-Founded by Elon Musk Starts For-Profit Arm", "body": "Please be explicit that I have no financial interest in the for-profit arm of OpenAI\n\nAI Research Group Co-Founded by Elon Musk Starts For-Profit Arm\n\nBloomberg\n\nOpenAI, the San Francisco-based artificial intelligence research group co-founded by Elon Musk and several other prominent Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, is starting a for-profit arm that will allow it to raise more money. Read the full story\n\nShared from Apple News", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "openai-for-profit-2019", "company": "OpenAI", "audience": "Sam Altman", "source_type": "court_exhibit", "source_title": "Musk v. Altman court exhibits, as transcribed in \"OpenAI Email Archives (from Musk v. Altman)\" by habryka, LessWrong, Nov 2024", "source_url": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5jjk4CDnj9tA7ugxr/openai-email-archives-from-musk-v-altman", "case": "Musk v. Altman, No. 4:24-cv-04722 (N.D. Cal.)", "context": "Musk asks Altman to state publicly that he has no financial interest in OpenAI's new for-profit arm, in reply to a Bloomberg report.", "tags": [ "ai", "communication", "legal" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 118, "bates": "EMX-000118", "slug": "2019-03-11-musk-to-altman", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-03-11-musk-to-altman" }, { "id": "2019-03-21-musk-to-all-tesla-vehicle-delivery-help", "date": "2019-03-21", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Vehicle Delivery Help Needed!", "body": "For the last ten days of this quarter, please consider your primary priority to be helping with vehicle deliveries. This applies to everyone. As challenges go, this is a good one to have, as we've built the cars and people have bought the cars, so we just need to get the cars to their new owners!\nWhat has made this particularly difficult is that Europe and China are simultaneously experiencing the same massive increase in delivery volume that North America experienced last year. In some locations, the delivery rate is over 600% higher than its previous peak! This was further exacerbated by supplier shortages of EU spec components and a sticker printing error on our part in China that were only resolved in the past few weeks.\nNorth America is also stressed, as the final month of this quarter is almost all North America builds. Moreover, for the first two weeks of March, most cars were sent from our factory in California to the East Coast to ensure arrival before the end of quarter.\nThe net result is a massive wave of deliveries needed throughout Europe, China and North America. This is the biggest wave in Tesla's history, but it is primarily a function of our first delivery of mass manufactured cars on two continents simultaneously, and will not be repeated in subsequent quarters.\nTo help, please contact Sanjay Shah in North America, Robin Ren in China and Ashley Harris in Europe.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "deliveries-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Read Elon Musk's email urging Tesla employees to help with deliveries\" (Mar 21, 2019)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/21/elon-musk-email-to-tesla-employees-help-with-deliveries.html", "case": null, "context": "End-of-quarter email asking all staff to prioritize vehicle deliveries across North America, Europe and China.", "tags": [ "deadlines", "manufacturing" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 119, "bates": "EMX-000119", "slug": "2019-03-21-musk-to-all-tesla-vehicle-delivery-help", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-03-21-musk-to-all-tesla-vehicle-delivery-help" }, { "id": "2019-05-musk-to-spacex-employees-starlink-public", "date": "2019-05", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "SpaceX employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "it will probably make sense to take Starlink public in about three years or so.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "SpaceX", "audience": "SpaceX employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, 'Elon Musk says an IPO of SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet business is still 3 or 4 years away' (Jun 7 2022); one quoted sentence from an email 'obtained by CNBC'", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/07/spacex-starlink-ipo-elon-musk-says-offering-is-3-or-4-years-away.html", "case": null, "context": "CNBC reported an email Musk sent to SpaceX employees in May 2019 that mentioned a possible Starlink public offering; only one sentence is quoted, so the text is partial.", "tags": [ "fundraising", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 120, "bates": "EMX-000120", "slug": "2019-05-musk-to-spacex-employees-starlink-public", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-05-musk-to-spacex-employees-starlink-public" }, { "id": "2019-05-16-musk-to-all-tesla-every-expenditure", "date": "2019-05-16", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "As mentioned at the company talk, it is extremely important that we examine every expenditure at Tesla no matter how small, and be sure that it is critical.\nWhen making hundreds of thousands of cars, battery packs and solar systems, even a ten cent savings could be worth over $50,000 a year. There are over 10,000 unique parts and processes at Tesla, so making small improvements across the board has a giant cumulative impact.\nAt the same time, we must also continue to make our products subtly better in thousands of small ways.\nIt is important to bear in mind that we lost $700 million in the first quarter this year, which is over $200 million per month. Investors nonetheless were supportive of our efforts and agreed to give us $2.4 billion (our net proceeds) to show that we can be financially sustainable.\nThat is a lot of money, but actually only gives us approximately ten months at the first-quarter burn rate to achieve breakeven. It's vital that we respect the faith investors have shown in Tesla, but it will require great effort to do so.\nThat is why, going forward, all expenses of any kind anywhere in the world, including parts, salary, travel expenses, rent, literally every payment that leaves our bank account must be reviewed, confirmed as critical and the top of every page of outgoing payments signed by our CFO.\nI will personally review and sign every 10th page.\nPlease examine closely every expense where responsibility is, or probably should be, assigned to your group. If in doubt, assume it is on your plate, so that we don't have anything slip through the cracks.\nThis will take at least a few weeks to get right. Please don't worry if it isn't correct at first.\nThis is hardcore, but it is the only way for Tesla to become financially sustainable and succeed in our goal of helping make the world environmentally sustainable.\nThanks again for your excellent work,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "cost-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Read the email Elon Musk sent to Tesla employees calling for 'hardcore' control of expenses\" (May 17, 2019)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/17/elon-musk-calls-for-cost-control-in-memo-to-employees.html", "case": null, "context": "Companywide email after a $2.4 billion raise, requiring every payment leaving Tesla’s bank account to be reviewed and the CFO to sign each page of outgoing payments.", "tags": [ "cost", "management", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 121, "bates": "EMX-000121", "slug": "2019-05-16-musk-to-all-tesla-every-expenditure", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-05-16-musk-to-all-tesla-every-expenditure" }, { "id": "2019-05-22-musk-to-all-tesla-record-quarter", "date": "2019-05-22", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "As of yesterday, we had over 50,000 net new orders for this quarter. Based on current trends, we have a good chance of exceeding the record 90,700 deliveries of Q4 last year and making this the highest deliveries/sales quarter in Tesla history!