A high-stakes legal battle is unfolding around OpenAI after failed settlement talks ahead of trial. Greg Brockman has revealed a reported $30 billion stake linked to the company and ties to Sam Altman, raising questions about governance. Elon Musk has alleged potential conflicts of interest, intensifying scrutiny. The case could reshape OpenAI’s structure, leadership, and future direction.


OpenAI Power Struggle: $30 Billion Stake Row Deepens as Musk Questions Independence

Elon Musk has taken the stand in a closely watched California courtroom battle involving OpenAI, the company he once helped establish. The high-stakes case centres on OpenAI’s structure, direction and long-term mission, with Musk arguing that the organisation has moved away from its original vision. The trial is being seen as a defining moment for the artificial intelligence industry, with experts saying the outcome could influence how powerful AI companies are governed in the future.


OpenAI Trial: Courtroom Exchange Raises Strategic Risks For Musk Team 

Elon Musk has another reason to land humans on Mars - his own pay package. According to a Reuters report, the SpaceX Board members have approved a compensation plan that would only kick in if the company successfully achieves its aims linked to the Red Planet. SpaceX recently filed a confidential registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which states that Musk will get $200 million in super-voting restricted shares if the company hits two goals: a market value of $7.5 trillion and a colony of at least 1 million people on Mars. Besides the interplanetary goal, the statement also states that Musk would get additional incentives of $60.4 million in restricted shares if SpaceX is able to operate space-based data centres with at least 100 terawatts of processing power. However, Musk has admitted that colonising Mars will take at least 20 more years. He recently also pushed back on the timeline and even added Moon as the midpoint. So the Board has now attached his appraisal with his achievements in clear terms. Basically, no Mars, no perks.Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/hidden-cosmic-route-could-speed-up-mars-travel-a-study-suggests-asteroid-data-may-slash-journey-time-to-153-days-1777448499484">A secret space shortcut to Mars? New study suggests asteroid data could cut travel time to just 153 days</a><h2>Musk and his plan to colonise Mars tied to his pay package</h2>Musk has pushed his plan of sending people to Mars and setting up a human colony for several years now. He has said many times that humanity needs to find a new home and that Mars is the answer. He plans to send one million people to Mars by 2050. The SpaceX CEO put his staff to work, who are reportedly spending hours every day on the interplanetary plan. The company developed Starship to achieve this dream, which has been tested several times and is still undergoing improvements. He never emphasised the role of the Moon in the mission, saying that Starship can directly take humans to Mars. However, earlier this year, Musk said that SpaceX has shifted focus towards building "a self-growing city on the Moon." He argued that this can be done in the next 10 years, while a Mars landing will take at least 20 years.Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/mind-blown-see-47-million-galaxies-in-the-largest-3d-map-of-the-universe-each-dot-in-this-photo-is-a-galaxy-1776433522489">MIND BLOWN! See 47 million galaxies in the largest 3D map of the universe. Each dot in this photo is a galaxy</a>&nbsp;The compensation plan for Musk is likely an attempt to keep him committed to SpaceX’s long-term vision. Although the valuation targets lack a strict timeline, Musk would receive zero shares if the company fails to meet the outlined goals. His current worth is an estimated $773.9 billion, according to Forbes. This would multiply manifold if he can not only save humanity but also colonise Mars.&nbsp; &nbsp;

Elon Musk has a new reason to push forward with his plans to send humans to Mars. The SpaceX board has tied his compensation to his success in colonising Mars and sending at least 1 million people to the Red Planet. However, Musk's own timeline for this is 20 years.

