I disagree. I understand that Musk invested in OpenAI under the understanding that ChatGPT would remain open source. He has expressed dissatisfaction with the direction OpenAI has taken ChatGPT and wants to return it to its original charitable mission. He paid millions of dollars for something that OpenAI didn't deliver, so I can understand him wanting to bring the project back inline with the vision he paid for.
I view Musk's decision here as a good thing that will benefit the world.
> I understand that Musk invested in OpenAI under the understanding that ChatGPT would remain open source.
This is false, but it what he tries to portray to save face. It has been shown numerous times that he was in agreement with keeping it AI private when it was assumed he would be in control of it. And specifically for safety reasons. And the only reason OpenAI took microsoft money was because Musk pulled his already pledged and budgeted funding for the company.
Why did he pull funding? Because he insisted OpenAI was light-years behind Google (he was very wrong) and insisted the way to save it was to give him full control of the company (also wrong). They told him he was wrong so he got made and pulled his already pledged funding.
Pledging funds for a non-profit then afterwards getting upset that they won't just give you the non-profit entity is pretty absurd.
You may not believe this, but there is no moral quality to money, spent or otherwise. There is no mandate and no value to obeying Musk's wishes.
If he wants to, he could apply legal mechanisms. The fact he's resorting to public pandering to sycophants to back him in his righteous cause suggests that he has exhausted those legal means.
I view Musk's decision here as a good thing that will benefit the world.