\n\nIn order to achieve this, we need sustained output of 1,000 Model 3’s per day. Almost all parts of the Model 3 production system have exceeded 1,000 units on multiple days (congratulations!!) and we’ve averaged about 900/day this week, so we’re only about 10% away from 7,000/week.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "deliveries-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Tesla is within reach of new record quarter for deliveries, says Elon Musk\" (May 23, 2019)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2019/05/23/tesla-new-delivery-record-elon-musk/", "case": null, "context": "Email sent the night before Electrek’s May 23, 2019 article; Electrek quoted two passages from two sources.", "tags": [ "deadlines", "manufacturing" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 122, "bates": "EMX-000122", "slug": "2019-05-22-musk-to-all-tesla-record-quarter", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-05-22-musk-to-all-tesla-record-quarter" }, { "id": "2019-05-29-musk-to-all-tesla-catch-up-on-deliveries", "date": "2019-05-29", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "While our demand is strong, we have a lot of vehicle deliveries to catch up to in order to have a successful quarter.\nStarting tomorrow, I will be holding skip-level calls with the America, Asia and Europe delivery teams every 2 days to understand what's needed to accelerate our rate of deliveries.\nWe also need to address the total cost of getting a car from our factory to the customer. Last quarter, there were many expedite fees and routing inefficiencies that led to higher than expected delivery costs. This makes it much harder for Tesla to break even.\nPer my earlier email, if we execute well, Q2 will be an all-time record for Tesla vehicle deliveries and an awesome victory!\nSuper excited to make this happen with you!", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "deliveries-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Read Tesla CEO Elon Musk's latest email urging employees to improve vehicle deliveries\" (May 29, 2019)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/29/read-tesla-ceo-elon-musk-email-on-vehicle-deliveries-meetings.html", "case": null, "context": "Email on delivery logistics and delivery costs during the second quarter of 2019.", "tags": [ "deadlines", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 123, "bates": "EMX-000123", "slug": "2019-05-29-musk-to-all-tesla-catch-up-on-deliveries", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-05-29-musk-to-all-tesla-catch-up-on-deliveries" }, { "id": "2019-09-26-musk-to-all-tesla-100k-quarter", "date": "2019-09-26", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "We have a shot at achieving our first 100,000 vehicle delivery quarter, which is an incredibly exciting milestone for our company! [...] The challenge is making sure that we have the right car variants in the right locations and rallying as much as our company resources as possible to help with the end of the quarter deliveries.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "deliveries-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Tesla 'has a shot' at record 100,000 cars this quarter - Elon Musk in email leak\" (Sept 26, 2019)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2019/09/26/tesladelivering-record-cars-quarter-elon-musk-leak-email/", "case": null, "context": "Email obtained by Electrek on the day of publication; Electrek also paraphrased that net orders were tracking to about 110,000; that is not in the body.", "tags": [ "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 124, "bates": "EMX-000124", "slug": "2019-09-26-musk-to-all-tesla-100k-quarter", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2019-09-26-musk-to-all-tesla-100k-quarter" }, { "id": "2020-03-13-musk-to-spacex-employees-covid19", "date": "2020-03-13", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "SpaceX employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "suggests that this is *not* within the top 100 health risks in the United States.\n[...]\nAs a basis for comparison, the risk of death from C19 is *vastly* less than the risk of death from driving your car home,\n[...]\nThere are about 36 thousand automotive deaths per deaths [sic], as compared to 36 so far this year for C19.\n[...]\nIsn’t C19 growing so fast that it will soon become a top 100 health risk for people who are otherwise healthy and young to middle-aged?\n[...]\nThe trends do not support this conclusion. Among other things, the media is using the ‘presumed’ positive number of C19 cases, not the *confirmed* number.\n[...]\nThe 36 deaths were almost all in high risk groups, particularly older people who already had prior lung damage, diabetes or heart disease,\n[...]\nThis was exacerbated in some cases by being stuck on a cruise ship with limited access to medical facilities.\n[...]\nAs said above, if you’re feeling ill, especially with something contagious, it’s always better to stay home and take care of yourself,", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "SpaceX", "audience": "Company-wide, SpaceX", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "BuzzFeed News, 'Elon Musk Told Workers They're More Likely To Die In A Car Crash Than From Coronavirus' (Mar 13 2020); quoted fragments only", "source_url": "https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/elon-musk-spacex-employees-car-crash-coronavirus", "case": null, "context": "Companywide email sent in the early hours of March 13 2020 about COVID-19, according to BuzzFeed News, which published fragments. The quoted text is partial and the quotes are separated by [...].", "tags": [ "safety", "communication", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 125, "bates": "EMX-000125", "slug": "2020-03-13-musk-to-spacex-employees-covid19", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2020-03-13-musk-to-spacex-employees-covid19" }, { "id": "2020-03-16-musk-to-all-tesla-coronavirus", "date": "2020-03-16", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "First, I’d like to be super clear that if you feel the slightest bit ill or even uncomfortable, please don’t feel obligated to come to work. I will personally be at work, but that is just me. Totally OK if you want to stay home for any reason.\n\nA lot of rumors are flying around, but, to the best of our knowledge, no one at Tesla (over 56,000 people) has tested positive for COVID-19. I will inform you immediately if anything changes.\n\nMy frank opinion remains that the harm from the coronavirus panic far exceeds that of the virus itself. If there is a massive redirection of medical resources out of proportion to the danger, it will result in less available care to those with critical medical needs, which does not serve the greater good.\n\nWhat the COVID-19 coverage does show is that the danger of colds and flu in general can be high for the elderly, especially if there is prior lung damage. Much is made of public gatherings, but please be cautious of family gatherings, too. What is relatively harmless to a child can be dangerous to grandparents.\n\nMy best guess, for what it is worth, based on the latest Center for Disease Control data, is that confirmed COVID-19 (this specific form of the common cold) cases will not exceed 0.1% of the US population. Moreover, I do not think, when we look back on 2020, that the causes of death or serious injury will have changed much from 2017, for example: (CDC statistic).", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Elon Musk says 'coronavirus panic is worse than virus itself' in email to Tesla employees\" (Mar 17, 2020); CNBC reported the email was sent late Monday Mar 16", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2020/03/17/elon-musk-tesla-coronavirus-panic-email/", "case": null, "context": "Email sent the day Bay Area counties issued shelter-in-place orders while Fremont stayed open. CNBC also quoted a closing line not reproduced by Electrek. Body is the passages Electrek quoted, in order.", "tags": [ "safety", "communication", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 126, "bates": "EMX-000126", "slug": "2020-03-16-musk-to-all-tesla-coronavirus", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2020-03-16-musk-to-all-tesla-coronavirus" }, { "id": "2020-06-06-musk-to-spacex-employees-starship-priority", "date": "2020-06-06", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "SpaceX employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Please consider the top SpaceX priority (apart from anything that could reduce Dragon return risk) to be Starship\n[...]