Elon Musk has another reason to land humans on Mars - his own pay package. According to a Reuters report, the SpaceX Board members have approved a compensation plan that would only kick in if the company successfully achieves its aims linked to the Red Planet. SpaceX recently filed a confidential registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which states that Musk will get $200 million in super-voting restricted shares if the company hits two goals: a market value of $7.5 trillion and a colony of at least 1 million people on Mars. Besides the interplanetary goal, the statement also states that Musk would get additional incentives of $60.4 million in restricted shares if SpaceX is able to operate space-based data centres with at least 100 terawatts of processing power. However, Musk has admitted that colonising Mars will take at least 20 more years. He recently also pushed back on the timeline and even added Moon as the midpoint. So the Board has now attached his appraisal with his achievements in clear terms. Basically, no Mars, no perks. Also Read: A secret space shortcut to Mars? New study suggests asteroid data could cut travel time to just 153 days Musk and his plan to colonise Mars tied to his pay package Musk has pushed his plan of sending people to Mars and setting up a human colony for several years now. He has said many times that humanity needs to find a new home and that Mars is the answer. He plans to send one million people to Mars by 2050. The SpaceX CEO put his staff to work, who are reportedly spending hours every day on the interplanetary plan. The company developed Starship to achieve this dream, which has been tested several times and is still undergoing improvements. He never emphasised the role of the Moon in the mission, saying that Starship can directly take humans to Mars. However, earlier this year, Musk said that SpaceX has shifted focus towards building "a self-growing city on the Moon." He argued that this can be done in the next 10 years, while a Mars landing will take at least 20 years. Also Read: MIND BLOWN! See 47 million galaxies in the largest 3D map of the universe. Each dot in this photo is a galaxy The compensation plan for Musk is likely an attempt to keep him committed to SpaceX’s long-term vision. Although the valuation targets lack a strict timeline, Musk would receive zero shares if the company fails to meet the outlined goals. His current worth is an estimated $773.9 billion, according to Forbes. This would multiply manifold if he can not only save humanity but also colonise Mars.

You think your work goals are too audacious? They are nothing compared to what Elon Musk has to achieve. The SpaceX board has tied his compensation to colonising Mars and sending at least 1 million people to the Red Planet. However, Musk's own timeline for this is 20 years.

No Mars, no moolah: Musk's appraisal directly tied to settling 1 million people on Red Planet

Musk vs OpenAI: Musk Alleges OpenAI Abandoned Public-Interest Mission

A tense moment unfolded in a California federal court as Elon Musk accused a lawyer representing Sam Altman of trying to mislead him during cross-examination.The exchange took place during an ongoing trial involving OpenAI, where Musk has filed a lawsuit over the company’s shift from a non-profit mission to a for-profit structure.&nbsp;<h2>What happened in the courtroom</h2>During questioning, lawyer William Savitt asked Musk about the tax benefits linked to his $38 million donation to OpenAI. Savitt described his questions as simple, but Musk disagreed.“Your questions are not simple. They are designed to trick me,” Musk told the court, speaking before a nine-member jury.The exchange became increasingly tense, with both sides interrupting each other as they tried to present their arguments.&nbsp;<h2>What is the dispute about?</h2>Musk’s lawsuit focuses on OpenAI’s original mission.He claims that:OpenAI was meant to operate as a non-profit organisationThe company later shifted towards a for-profit model in 2019This change, according to him, benefited its leadershipMusk has also accused the company of breach of trust and unjust enrichment.He is seeking $150 billion in damages, with any compensation intended for OpenAI’s charitable arm.&nbsp;OpenAI’s response to Musk’s claimsOpenAI has rejected Musk’s allegations.The company argues that:Musk supported the idea of a for-profit structure in earlier discussionsHe wanted a larger role in leading the companyHis current actions may be linked to competition with his AI venture, xAIOpenAI has said the shift to a for-profit model was necessary to:Attract investmentBuild computing infrastructureHire skilled researchers<h2>Key evidence presented in court</h2>During the trial, several emails and messages were shown to the jury.These included:A 2015 email where Musk discussed a possible for-profit structureA 2017 email where Musk called himself a “fool” for funding what he believed was a non-profit. Messages exchanged after Microsoft’s investment in OpenAIMusk described the investment move as a “bait and switch” and said an offer to let him invest felt like a “bribe”.&nbsp;From partnership to legal battleMusk, Altman and Greg Brockman were part of the founding team of OpenAI in 2015.Musk later left the company in 2018. Since then, the relationship between the founders has changed significantly.Today, the case reflects a wider disagreement over:&nbsp;The direction of AI developmentThe role of private investmentControl over advanced technologies<h2>Why this case matters</h2>The trial is not just about a dispute between individuals. It raises broader questions about how AI companies should operate.At the centre is a key issue:Should advanced AI be developed as a public good?Or should companies adopt commercial models to scale faster?The outcome of the case could influence how AI organisations are structured in the future.<h2>What happens next?</h2>The trial is ongoing, with more witnesses and arguments expected in the coming days.The court will examine:OpenAI’s structure and funding modelInternal communications between foundersWhether the company followed its original mission For now, Musk’s testimony and the courtroom exchanges highlight how complex and high-stakes the debate around AI governance has become&nbsp;

A tense exchange unfolded in a California federal court as Elon Musk accused a lawyer representing Sam Altman of trying to mislead him during cross-examination. The clash is part of Musk’s high-stakes lawsuit against OpenAI over its shift from a non-profit mission to a for-profit structure.

