Elon Musk is diverting Tesla’s GPUs to X, xAI, Nvidia emails say
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
I’m unsure how to classify this. Those H100s may be worth a lot more on the open market than their purchase price, just because they are available now. While I do not think it is theft as a shareholder (which I’m not) I feel he squandered significant value. Either by not using the H100s or by not selling them to the highest bidder.
There is, after all, no formal relationship between X and Tesla. It’s just that Musk works at both.
Upvote
65
(65
/
0)
You know what's hilarious abut this line? It shows just how little strategy and business acumen he actually has. You wasted tons of money trying to build a supercomputer when a bunch of of the shelf GPUs would suffice, and then you decide to also buy those GPUs anyways thereby making the wasted investment also redundant? What's the supposed strategy there, either you need a supercomputer or the GPU cluster but not both.
Upvote
82
(83
/
-1)
I would assume so. But it's still doing financial damage to Tesla, because they're basically letting the chips go at retail price, while their actual value (with short delivery time) is much higher in the current landscape. Imagine the money shower if they had auctioned them off. (And that's besides the fact that Tesla probably actually needs them anyway.)
So it's fair to call it theft, but the exact damage is much harder to quantify.
Upvote
61
(62
/
-1)
The hissy fit he's gonna throw if the shareholders rejects everything in the vote will be epic. LIke full on lying on the ground and kicking his legs while holding his breath toddler level of fit.
Upvote
39
(39
/
0)
Isn't this a breach of his fiduciary duty to shareholders of Tesla? He's diverting resources needed by the public company in order to give an advantage to his privately held one and benefit himself at their expense. Even if both companies are paying for their own GPUs, time has a value.
Upvote
51
(52
/
-1)
See, there's a problem with this approach though. Namely that Musk has to keep Tesla shareholders in "HODL" mode so that he can sell and collect his billions. But crapola like stealing people and compute from Tesla for his other ventures makes that a lot harder. All it's going to take is a sell-off to start and Musk is going to be in deep doo-doo. He'll never be poor, but a lot of billions will evaporate if the shareholders revolt over his profound mismanagement of Tesla.
Upvote
34
(34
/
0)
Longmile149
Ars Scholae Palatinae
So assuming a stupidest-case scenario (this is, after all, Elon Musk we're talking about), how would something like this affect the private companies that benefited from the thefts?
If the courts end up finding that Musk was feeding X and SpaceX with Tesla money, what does that mean for X and SpaceX?
Upvote
19
(20
/
-1)
This is interesting to me because Nvidia straight up won't deliver the H100 chassis you have paid for unless you fill out their hyper specific questionnaire about how the unit will be installed. Think "describe your dock facilities in detail" and "from the dock to installation location, exactly how many bumps will the package be subjected to?" "How many elevator rides?". And then Nvidia personnel demand they be the ones to install the equipment.
Upvote
41
(42
/
-1)
Am I reading this right? Tesla, a publicly owned company, has diverted purchases it made to X and xAI, two privately held companies? Does the fan base still consider this on the up and up, and not a conflict of interest at the very least?
And Musk still wants his $56 billion payday, when he’s obviously raiding Tesla???
What the fuck. I want some Musk stans to explain to everyone how this is a good thing for everyone.
And Musk still wants his $56 billion payday, when he’s obviously raiding Tesla???
What the fuck. I want some Musk stans to explain to everyone how this is a good thing for everyone.
Upvote
56
(57
/
-1)
When Musk decided that all the problems in his life are other humans and he wants to get rid of them. Full self driving is just him not wanting to even see a chauffeur, let alone have to ride along with a pleb on automatic mass transit, just him safe smug and alone in his little pod bubble of invincibility and safety. And when he tried to get rid of workers he found that retrofitting robots into assembly of an already designed car is no easily done or cost effective, something the big 3 and foreign automakers learned decades ago. So in his ginormous brain the answer wasn't the obvious, "we'll we design the next product with robot assembly in mind", but the much more asinine "If industrial robots aren't a 1 to 1 human replacement then I'll just make humanoid robots to replace my workers without redesigning anything else"
Upvote
39
(40
/
-1)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
Do shareholders generally have the ability to oust an incompetent board outside of regular periodic elections? Does it depend on the incorporation charter?
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
It's more than that, it's outright theft and embezzlement. He's not just making bad decisions with investor money, which would be a fiduciary breach, he's actively stealing their money/value out of the company and putting it into ones that he personally owns. He's stealing/transferring wealth.