\nWe need to accelerate Starship progress\n[...]\nconsider spending significant time\n[...]\nFor those considering moving, we will always offer a dedicated SpaceX aircraft to shuttle people", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "SpaceX", "audience": "Company-wide, SpaceX", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, 'Elon Musk tells SpaceX employees that its Starship rocket is the top priority now' (Jun 7 2020); only quoted fragments of the email are published", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/07/elon-musk-email-to-spacex-employees-starship-is-the-top-priority.html", "case": null, "context": "Companywide email sent on a Saturday about a week after SpaceX's first crewed NASA launch, asking employees to prioritize Starship development in Boca Chica, Texas. CNBC published only fragments; the text is partial.", "tags": [ "strategy", "product", "engineering", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 127, "bates": "EMX-000127", "slug": "2020-06-06-musk-to-spacex-employees-starship-priority", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2020-06-06-musk-to-spacex-employees-starship-priority" }, { "id": "2020-06-29-musk-to-all-tesla-down-to-the-last-few-days", "date": "2020-06-29", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Down to the last few days", "body": "Breaking even is looking super tight. Really makes a difference for every car you build and deliver. Please go all out to ensure victory!\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "deliveries-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk emails Tesla employees: 'Breaking even is looking super tight'\" (June 29, 2020)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/29/elon-musk-emails-tesla-workers-breaking-even-is-looking-super-tight.html", "case": null, "context": "End-of-quarter email transcribed by CNBC.", "tags": [ "deadlines", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 128, "bates": "EMX-000128", "slug": "2020-06-29-musk-to-all-tesla-down-to-the-last-few-days", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2020-06-29-musk-to-all-tesla-down-to-the-last-few-days" }, { "id": "2020-09-20-musk-to-all-tesla-record-deliveries-possible", "date": "2020-09-20", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "We have a shot at record quarter for deliveries, but we’ll have to rally hard to achieve it. This is the most number of vehicles per day that we’ would ever had to deliver.\n\nPlease consider vehicle deliveries to be the absolute top priority. It’s also extremely important that we keep factory output as high as possible over the remaining 10 days. This is vital for the California market.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Tesla (TSLA): Elon Musk says 'record deliveries possible' in leaked employee email\" (Sept 20, 2020)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2020/09/20/tesla-tsla-elon-musk-record-deliveries-possible-leaked-employee-email/", "case": null, "context": "Two passages from an end-of-quarter email as quoted by Electrek, in order; the source text contains typos that are preserved.", "tags": [ "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 129, "bates": "EMX-000129", "slug": "2020-09-20-musk-to-all-tesla-record-deliveries-possible", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2020-09-20-musk-to-all-tesla-record-deliveries-possible" }, { "id": "2021-07-musk-to-spacex-employees-starship-surge", "date": "2021-07", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "SpaceX employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Starship Surge", "body": "Anyone who is not working on other obviously critical path projects at SpaceX should shift immediately to work on the first Starship orbit\n[...]\nPlease fly, drive, or get here by any means possible.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "SpaceX", "audience": "All SpaceX employees", "source_type": "book", "source_title": "Walter Isaacson, 'Elon Musk' (2023), Chapter 59 'Starship Surge', excerpt published by Space.com; quoted fragments only", "source_url": "https://www.space.com/elon-musk-walter-isaacson-book-excerpt-starship-surge", "case": null, "context": "Per Isaacson, sent shortly after 1 a.m. on a Friday night in July 2021 after Musk ordered a surge to stack the Starship booster and ship at Boca Chica, Texas. Exact date not given; text partial.", "tags": [ "manufacturing", "deadlines", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 130, "bates": "EMX-000130", "slug": "2021-07-musk-to-spacex-employees-starship-surge", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2021-07-musk-to-spacex-employees-starship-surge" }, { "id": "2021-10-03-musk-to-all-tesla-music-in-the-factory", "date": "2021-10-03", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Music in the Factory", "body": "Just wanted to say that I very much support music in the factory, as well as any little touches that make work more enjoyable.\nAn associate just sent me a note asking if we could have one ear bud for music so the other ear can listen for safety-related issues. That sounds fine to me.\nAlso, ambient music from speakers is also totally cool so long as there is reasonable agreement among your colleagues as to the music choices.\nIf there are other things that you think would improve your day, please let me know. I care very much that you look forward to coming to work every day!", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tesla-oct-2021", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk emails at Tesla in October 2021: Music, direct orders\" (Nov 19, 2021)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/19/elon-musk-emails-at-tesla-in-october-2021-music-direct-orders.html", "case": null, "context": "Sunday email permitting music in the factory with one earbud out for safety. CNBC redacted the time.", "tags": [ "culture", "safety" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 131, "bates": "EMX-000131", "slug": "2021-10-03-musk-to-all-tesla-music-in-the-factory", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2021-10-03-musk-to-all-tesla-music-in-the-factory" }, { "id": "2021-10-04-musk-to-all-tesla-please-note", "date": "2021-10-04", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Please Note", "body": "If an email is sent from me with explicit directions, there are only three actions allowed by managers.\n1. Email me back to explain why what I said was incorrect. Sometimes, I'm just plain wrong!\n2. Request further clarification if what I said was ambiguous.\n3. Execute the directions.\nIf none of the above are done, that manager will be asked to resign immediately.\nThank you,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "tesla-oct-2021", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk emails at Tesla in October 2021: Music, direct orders\" (Nov 19, 2021)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/19/elon-musk-emails-at-tesla-in-october-2021-music-direct-orders.html", "case": null, "context": "Monday email on the actions managers may take when Musk sends explicit directions. First published by CNBC on Nov 19, 2021, which obtained the pair of October emails.", "tags": [ "management", "communication", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 132, "bates": "EMX-000132", "slug": "2021-10-04-musk-to-all-tesla-please-note", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2021-10-04-musk-to-all-tesla-please-note" }, { "id": "2021-11-26-musk-to-spacex-employees-raptor-crisis", "date": "2021-11-26", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "SpaceX employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Unfortunately, the Raptor production crisis is much worse than it had seemed a few weeks ago. As we have dug into the issues following the exiting of prior senior management, they have unfortunately turned out to be far more severe than was reported. There is no way to sugarcoat this.