A tense moment unfolded in a California federal court as Elon Musk accused a lawyer representing Sam Altman of trying to mislead him during cross-examination. The exchange took place during an ongoing trial involving OpenAI, where Musk has filed a lawsuit over the company’s shift from a non-profit mission to a for-profit structure. What happened in the courtroom During questioning, lawyer William Savitt asked Musk about the tax benefits linked to his $38 million donation to OpenAI. Savitt described his questions as simple, but Musk disagreed. “Your questions are not simple. They are designed to trick me,” Musk told the court, speaking before a nine-member jury. The exchange became increasingly tense, with both sides interrupting each other as they tried to present their arguments. What is the dispute about? Musk’s lawsuit focuses on OpenAI’s original mission. He claims that: OpenAI was meant to operate as a non-profit organisation The company later shifted towards a for-profit model in 2019 This change, according to him, benefited its leadership Musk has also accused the company of breach of trust and unjust enrichment. He is seeking $150 billion in damages, with any compensation intended for OpenAI’s charitable arm. OpenAI’s response to Musk’s claims OpenAI has rejected Musk’s allegations. The company argues that: Musk supported the idea of a for-profit structure in earlier discussions He wanted a larger role in leading the company His current actions may be linked to competition with his AI venture, xAI OpenAI has said the shift to a for-profit model was necessary to: Attract investment Build computing infrastructure Hire skilled researchers Key evidence presented in court During the trial, several emails and messages were shown to the jury. These included: A 2015 email where Musk discussed a possible for-profit structure A 2017 email where Musk called himself a “fool” for funding what he believed was a non-profit. Messages exchanged after Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI Musk described the investment move as a “bait and switch” and said an offer to let him invest felt like a “bribe”. From partnership to legal battle Musk, Altman and Greg Brockman were part of the founding team of OpenAI in 2015. Musk later left the company in 2018. Since then, the relationship between the founders has changed significantly. Today, the case reflects a wider disagreement over: The direction of AI development The role of private investment Control over advanced technologies Why this case matters The trial is not just about a dispute between individuals. It raises broader questions about how AI companies should operate. At the centre is a key issue: Should advanced AI be developed as a public good? Or should companies adopt commercial models to scale faster? The outcome of the case could influence how AI organisations are structured in the future. What happens next? The trial is ongoing, with more witnesses and arguments expected in the coming days. The court will examine: OpenAI’s structure and funding model Internal communications between founders Whether the company followed its original mission For now, Musk’s testimony and the courtroom exchanges highlight how complex and high-stakes the debate around AI governance has become

A tense exchange unfolded in a California federal court as Elon Musk accused a lawyer representing Sam Altman of trying to mislead him during cross-examination. The clash is part of Musk’s high-stakes lawsuit against OpenAI over its shift from a non-profit mission to a for-profit structure.

Elon Musk accuses OpenAI lawyer of ‘trying to trick me’ in court

Elon Musk Testifies In Explosive OpenAI Trial That Could Reshape AI Industry

Elon Musk has begun testifying in a major legal case against OpenAI and its leadership, including CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman. The trial, taking place in a California federal court, is one of the most closely watched disputes in the artificial intelligence industry.<h2>What is the case about?</h2>The case centres on claims made by Musk that OpenAI has moved away from its original mission. OpenAI was founded with the aim of building artificial general intelligence (AGI) that benefits humanity. Musk, who was part of the founding team and invested about $38 million, argues that the company has shifted towards a profit-driven model.According to the lawsuit, Musk has raised concerns including:Alleged breach of OpenAI’s founding principlesClaims of unjust enrichmentConcerns over the company’s restructuring into a for-profit modelMusk has asked the court to remove Altman and Brockman from leadership roles and review OpenAI’s current structure.<h2>From partnership to rivalry</h2>Musk, Altman and Brockman were once part of the same founding group at OpenAI. However, differences soon emerged over the company’s direction, including discussions around whether OpenAI should be integrated with Tesla, which Musk leads. Musk later stepped away from OpenAI and went on to launch his own AI company, xAI, positioning it as a competitor in the same space.<h2>Who else could testify?</h2>The trial is expected to feature testimony from several major figures in the tech industry.These may include:Satya Nadella Kevin Scott Mira MuratiMicrosoft is also named in the case due to its partnership and investment in OpenAI.<h2>Why this case matters</h2>This trial goes beyond a personal dispute. It raises wider questions about how AI companies operate. At the centre of the debate is whether organisations developing advanced AI should:Remain focused on public benefitOr adopt commercial models to scale fasterThe outcome of the case could influence how future AI companies are structured and regulated.<h2>What happens next?</h2>The trial is expected to continue with more testimonies and legal arguments in the coming weeks.As both sides present their case, the court will examine:OpenAI’s organisational changes Financial structure Whether its actions align with its original missionFor now, Musk’s testimony marks a key moment in a case that could shape the future direction of the AI industry.

