马斯克翻车了！一边告OpenAI，一边偷偷蒸馏ChatGPT

marsbitPubblicato 2026-05-02Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-05-02

编辑:桃子

【新智元导读】大型翻车现场!起诉OpenAI「背叛使命」的马斯克,竟亲口承认自家Grok模型蒸馏了ChatGPT。

对薄公堂第四天,马斯克爆出了大瓜!

4月30日,加州奥克兰联邦法院,马斯克诉OpenAI案进入第四天。

现场,OpenAI首席律师William Savitt站起来,问了一个让整个法庭安静了三秒的问题:

xAI是否蒸馏了OpenAI的模型?

马斯克先是打了个太极,「所有AI公司都在这么干」。Savitt继续追问道,所以答案是yes?

部分如此(Partly)。

此话一出,全网瞬间看呆!

马斯克承认Grok模型蒸馏了ChatGPT

一个正在起诉OpenAI「背叛非营利使命」的人,亲口承认自家AI蒸馏了对手模型。

大型双标现场,撕碎了体面

不得不说,这一幕的讽刺含量已经溢出屏幕了。

马斯克在宣誓作证的法庭上,轻飘飘一句话,彻底捅破了窗户纸——

这是AI行业的标准做法,所有AI公司都在这样做。

马斯克承认Grok模型蒸馏了ChatGPT

蒸馏(Distillation),本质上就是让竞争对手的AI当家教,低成本教出一个差不多水平的学生。

马斯克起诉OpenAI,指控奥特曼违背了非营利使命,把他捐的3800万美元拿去搞了一个估值8000亿美元的营利性公司。

他是原告,他是那个指责别人「偷窃慈善」的人。

但就在这个案子的法庭上,他自己承认了另一种「偷」。

蒸馏算不算违法?目前,法律上是灰色地带:它可能不违法,但几乎肯定违反了OpenAI的服务条款。

硅谷巨头在训练数据上,疯狂游走在版权法边缘,海量爬取互联网内容,面对版权方的起诉时振振有词说是「合理使用」。

Anthropic声称OpenAI通过使用其API违反了服务条款

现在连马斯克都说了:大家都在这么干。

这个回答精妙到让律师都沉默了几秒,承认了,但没完全承认;坦白了,但留了余地。

Anthropic第一,xAI垫底?

庭审中还有一个细节引爆了讨论,马斯克亲口给全球AI公司排了个座次。

被问及他去年夏天吹过的「xAI即将超越除谷歌以外所有公司」的豪言时,马斯克在法庭上的排名是:

Anthropic第一,OpenAI第二,谷歌第三,开源模型第四。

马斯克

他说:「xAI非常小,大约只有OpenAI的十分之一,员工只有几百人」。

这和他平时在X上的画风完全不一样。

那个在社交媒体上天天喊「Grok杀疯了」的男人,到了宣誓席上突然变得无比谦虚。

在法庭上,马斯克需要把xAI描述得尽可能小,才能反驳「你起诉OpenAI是为了打击竞争对手」的指控。

OpenAI社媒

说白了就是:为了赢官司,必须先承认自己不行。

比马斯克证词更狠

庭审中最名场面的一幕,来自法官Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers。

马斯克的律师想让专家证人讨论AI可能导致「人类灭绝」,被法官当场拦下。

马斯克自己也在证词中反复提到「终结者」场景,说要确保特斯拉的机器人「不要变成终结者」。

电影截图

谁曾想,法官的回应堪称教科书——

我注意到,尽管存在这些风险,马斯克先生本人也正在「这个领域」创建一家公司。

我相信有很多人不愿意把人类的未来交到马斯克手中。

但这不重要,这是一个关于慈善信托是否被违反的案件,不是一场关于AI安全风险的审判。

这句话的潜台词,远比字面意思锋利得多。

它指向了一个马斯克一直试图回避的事实:你一边高喊AI会毁灭人类,一边创办了一家AI公司,蒸馏了竞争对手的模型,还把它和SpaceX合并了。

你到底是在拯救人类,还是在跟人类抢生意?

OpenAI总裁日记,真正的定时炸弹

马斯克的证词,只是这场审判的序章。

下周一,OpenAI联合创始人Greg Brockman将出庭作证。

Brockman之所以是关键证人,是因为他的私人日记被法庭采信为证据。其中有这样几段:

山姆·奥特曼

他的故事将会是:我们最后对他不诚实,关于仍然想做营利化这件事,只是不带他一起。

从他手里偷走非营利组织是不对的。

在没有他的情况下转成B-corp,那是道德破产,而且他真的不蠢。

这些日记条目,正是法官决定将此案交由陪审团审理的关键依据之一。

OpenAI称这些日记,是被马斯克律师团队「断章取义」。

但无论如何,下周的法庭上,Brockman将不得不面对自己写下的每一个字。

一场改写AI行业叙事的庭审

回过头看这四天的庭审,信息量大到惊人。

马斯克承认了蒸馏,捅破了硅谷最大的公开秘密。他给AI公司排了名,当庭把自己的xAI贬到了最小。

马斯克承认Grok模型蒸馏了ChatGPT

他被法官教育「你不是律师」,被禁止讨论AI末日论。

他的财务管家Birchall证实了3800万美元捐款的细节,但也暴露了捐款可能没有附加限制条件的事实。

而最戏剧性的反转还没到来,Brockman的证人席,才是这场大戏的真正高潮。

下周一,正面交锋大戏正式开始。

参考资料:

https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/921546/elon-musk-xai-openai-trial-model-distillation

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/30/openai-trial-elon-musk-sam-altman-live-updates.html

https://www.businessinsider.com/takeaways-elon-musk-sam-altman-openai-federal-trial-2026-4?utm_campaign=business-link-post&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

本文来自微信公众号“新智元”,作者:新智元

Letture associate

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that the core limitation of blockchain technology is not the scalability trilemma, but its fundamental lack of privacy, which acts as a barrier to institutional capital. It defines blockchain as a slow, expensive, shared computer whose primary value is "permissionlessness" (no administrator) and verifiable trust. While this is ideal for native financial assets like stable币, which now process trillions, two critical flaws remain for mainstream adoption: regulatory legitimacy and a default transparency that leaks all financial activity. The author contends that transparency is not a feature but a tax, quantified through MEV extraction, making the public ledger unusable for serious institutions. However, modern cryptography, specifically zero-knowledge proofs, now offers a solution: "provable privacy." This allows users to prove compliance (e.g., solvency, KYC) without revealing underlying data. This fusion of privacy and auditability resolves the transparency-compliant privacy-compliance dichotomy, enabling a purely upgraded system where transactions are verified but not broadcasted. Closing these flaws is presented as the essential bridge to onboard the next wave of trillions in capital.

marsbit7 h fa

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

marsbit7 h fa

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手7 h fa

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手7 h fa

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit9 h fa

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit9 h fa

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手11 h fa

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手11 h fa

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit12 h fa

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit12 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片