\nI was going to take this weekend off, as my first weekend off in a long time, but instead, I will be on the Raptor line all night and through the weekend.\nUnless you have critical family matters or cannot physically return to Hawthorne, we will need all hands on deck to recover from what is, quite frankly, a disaster. \nThe consequences for SpaceX if we can not get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship, which means we then can’t fly Starlink Satellite V2 (Falcon has neither the volume nor the mass to orbit needed for satellite V2). Satellite V1, by itself, is financially weak, while V2 is strong.\nIn addition, we are spooling up terminal production to several million units per year, which will consume massive capital, assuming that satellite V2 will be on orbit to handle the bandwidth demand. These terminals will be useless otherwise.\nWhat it comes down to, is that we face a genuine risk of bankruptcy if we can’t achieve a Starship flight rate of at least once every two weeks next year.\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "SpaceX", "audience": "Company-wide, SpaceX", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Space Explored, 'Elon Musk says SpaceX could face genuine risk of bankruptcy from Starship engine production' (Nov 29 2021), 'Full email from Elon to SpaceX employees'; date per CNBC ('the day after Thanksgiving')", "source_url": "https://spaceexplored.com/2021/11/29/spacex-raptor-crisis/", "case": null, "context": "Companywide email sent the day after Thanksgiving 2021, after the departure of the vice president of propulsion, about Raptor engine production for Starship. CNBC, which also obtained a copy, confirmed it.", "tags": [ "manufacturing", "deadlines", "engineering", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 133, "bates": "EMX-000133", "slug": "2021-11-26-musk-to-spacex-employees-raptor-crisis", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2021-11-26-musk-to-spacex-employees-raptor-crisis" }, { "id": "2022-04-13-musk-to-bret-taylor-offer-letter", "date": "2022-04-13", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Bret Taylor" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Letter proposing to acquire Twitter at $54.20 per share (Schedule 13D/A, Exhibit B)", "body": "I invested in Twitter as I believe in its potential to be the platform for free speech around the globe, and I believe free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy.\n\nHowever, since making my investment I now realize the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company.\n\nAs a result, I am offering to buy 100% of Twitter for $54.20 per share in cash, a 54% premium over the day before I began investing in Twitter and a 38% premium over the day before my investment was publicly announced. My offer is my best and final offer and if it is not accepted, I would need to reconsider my position as a shareholder.\n\nTwitter has extraordinary potential. I will unlock it.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-acquisition-2022", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "Twitter board chair (letter delivered to the company, filed publicly the next morning)", "source_type": "sec_filing", "source_title": "Twitter, Inc. Schedule 13D/A (Elon Musk), filed Apr 14 2022, Exhibit B", "source_url": "https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000110465922045641/tm2212748d1_sc13da.htm", "case": null, "context": "Musk had disclosed a roughly 9% Twitter stake days earlier. This letter, delivered to the Twitter board chair, proposed buying all of Twitter for cash and was filed publicly with the SEC. The SEC filing labels it a letter; the sources do not say whether it was sent by email.", "tags": [ "acquisition", "strategy", "fundraising" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 134, "bates": "EMX-000134", "slug": "2022-04-13-musk-to-bret-taylor-offer-letter", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-04-13-musk-to-bret-taylor-offer-letter" }, { "id": "2022-04-24-musk-to-bret-taylor-best-and-final", "date": "2022-04-24", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Bret Taylor" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Letter reiterating $54.20 offer with attached seller-friendly merger agreement (Schedule 13D/A, Exhibit G)", "body": "Thank you for the conversation yesterday.\n\nWe remain committed to our transaction with Twitter at $54.20 and appreciate your contact on the matter. As we discussed, $54.20 has been and will remain my best and final offer, period. This is binary – my offer will either be accepted or I will exit my position. At the time my $54.20 offer was made, it represented a 54% premium to Twitter’s share price prior to the day before my investment in Twitter began, and a 38% premium to the day before my investment in Twitter was announced. Since that time, the attractiveness of my proposal has only increased given the market’s continued correction. Had your stock traded inline with comparable social media companies, my offer would represent approximately 90% and 70% premiums to those times.\n\nWhile I strongly believe that you should recommend my offer to shareholders based upon its superior value to the value of Twitter without my offer and my equity position, I recognize that you may elect not to do so. As such, I have attached a merger agreement that is “seller friendly” and that does not require you to recommend in favor of my offer. This will provide all shareholders a voice, and allow for a democratic decision consistent with Twitter’s ethos. With your cooperation, we can negotiate changes that you require to be able to announce a transaction before the market opens tomorrow that the shareholders can then vote on. I would respect the outcome of that vote if the shareholders prefer the management plan to my $54.20, and exit my position entirely if that is the outcome of the vote.\n\nIn order to provide further value and choice to shareholders (within the legal boundaries of a private, unlisted company), we are willing to explore options that allow existing shareholders (including convertible securities and other related instruments) to invest all or a portion of their proceeds into the proposed transaction. Any such rollover transaction would be structured as a separate negotiated transaction consistent with laws and regulations and not be a public offer, and would not affect the proposed $54.20 cash offer transaction.\n\nMy strong preference continues to be a negotiated transaction with you at $54.20 per share.\n\nI look forward to the board’s response to my proposal.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-acquisition-2022", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "Twitter board chair", "source_type": "sec_filing", "source_title": "Twitter, Inc. Schedule 13D/A (Elon Musk), filed Apr 25 2022, Exhibit 99.G", "source_url": "https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000110465922049844/tm2213189d8_ex99-g.htm", "case": null, "context": "Written a day after a conversation with the Twitter board chair and the day before Twitter agreed to the acquisition. Filed publicly with the SEC as Exhibit G. The filing labels it a letter; the sources do not say whether it was sent by email.", "tags": [ "acquisition", "strategy", "legal" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 135, "bates": "EMX-000135", "slug": "2022-04-24-musk-to-bret-taylor-best-and-final", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-04-24-musk-to-bret-taylor-best-and-final" }, { "id": "2022-05-31-musk-to-all-tesla-to-be-super-clear", "date": "2022-05-31", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "To be super clear", "body": "Everyone at Tesla is required to spend a minimum of 40 hours in the office per week. Moreover, the office must be where your actual colleagues are located, not some remote pseudo office. If you don’t show up, we will assume you have resigned.