Elon Musk has begun testifying in a major US court case against OpenAI and its leadership. The trial, taking place in a California federal court, focuses on claims that OpenAI has shifted away from its original mission of building AI for public benefit and moved toward a profit-driven model.


Elon Musk has begun testifying in a major legal case against OpenAI and its leadership, including CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman. The trial, taking place in a California federal court, is one of the most closely watched disputes in the artificial intelligence industry. What is the case about? The case centres on claims made by Musk that OpenAI has moved away from its original mission. OpenAI was founded with the aim of building artificial general intelligence (AGI) that benefits humanity. Musk, who was part of the founding team and invested about $38 million, argues that the company has shifted towards a profit-driven model. According to the lawsuit, Musk has raised concerns including: Alleged breach of OpenAI’s founding principles Claims of unjust enrichment Concerns over the company’s restructuring into a for-profit model Musk has asked the court to remove Altman and Brockman from leadership roles and review OpenAI’s current structure. From partnership to rivalry Musk, Altman and Brockman were once part of the same founding group at OpenAI. However, differences soon emerged over the company’s direction, including discussions around whether OpenAI should be integrated with Tesla, which Musk leads. Musk later stepped away from OpenAI and went on to launch his own AI company, xAI, positioning it as a competitor in the same space. Who else could testify? The trial is expected to feature testimony from several major figures in the tech industry. These may include: Satya Nadella Kevin Scott Mira Murati Microsoft is also named in the case due to its partnership and investment in OpenAI. Why this case matters This trial goes beyond a personal dispute. It raises wider questions about how AI companies operate. At the centre of the debate is whether organisations developing advanced AI should: Remain focused on public benefit Or adopt commercial models to scale faster The outcome of the case could influence how future AI companies are structured and regulated. What happens next? The trial is expected to continue with more testimonies and legal arguments in the coming weeks. As both sides present their case, the court will examine: OpenAI’s organisational changes Financial structure Whether its actions align with its original mission For now, Musk’s testimony marks a key moment in a case that could shape the future direction of the AI industry.

Elon Musk has begun testifying in a major US court case against OpenAI and its leadership. The trial, taking place in a California federal court, focuses on claims that OpenAI has shifted away from its original mission of building AI for public benefit and moved toward a profit-driven model.

Elon Musk challenges OpenAI’s shift to a profit model in court: What the case is about

Elon Musk’s legal fight against OpenAI has entered a major new phase after a jury was selected in California. Musk alleges the company abandoned its original mission and shifted away from the principles it was founded on. The closely watched case could have major implications for the future of artificial intelligence, corporate governance, and the battle over control of advanced AI systems.


Musk vs OpenAI: Elon Musk Claims OpenAI Betrayed Founding Mission

Elon Musk’s Legal Battle With OpenAI Intensifies As Jury Selected In California

The legal battle between Elon Musk and OpenAI is set to go to trial in the United States, marking a major moment in the ongoing dispute over the company’s direction and governance. Musk is reportedly seeking billions in financial disgorgement, while the case could also impact OpenAI’s structure and future IPO plans. The outcome may have wide-reaching consequences for the global artificial intelligence industry.