Upvote
33
(35
/
-2)
Another day, another direction for Musk. He can't focus. The board needs to remove him.
Upvote
23
(23
/
0)
Would you really put it past the man who went around Twitter unplugging random servers, and who installed an illegal flashing strobing X sign on the roof without any permits or structural engineering, to not just go in after the nvidia people have left and unplug and steal the GPUs?
Upvote
49
(49
/
0)
Friend, if you think he’ll ever face meaningful legal or financial consequences, I have some disappointing news.
Upvote
35
(35
/
0)
And I bet it's either because he lost interest in the car business and it's no longer shiny enough, or he's run out of cash for the checks his mouth have been writing about it and is hoping the jump to unrelated businesses will distract people long enough to keep the house of cars from falling down.
Upvote
35
(35
/
0)
Upvote
20
(20
/
0)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
Well this spawns a whole litany of questions, but the foremost is why? Is it because the supply/demand imbalance is so huge that Nvidia needs to avoid RMAs at all costs? A defense against reverse engineering? White glove treatment for a premiere product?
Upvote
28
(28
/
0)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
I can't help but believe that approach comes with an unforgiving diminishing returns curve.
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
Maybe he thought "supercomputer" was for "big boys" and GPU driven systems were "toys that came from games" or some other hilariously stupid nonsense.
Like if he sees everyone else using GPU clusters he'd have thought he was going against the grain of a "fad" because he doesn't understand it and if he doesn't understand it it must mean they're stupid and he's smart.
Or maybe it's none of that, I don't know. I like Musk's Razor – a philosophical device used to "slice away" improbable explanations but that always fails because all explanations are equally insane. It's a dull razor
Upvote
32
(32
/
0)
If Tesla had a reasonable, independent board of directors that act in shareholders best interests, I’d except Musk to be fired for this.
But Tesla doesn’t have a responsable, independent board of directors that act in the shareholders, save for Musk’s, best interests.
But Tesla doesn’t have a responsable, independent board of directors that act in the shareholders, save for Musk’s, best interests.
Upvote
45
(45
/
0)
idfk. I just had to come up with all the answers in a day. A lot of the questions were environmental in nature. Seemed like a checklist for dummies beyond letting customers say "ya i've got 240v power and AC in that room it'll be fine" and then it would not be fine.
Upvote
21
(21
/
0)
Of course the cult is busily reassuring themselves this is very good and smart and fine of Elon, but if this doesn't launch a shareholder lawsuit, what does?
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
He views all of his business ventures as extensions of his persona, ego, and will, and while he understands the distinctions between them I don't really think he cares. It's all just ElonCorp, and ElonCorp is Elon.
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
It's still theft. He didn't steal the GPUs, he stole the time they're not computing stuff for Tesla.
Upvote
60
(62
/
-2)
Shareholders can sue, in a derivative action, if there has been mismanagement. The issue is, though, whether the damage to the company’s bottom line is sufficient to show damages, or whether the shareholders would have to show the stock price was impacted.
Shareholder derivative litigation is a mess of a doctrine. But it exists. The other big question, as others have pointed out, is that removing musk as CEO would tank the price. So there’s no incentive to oust him
Upvote
25
(25
/
0)
Especially since this was done in December, while his pay package was still in effect.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
That actually does seem to be the case. They're all psychopaths. They commit one crime and the thrill of it and feeling of superiority over lesser beings (the rest of us) make them do it over and over again. Meanwhile our two tiered justice system keeps them out of jail
Upvote
31
(31
/
0)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
When you put it that way, maybe more vendors should be that thorough. We've had a few rescheduled installations because a vendor made assumptions about circuit availability.
Upvote
19
(19
/
0)
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
If X received GPUs that should have been doing something useful for Tesla and building shareholder value for Tesla, then Elon has not fulfilled his fiduciary duty to the shareholders.
Upvote
46
(46
/
0)
Upvote
16
(17
/
-1)
Pretty major typo in the title that I currently see:
Nvida emails: Elon Musk diverting Tesla GPUs to his other companies
Nvida should, of course, be Nvidia.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
Non-crime, yes (I think). Non-issue is more of a stretch. It's still a constrained resource that Tesla supposedly requires, so just sweethearting it off to Twitter at cost is still some underhanded self-dealing. It's still Tesla giving value to X, when they are legally distinct entities. Even if it doesn't violate any specific laws, it's still INCREDIBLY unethical.
Upvote
28
(29
/
-1)