\nThe more senior you are, the more visible must be your presence. That is why I lived in the factory so much – so that those on the line could see me working alongside them. If I had not done that, Tesla would long ago have gone bankrupt.\nThere are of course companies that don’t require this, but when was the last time they shipped a great new product? It’s been a while.\nTesla has and will create and actually manufacture the most exciting and meaningful products of any company on Earth. This will not happen by phoning it in.\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "remote-work-2022", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Elon Musk asks all Tesla employees to come back to the office or quit\" (June 1, 2022)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2022/06/01/elon-musk-tesla-employees-come-back-office-or-quit/", "case": null, "context": "Follow-up to the remote work email, sent the same day per CNBC and Electrek.", "tags": [ "remote-work", "management", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 136, "bates": "EMX-000136", "slug": "2022-05-31-musk-to-all-tesla-to-be-super-clear", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-05-31-musk-to-all-tesla-to-be-super-clear" }, { "id": "2022-05-31-musk-to-tesla-remote-work-no-longer-acceptable", "date": "2022-05-31", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Remote work is no longer acceptable", "body": "Anyone who wishes to do remote work must be in the office for a minimum (and I mean *minimum*) of 40 hours per week or depart Tesla. This is less than we ask of factory workers.\nIf there are particularly exceptional contributors for whom this is impossible, I will review and approve those exceptions directly.\nMoreover, the “office” must be a main Tesla office, not a remote branch office unrelated to the job duties, for example being responsible for Fremont factory human relations, but having your office be in another state.\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "remote-work-2022", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla employees (published by Electrek as the first of two emails)", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Elon Musk asks all Tesla employees to come back to the office or quit\" (June 1, 2022)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2022/06/01/elon-musk-tesla-employees-come-back-office-or-quit/", "case": null, "context": "First of two emails on May 31, 2022 ending remote work. Electrek printed the subject with a typo (\"acceptble\"); other outlets give \"Remote work is no longer acceptable\", used here.", "tags": [ "remote-work", "management", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 137, "bates": "EMX-000137", "slug": "2022-05-31-musk-to-tesla-remote-work-no-longer-acceptable", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-05-31-musk-to-tesla-remote-work-no-longer-acceptable" }, { "id": "2022-06-musk-to-spacex-executives-return-to-office", "date": "2022-06", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "SpaceX executives" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "The more senior you are, the more visible must be your presence\n[...]\nThat is why I spent so much time in the factory — so that those on the line could see me working alongside them. If I had not done that, SpaceX would long ago have gone bankrupt.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "rto-2022", "company": "SpaceX", "audience": "SpaceX executives (memo reported by The New York Times, Jun 1 2022)", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Space.com, 'Elon Musk tells SpaceX, Tesla workers they must be in office at least 40 hours a week: report' (quoting The New York Times); quoted fragments only", "source_url": "https://www.space.com/elon-musk-spacex-tesla-no-remote-work", "case": null, "context": "Memo to SpaceX executives reported on June 1 2022 setting an in-office minimum of 40 hours per week. A parallel memo went to Tesla. Only two sentences are quoted by the source; exact send date not shown.", "tags": [ "remote-work", "management", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 138, "bates": "EMX-000138", "slug": "2022-06-musk-to-spacex-executives-return-to-office", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-06-musk-to-spacex-executives-return-to-office" }, { "id": "2022-06-03-musk-to-all-tesla-headcount-reduction", "date": "2022-06-03", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Headcount Reduction", "body": "Tesla will be reducing salaried headcount by 10% as we have become overstaffed in many areas. Note this does not apply to anyone actually building cars, battery packs or installing solar. Hourly headcount will increase.\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "headcount-2022", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Here's the email Elon Musk sent all Tesla employees about 10% head count reduction\" (June 3, 2022)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/03/heres-the-email-elon-musk-sent-all-tesla-employees-10percent-job-cuts.html", "case": null, "context": "Short follow-up to all staff after the executive email reported by Reuters; transcribed by CNBC.", "tags": [ "firing", "cost", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 139, "bates": "EMX-000139", "slug": "2022-06-03-musk-to-all-tesla-headcount-reduction", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-06-03-musk-to-all-tesla-headcount-reduction" }, { "id": "2022-11-09-musk-to-twitter-team-first-company-email", "date": "2022-11-09", "time": "11:39 PM PT", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Team" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Sorry that this is my first email to the whole company but there is no way to sugarcoat the message.\n\nFrankly, the economic picture ahead is dire especially for a company like ours that is so dependent on advertising in a challenging economic climate. Moreover, 70% of our advertising is brand, rather than specific performance, which makes us doubly vulnerable!\n\nThat is why the priority over the past ten days has been to develop and launch Twitter Blue Verified subscriptions (huge props to the team!).\n\nWithout significant subscription revenue, there is a good chance Twitter will not survive the upcoming economic downturn. We need roughly half of our revenue to be subscription.\n\nOf course, we will still then be significantly reliant on advertising, so I am spending time with our sales & partnerships teams to ensure that Twitter continues to be appealing to advertisers.\n\nThis is the Spaces discussion that Robin, Yoel and I hosted today: [Link to Elon Q&A: Advertising & the Future removed]\n\nThe road ahead is arduous and will require intense work to succeed. We are also changing Twitter policy such that remote work is no longer allowed unless you have a specific exception. Managers will send the exception lists to me for review and approval.\n\nStarting tomorrow (Thursday), everyone is required to be in the office for a minimum of 40 hours per week. Obviously, if you are physically unable to travel to an office or have a critical personal obligation, then your absence is understandable.\n\nI look forward to working with you to take Twitter to a whole new level. The potential is truly incredible!\n\nThanks,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-nov-2022", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "All Twitter employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Read Elon Musk's first email to all Twitter employees\" (Nov 10 2022), transcribed by CNBC", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/10/read-elon-musks-first-email-to-all-twitter-employees.html", "case": null, "context": "First company-wide email to Twitter staff after the acquisition closed on Oct 27-28 2022. It ended remote work and required 40 hours per week in the office. Send time is from Platformer reporting; CNBC removed the timestamp.", "tags": [ "management", "remote-work", "communication", "cost", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 140, "bates": "EMX-000140", "slug": "2022-11-09-musk-to-twitter-team-first-company-email", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-11-09-musk-to-twitter-team-first-company-email" }, { "id": "2022-11-09-musk-to-twitter-team-top-priority", "date": "2022-11-09", "time": "11:56 PM PT", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Team" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Top Priority", "body": "Over the next few days, the absolute top priority is finding and suspending any verified bots/trolls/spam.