Musk vs OpenAI: Musk Claims He Was Misled Over OpenAI's Original Mission 

Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of Tesla and X, is set to go to trial against Sam Altman and OpenAI in a case that could define the future direction of artificial intelligence development. The lawsuit centres on what Musk calls a “broken promise” by the company he co-founded in 2015.&nbsp;Musk argues that OpenAI has moved away from its original mission of developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. He claims that under Altman’s leadership, the organisation has shifted from a non-profit model to a closed-source, profit-driven structure closely linked to Microsoft.&nbsp;&nbsp;Musk says he invested about 100 million dollars in the early years to ensure that AI would not be controlled by a few large corporations.&nbsp;OpenAI and Altman have rejected the claims, calling the lawsuit a distraction driven by competition. They point out that Musk is now building his own AI venture, xAI, which directly competes with OpenAI. According to them, the legal challenge is an attempt to slow down the growth of tools like ChatGPT.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-weighing-proposal-aimed-at-satisfying-us-demands-trump-claims-ahead-of-second-round-of-talks-in-pakistan-1777059310739">Iran weighing proposal aimed at satisfying US demands, Trump claims ahead of second round of talks in Pakistan</a>&nbsp;The dispute has its roots in OpenAI’s early years, when Musk, Altman and researchers, including Ilya Sutskever, launched the organisation to counter the growing influence of Google in AI. Rising computing costs later put pressure on the model, and in 2019, Musk left the board after disagreements over control. Soon after, OpenAI created a capped profit structure to attract investment.&nbsp;The launch of ChatGPT in 2022 brought global attention and rapid growth, backed by a reported $13 billion investment from Microsoft. The company also saw internal turmoil in 2023 when Altman was briefly removed and then reinstated after employee backlash.&nbsp;The case, expected to be closely watched when it proceeds on April 27, will test Musk’s claim that he was misled into supporting a project that has now shifted towards profit. OpenAI maintains that the case lacks legal merit and reflects Musk’s own business interests as competition in the AI sector intensifies.

Musk argues that OpenAI has moved away from its original mission of developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity.

Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of Tesla and X, is set to go to trial against Sam Altman and OpenAI in a case that could define the future direction of artificial intelligence development. The lawsuit centres on what Musk calls a “broken promise” by the company he co-founded in 2015. Musk argues that OpenAI has moved away from its original mission of developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. He claims that under Altman’s leadership, the organisation has shifted from a non-profit model to a closed-source, profit-driven structure closely linked to Microsoft. Musk says he invested about 100 million dollars in the early years to ensure that AI would not be controlled by a few large corporations. OpenAI and Altman have rejected the claims, calling the lawsuit a distraction driven by competition. They point out that Musk is now building his own AI venture, xAI, which directly competes with OpenAI. According to them, the legal challenge is an attempt to slow down the growth of tools like ChatGPT. Also Read: Iran weighing proposal aimed at satisfying US demands, Trump claims ahead of second round of talks in Pakistan The dispute has its roots in OpenAI’s early years, when Musk, Altman and researchers, including Ilya Sutskever, launched the organisation to counter the growing influence of Google in AI. Rising computing costs later put pressure on the model, and in 2019, Musk left the board after disagreements over control. Soon after, OpenAI created a capped profit structure to attract investment. The launch of ChatGPT in 2022 brought global attention and rapid growth, backed by a reported $13 billion investment from Microsoft. The company also saw internal turmoil in 2023 when Altman was briefly removed and then reinstated after employee backlash. The case, expected to be closely watched when it proceeds on April 27, will test Musk’s claim that he was misled into supporting a project that has now shifted towards profit. OpenAI maintains that the case lacks legal merit and reflects Musk’s own business interests as competition in the AI sector intensifies.

Musk argues that OpenAI has moved away from its original mission of developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity.

Musk vs Altman AI clash heads to court on April 27 in OpenAI legal battle

Elon Musk's lawsuit against OpenAI, set for a jury trial on April 27, 2026, alleges that the company abandoned its founding mission to develop artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity in favor of maximizing profits for Microsoft. The lawsuit seeks to remove CEO Sam Altman, reverse the company's for-profit pivot, and return "ill-gotten gains" to the non-profit. 


Elon Musk Takes OpenAI To Court; What The Lawsuit Alleges?

Elon Musk Versus OpenAI Trial Set To Begin In US 

A shocking study claims that children as young as 13 are being exposed to explicit sexual content on X. Researchers found that even basic searches led to graphic material and the platform’s algorithm continued to push similar content into feeds. With regulators now stepping in, serious questions are being raised about whether social media platforms are doing enough to protect minors online.