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-nov-2022", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "All Twitter employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Fortune, \"Musk's toughest troll fight on Twitter is with a Tesla parody account\" (Nov 11 2022); subject line and timing per Platformer, \"Inside the Twitter meltdown\"", "source_url": "https://fortune.com/2022/11/11/elon-musk-troll-fight-twitter-tesla-parody-account-teslareal/", "case": null, "context": "A separate one-sentence email sent about 17 minutes after the first company-wide email, per Platformer. Only the quoted sentence is available. Subject line and send time come from Platformer (https://www.platformer.news/inside-the-twitter-meltdown/).", "tags": [ "management", "product", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 141, "bates": "EMX-000141", "slug": "2022-11-09-musk-to-twitter-team-top-priority", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-11-09-musk-to-twitter-team-top-priority" }, { "id": "2022-11-11-musk-to-twitter-team-being-there", "date": "2022-11-11", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Team at Twitter" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Being There (great movie)", "body": "I was at Twitter HQ again until late into the night yesterday and would like to extend a note of appreciation to those who were there with me, as well as those working remotely, some of whom had been up even longer.\n\nTo reaffirm, working remotely is fine if you cannot reasonably make it to the office and you are performing at an exceptional level. That said, I am a big believer in the esprit de corps and effectiveness of being physically in the same location.\n\nI will be in the office again today. Stop by the 10th floor if you'd like to talk about taking Twitter to the next level. The priority is near-term actions.\n\nThanks,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-nov-2022", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "All Twitter employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk's latest email to Twitter employees addresses working late\" (Nov 11 2022), transcribed by CNBC", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/11/elon-musks-latest-email-to-twitter-employees-addresses-working-late.html", "case": null, "context": "Sent two days after the first company-wide email and a week after Twitter cut roughly half its workforce. It restated the remote-work exception and invited staff to the 10th floor of the San Francisco office.", "tags": [ "management", "remote-work", "culture", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 142, "bates": "EMX-000142", "slug": "2022-11-11-musk-to-twitter-team-being-there", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-11-11-musk-to-twitter-team-being-there" }, { "id": "2022-11-16-musk-to-twitter-team-fork-in-the-road", "date": "2022-11-16", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Team" ], "cc": [], "subject": "A Fork in the Road", "body": "Going forward, to build a breakthrough Twitter 2.0 and succeed in an increasingly competitive world, we will need to be extremely hardcore. This will mean working long hours at high intensity. Only exceptional performance will constitute a passing grade.\n\nTwitter will also be much more engineering-driven. Design and product management will still be very important and report to me, but those writing great code will constitute the majority of our team and have the greatest sway.\n\nAt its heart, Twitter is a software and servers company, so l think this makes sense.\n\nIf you are sure that you want to be part of the new Twitter, please click yes on the link below:\n\n[Link removed]\n\nAnyone who has not done so by 5pm ET tomorrow (Thursday) will receive three months of severance.\n\nWhatever decision you make, thank you for your efforts to make Twitter successful.\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-nov-2022", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "All Twitter employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk demands Twitter staff commit to 'long hours' or leave: Read the email\" (Nov 16 2022), transcribed by CNBC", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/16/elon-musk-demands-twitter-staff-commit-to-long-hours-or-leave.html", "case": null, "context": "Sent as a company-wide email after the November 2022 layoffs. Employees who did not click \"yes\" by 5pm ET the next day would receive three months of severance. CNBC reports it was sent around midnight San Francisco time.", "tags": [ "management", "hiring", "firing", "culture", "engineering" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 143, "bates": "EMX-000143", "slug": "2022-11-16-musk-to-twitter-team-fork-in-the-road", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-11-16-musk-to-twitter-team-fork-in-the-road" }, { "id": "2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-1", "date": "2022-11-18", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Team" ], "cc": [], "subject": "All Software Engineers", "body": "Anyone who actually writes software, please report to the 10th floor at 2 p.m. today.\n\nBefore doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months, along with up to 10 screenshots of the most salient lines of code.\n\nThanks,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-nov-2022-engineers", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "Twitter software engineers", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Read Elon Musk's Friday emails to Twitter engineers asking them to come to the office\" (Nov 18 2022), transcribed by CNBC", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/18/twitter-planned-to-close-offices-friday-but-musk-asks-engineers-in.html", "case": null, "context": "One of three emails Musk sent employees early on Friday Nov 18 2022, the day after the \"extremely hardcore\" ultimatum deadline, while Twitter offices had been announced as closed until Monday. CNBC transcribed all three; send times were removed. This was the first, calling engineers to the 10th floor of the San Francisco headquarters.", "tags": [ "engineering", "management", "remote-work", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 144, "bates": "EMX-000144", "slug": "2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-1", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-1" }, { "id": "2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-2", "date": "2022-11-18", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Team" ], "cc": [], "subject": "All Software Engineers", "body": "If you're working remotely, please email the request below nonetheless and I will try to speak to you via video. Only those who cannot physically get to Twitter HQ or have a family emergency are excused.\n\nThese will be short, technical interviews that allow me to better understand the Twitter tech stack.\n\nThanks,\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-nov-2022-engineers", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "Twitter software engineers", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Read Elon Musk's Friday emails to Twitter engineers asking them to come to the office\" (Nov 18 2022), transcribed by CNBC", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/18/twitter-planned-to-close-offices-friday-but-musk-asks-engineers-in.html", "case": null, "context": "One of three emails Musk sent employees early on Friday Nov 18 2022, the day after the \"extremely hardcore\" ultimatum deadline, while Twitter offices had been announced as closed until Monday. CNBC transcribed all three; send times were removed. This was the second, covering remote engineers.", "tags": [ "engineering", "management", "remote-work", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 145, "bates": "EMX-000145", "slug": "2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-2", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-2" }, { "id": "2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-3", "date": "2022-11-18", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Team at Twitter" ], "cc": [], "subject": "All Software Engineers", "body": "If possible, I would appreciate it if you could fly to SF to be present in person. I will be at Twitter HQ until midnight and then back again tomorrow morning.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-nov-2022-engineers", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "Twitter software engineers", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Read Elon Musk's Friday emails to Twitter engineers asking them to come to the office\" (Nov 18 2022), transcribed by CNBC", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/18/twitter-planned-to-close-offices-friday-but-musk-asks-engineers-in.html", "case": null, "context": "One of three emails Musk sent employees early on Friday Nov 18 2022, the day after the \"extremely hardcore\" ultimatum deadline, while Twitter offices had been announced as closed until Monday. CNBC transcribed all three; send times were removed. This was the third, asking engineers to fly to San Francisco.", "tags": [ "engineering", "management", "remote-work", "hiring" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 146, "bates": "EMX-000146", "slug": "2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-3", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-11-18-musk-to-twitter-team-all-software-engineers-3" }, { "id": "2022-12-28-musk-to-all-tesla-final-few-days", "date": "2022-12-28", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Final Few Days", "body": "Just a quick note to thank you for your hard work and congratulate you on exceptional execution in 2022!\nSince we have a lot of cars arriving at the last minute, it is important to rally hard and do everything we can to get our cars to customers who have ordered them before midnight on Dec. 31. Also, every incremental car we produce that can be delivered in time also matters.\nPlease go all out for the next few days and volunteer to help deliver if at all possible. It will make a real difference!\nThanks,\nElon\nBtw, don't be too bothered by stock market craziness. As we demonstrate continued excellent performance, the market will recognize that. Long-term, I believe very much that Tesla will be the most valuable company on Earth!", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "deliveries-2019", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk tells Tesla employees don't be 'bothered by stock market craziness'\" (Dec 28, 2022)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/12/28/elon-musk-tells-tesla-employees-to-ignore-stock-market-craziness.html", "case": null, "context": "Year-end delivery push email sent as Tesla shares fell. CNBC removed the time stamp.", "tags": [ "deadlines", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 147, "bates": "EMX-000147", "slug": "2022-12-28-musk-to-all-tesla-final-few-days", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2022-12-28-musk-to-all-tesla-final-few-days" }, { "id": "2023-03-22-musk-to-twitter-staff-office-not-optional", "date": "2023-03-22", "time": "2:30 AM", "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Twitter employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "office is not optional", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-2023", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "All Twitter employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Fox 9, \"Elon Musk tells employees to get back in office with 2:30 am memo\" (Mar 2023), citing Platformer's Zoe Schiffer", "source_url": "https://www.fox9.com/news/elon-musk-tells-employees-to-get-back-in-office-with-230-am-memo", "case": null, "context": "Early-morning return-to-office email sent after Musk noted the San Francisco headquarters was half empty the previous day. Only a three-word quotation is available.", "tags": [ "remote-work", "management", "culture" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 148, "bates": "EMX-000148", "slug": "2023-03-22-musk-to-twitter-staff-office-not-optional", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2023-03-22-musk-to-twitter-staff-office-not-optional" }, { "id": "2023-03-24-musk-to-twitter-staff-equity-grants", "date": "2023-03-24", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Twitter employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "I see a clear, but difficult, path to a >$250B valuation", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "twitter-2023", "company": "Twitter", "audience": "All Twitter employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Rolling Stone, \"Elon Musk Says Twitter Worth $20 Billion, or Less Than Half What He Bought it For\" (Mar 26 2023); email first reported by The Wall Street Journal and Platformer", "source_url": "https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/elon-musk-twitter-20-billion-value-1234703945/", "case": null, "context": "Late-night email to staff describing new equity grants, which implied a valuation of about $20 billion. Only a short exact quotation is available; Fortune dates the email to the night before its Mar 25 2023 article.", "tags": [ "management", "fundraising", "strategy", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 149, "bates": "EMX-000149", "slug": "2023-03-24-musk-to-twitter-staff-equity-grants", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2023-03-24-musk-to-twitter-staff-equity-grants" }, { "id": "2023-05-15-musk-to-all-tesla-hiring", "date": "2023-05-15", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Everybody" ], "cc": [], "subject": "Hiring", "body": "I would like to gain a better understanding of our hiring. VPs should send me a list of their department hiring requests once a week.\nThink carefully before sending me a request. No one can join Tesla, even as a contractor, until you receive my email approval.\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "hiring", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Tesla CEO Elon Musk says he must approve all new hires in internal email\" (May 15, 2023)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/15/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-says-in-email-he-must-approve-all-hires.html", "case": null, "context": "Companywide email requiring Musk’s approval for all hires, including contractors.", "tags": [ "hiring", "management", "cost" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 150, "bates": "EMX-000150", "slug": "2023-05-15-musk-to-all-tesla-hiring", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2023-05-15-musk-to-all-tesla-hiring" }, { "id": "2023-08-23-musk-to-tesla-cybertruck-precision", "date": "2023-08", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Due to the nature of Cybertruck, which is made of bright metal with mostly straight edges, any dimensional variation shows up like a sore thumb.\n\nAll parts for this vehicle, whether internal or from suppliers, need to be designed and built to sub 10 micron accuracy.\n\nThat means all part dimensions need to be to the third decimal place in millimeters and tolerances need be specified in single digit microns. If LEGO and soda cans, which are very low cost, can do this, so can we.\n\nPrecision predicates perfectionism.