Elon Musk's X Exposed In UK? Study Says 13-Year-Olds Are Shown Explicit Content

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has launched a sharp attack on South Africa’s race-based ownership laws, claiming they have prevented his satellite internet service Starlink from operating in the country. In a series of posts on X, Musk described the regulations as “openly racist” and alleged that officials had suggested installing a nominal Black executive to secure approval, an offer he said he refused on principle. “South Africa won’t allow Starlink to be licenced, even though I was born there, simply because I am not Black,” he wrote, adding that such policies were “evil” and should face international sanctions.&nbsp;The dispute centres on South Africa’s Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment policy, introduced after the end of Apartheid in 1994 to address historical inequalities. Under the framework, companies in sectors such as telecommunications are required to ensure significant participation by historically disadvantaged groups, primarily Black South Africans.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/why-giorgia-meloni-has-halted-italy-s-defence-pact-with-israel-this-is-what-we-know-1776184494116">Why Giorgia Meloni has halted Italy’s defence pact with Israel? This is what we know</a>&nbsp;According to a BBC report, telecom operators must typically meet a threshold of around 30 per cent ownership by such groups to qualify for a licence from the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa. Compliance is assessed across ownership, management control and skills development, and failure to meet the criteria can block market entry.&nbsp;Musk, who was born in Pretoria in 1971, has repeatedly highlighted his South African origins in criticising the policy. He also claimed Starlink had been asked to “bribe” its way into compliance, an allegation not substantiated by authorities.&nbsp;The South African government has pushed back strongly. Presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the country would not alter its regulatory framework to accommodate a single company. “There are currently 193 member states in the United Nations. Surely there is good money to be made out of 192 markets. It is okay to move on,” he was quoted as saying by Business Insider Africa.&nbsp;Clayson Monyela, head of public diplomacy at the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, also rejected Musk’s claims. Quoted by Indy100, he stated that more than 600 US firms operate in South Africa by complying with local laws and insisted that Starlink was welcome, provided it adhered to the rules.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/eric-swalwell-controversy-anna-paulina-luna-video-1776172044244">Anna Paulina alleges jailtime for Eric Swalwell, Brittany Watt maintains silence</a>&nbsp;Despite the standoff, Starlink has not yet formally applied for a licence in South Africa, according to the regulator and reports by Bloomberg and Snopes. Instead, the company has been lobbying for changes to the Black Economic Empowerment framework.&nbsp;In December 2025, Communications Minister Solly Malatsi proposed allowing “equity equivalent investment programmes” as an alternative to the ownership requirement. This would permit foreign firms to invest in local infrastructure and social initiatives rather than transfer equity.&nbsp;Starlink has indicated it would commit around R500 million to connect 5,000 rural schools to high-speed internet if such provisions are implemented. Similar arrangements have previously been used by multinational firms such as Toyota and BMW in South Africa.&nbsp;However, the proposal has divided the coalition government. Leaders within the African National Congress have opposed any dilution of empowerment rules. Parliamentary committee chair Khusela Diko reportedly described the directive as unlawful and questioned whether Starlink would follow through on its commitments.&nbsp;President Cyril Ramaphosa has also defended the policy, stating that calls to scrap Black Economic Empowerment and affirmative action were unrealistic. The row comes amid broader controversy around Musk’s statements on South Africa. He has previously amplified unsubstantiated claims about violence against white citizens, which were echoed by Donald Trump.&nbsp;