\n\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": null, "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Elon Musk says 'if LEGO can do it, so can we' about Cybertruck quality in leaked Tesla email\" (Aug 23, 2023)", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2023/08/23/elon-musk-lego-cybertruck-quality-leaked-tesla-email/", "case": null, "context": "Leaked email on Cybertruck part tolerances, first reported by the Cybertruck Owners Club per Electrek. Date is the Electrek publication date; subject line not given. The exact send date is not public; the month shown is when it was published.", "tags": [ "manufacturing", "engineering", "product" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 151, "bates": "EMX-000151", "slug": "2023-08-23-musk-to-tesla-cybertruck-precision", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2023-08-23-musk-to-tesla-cybertruck-precision" }, { "id": "2024-04-15-musk-to-all-tesla-layoffs", "date": "2024-04-15", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "All Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "Over the years, we have grown rapidly with multiple factories scaling around the globe. With this rapid growth there has been duplication of roles and job functions in certain areas. As we prepare the company for our next phase of growth, it is extremely important to look at every aspect of the company for cost reductions and increasing productivity.\n\nAs part of this effort, we have done a thorough review of the organization and made the difficult decision to reduce our headcount by more than 10% globally. There is nothing I hate more, but it must be done. This will enable us to be lean, innovative and hungry for the next growth phase cycle.\n\nI would like to thank everyone who is departing Tesla for their hard work over the years. I’m deeply grateful for your many contributions to our mission and we wish you well in your future opportunities. It is very difficult to say goodbye.\n\nFor those remaining, I would like to thank you in advance for the difficult job that remains ahead. We are developing some of the most revolutionary technologies in auto, energy and artificial intelligence. As we prepare the company for the next phase of growth, your resolve will make a huge difference in getting us there.\n\nThanks,\nElon", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "layoffs-2024", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "All Tesla employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Electrek, \"Tesla lays off 'more than 10%' of its global workforce\" (Apr 15, 2024); text also matches CNBC's transcription", "source_url": "https://electrek.co/2024/04/15/tesla-lays-off-more-than-10-of-its-global-workforce/", "case": null, "context": "Companywide email announcing a reduction of more than 10 percent of headcount worldwide. Electrek posted the full text; CNBC also transcribed it.", "tags": [ "firing", "cost", "management" ], "verified": true, "partial": false, "num": 152, "bates": "EMX-000152", "slug": "2024-04-15-musk-to-all-tesla-layoffs", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2024-04-15-musk-to-all-tesla-layoffs" }, { "id": "2024-04-17-musk-to-all-tesla-severance-correction", "date": "2024-04-17", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "Tesla employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "As we reorganize Tesla it has come to my attention that some severance packages are incorrectly low [...] My apologies for this mistake. It is being corrected immediately.", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "layoffs-2024", "company": "Tesla", "audience": "Tesla staff", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNBC, \"Elon Musk email says Tesla sent 'incorrectly low' severance packages to laid-off employees\" (Apr 18, 2024)", "source_url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/tesla-says-in-email-it-sent-some-incorrectly-low-severance-packages.html", "case": null, "context": "CNBC called it a brief email sent Wednesday April 17, 2024 and quoted two sentences; no sign-off or subject was shown.", "tags": [ "firing", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 153, "bates": "EMX-000153", "slug": "2024-04-17-musk-to-all-tesla-severance-correction", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2024-04-17-musk-to-all-tesla-severance-correction" }, { "id": "2024-08-musk-to-x-staff-one-page-summary", "date": "2024-08", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "X staff" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "one page summary of your contributions to the company over the last month and over the last twelve months [...] stock & option awards proportionate to the likely future contributions of people at X", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "x-2024", "company": "X", "audience": "All X employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNN, \"Elon Musk is back to asking xAI employees to prove 'what you've accomplished'\" (Sep 17 2025), quoting the Aug 2024 email first reported by The Verge", "source_url": "https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/17/tech/elon-musk-xai-email", "case": null, "context": "Email to X staff in August 2024 asking for a one-page summary of contributions, tied to stock and option awards. Exact day is not given in the source. The two quoted fragments are joined by \"[...]\"; they are not contiguous text.", "tags": [ "management", "hiring", "communication" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 154, "bates": "EMX-000154", "slug": "2024-08-musk-to-x-staff-one-page-summary", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2024-08-musk-to-x-staff-one-page-summary" }, { "id": "2025-01-musk-to-x-staff-barely-breaking-even", "date": "2025-01", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "X staff" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "And we're barely breaking even [...] Over the last few months, we've witnessed the power of X in shaping national conversations and outcomes [...] We are also seeing other platforms begin to adopt our commitment to free speech and unbiased truth", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "x-2025", "company": "X", "audience": "All X employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "Yahoo Finance, \"Elon Musk Says X Growth Is 'Stagnant,' Revenue Is 'Unimpressive' in Leaked Email to Staff\" (Jan 24 2025), reporting the email obtained by The Wall Street Journal", "source_url": "https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-says-x-growth-221307490.html", "case": null, "context": "January 2025 email to X staff, reported by the Wall Street Journal on Jan 24 2025, assessing growth and finances. Exact send date is not given. Only the quoted fragments are available; \"[...]\" marks a gap. Reporting also describes the email as calling growth stagnant and revenue unimpressive, but those single words are not reproduced here as email text.", "tags": [ "management", "communication", "strategy" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 155, "bates": "EMX-000155", "slug": "2025-01-musk-to-x-staff-barely-breaking-even", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2025-01-musk-to-x-staff-barely-breaking-even" }, { "id": "2025-09-16-musk-to-xai-staff-one-page-summary", "date": "2025-09-16", "time": null, "from": "Elon Musk", "to": [ "xAI employees" ], "cc": [], "subject": "", "body": "send a one page summary of what you've accomplished in the past four weeks and what you intend to accomplish in the next four weeks. [...] This is due by noon on Thursday", "musk_authored": true, "thread": "xai-2025", "company": "xAI", "audience": "All xAI employees", "source_type": "press_leak", "source_title": "CNN, \"Elon Musk is back to asking xAI employees to prove 'what you've accomplished'\" (Sep 17 2025), copy of the email shared with CNN by a source", "source_url": "https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/17/tech/elon-musk-xai-email", "case": null, "context": "Email sent on a Tuesday afternoon (Sep 16 2025) asking all xAI employees for a one-page summary of past and planned work. Only the quoted fragments are available; \"[...]\" marks a gap.", "tags": [ "management", "ai", "communication", "deadlines" ], "verified": true, "partial": true, "num": 156, "bates": "EMX-000156", "slug": "2025-09-16-musk-to-xai-staff-one-page-summary", "url": "https://www.rpdoyle.com/elonmails/e/2025-09-16-musk-to-xai-staff-one-page-summary" } ] }