Elon Musk accused South Africa of racism, claiming Black ownership laws block Starlink’s license. The government maintains that compliance with post-Apartheid empowerment policies is mandatory for all foreign firms.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has launched a sharp attack on South Africa’s race-based ownership laws, claiming they have prevented his satellite internet service Starlink from operating in the country. In a series of posts on X, Musk described the regulations as “openly racist” and alleged that officials had suggested installing a nominal Black executive to secure approval, an offer he said he refused on principle. “South Africa won’t allow Starlink to be licenced, even though I was born there, simply because I am not Black,” he wrote, adding that such policies were “evil” and should face international sanctions. The dispute centres on South Africa’s Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment policy, introduced after the end of Apartheid in 1994 to address historical inequalities. Under the framework, companies in sectors such as telecommunications are required to ensure significant participation by historically disadvantaged groups, primarily Black South Africans. Also read: Why Giorgia Meloni has halted Italy’s defence pact with Israel? This is what we know According to a BBC report, telecom operators must typically meet a threshold of around 30 per cent ownership by such groups to qualify for a licence from the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa. Compliance is assessed across ownership, management control and skills development, and failure to meet the criteria can block market entry. Musk, who was born in Pretoria in 1971, has repeatedly highlighted his South African origins in criticising the policy. He also claimed Starlink had been asked to “bribe” its way into compliance, an allegation not substantiated by authorities. The South African government has pushed back strongly. Presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the country would not alter its regulatory framework to accommodate a single company. “There are currently 193 member states in the United Nations. Surely there is good money to be made out of 192 markets. It is okay to move on,” he was quoted as saying by Business Insider Africa. Clayson Monyela, head of public diplomacy at the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, also rejected Musk’s claims. Quoted by Indy100, he stated that more than 600 US firms operate in South Africa by complying with local laws and insisted that Starlink was welcome, provided it adhered to the rules. Also read: Anna Paulina alleges jailtime for Eric Swalwell, Brittany Watt maintains silence Despite the standoff, Starlink has not yet formally applied for a licence in South Africa, according to the regulator and reports by Bloomberg and Snopes. Instead, the company has been lobbying for changes to the Black Economic Empowerment framework. In December 2025, Communications Minister Solly Malatsi proposed allowing “equity equivalent investment programmes” as an alternative to the ownership requirement. This would permit foreign firms to invest in local infrastructure and social initiatives rather than transfer equity. Starlink has indicated it would commit around R500 million to connect 5,000 rural schools to high-speed internet if such provisions are implemented. Similar arrangements have previously been used by multinational firms such as Toyota and BMW in South Africa. However, the proposal has divided the coalition government. Leaders within the African National Congress have opposed any dilution of empowerment rules. Parliamentary committee chair Khusela Diko reportedly described the directive as unlawful and questioned whether Starlink would follow through on its commitments. President Cyril Ramaphosa has also defended the policy, stating that calls to scrap Black Economic Empowerment and affirmative action were unrealistic. The row comes amid broader controversy around Musk’s statements on South Africa. He has previously amplified unsubstantiated claims about violence against white citizens, which were echoed by Donald Trump.

Elon Musk accused South Africa of racism, claiming Black ownership laws block Starlink’s license. The government maintains that compliance with post-Apartheid empowerment policies is mandatory for all foreign firms.

Musk calls South Africa racist over Starlink block, alleges it happened because he’s ‘not Black’

Elon Musk criticizes COVID-19 vaccine protocols on X, claiming the second dose "almost sent me to the hospital." He shared his experience with the "Wuhan virus" and his claims that global vaccine dosages were "obviously too high."

Musk re-ignites COVID-19 vaccine debate; calls dosages ‘too high’ following personal health scare

Elon Musk recently shared an interview with Robin Farrow, who wrote a 'hit piece' on Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, the artificial intelligence firm behind ChatGPT. In the interview, the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist behind the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse exposé that sparked the MeToo movement, said that former associates of Altman described him as a sociopath and a pathological liar. Sharing the interview, the X chief, who was part of the founding team of OpenAI, said this man cannot be trusted with a superpowerful AI.&nbsp;<h2>Sam Altman accused of excessive lying</h2>Musk posted the Farrow interview, in which the journalist from The New Yorker highlighted allegations of repeated dishonesty, exaggeration, and misleading statements to board members and partners by Altman. Farrow claimed that Altman was fired from OpenAI in 2023 - before being reinstated - partly for excessive lying. He also spoke about untested AI models being released to India, and false assurances on AI safety provisions, under Altman. While sharing the interview, Musk wrote: "Not someone you want in charge of superpowerful AI."<h2>Farrow's allegations against Sam Altman</h2>Farrow made several allegations in a piece for the New Yorker, titled "Sam Altman May Control Our Future—Can He Be Trusted?". Written by Farrow along with Andrew Marantz and published on 6 April, the article came after 18 months of reporting and investigation. It is based on interviews with more than 100 people, including former and current OpenAI board members, executives, employees, investors, and colleagues. The article also claims to have reviewed previously undisclosed internal documents. This includes the “Ilya memos”, which contain Ilya Sutskever’s Slack messages and HR documents. Also reviewed were the private notes kept by Dario Amodei, the co-founder of rival AI firm Anthropic. Amodei was previously associated with OpenAI.The article questioned whether Altman can be trusted with control over transformative AI technology, in the context that artificial general intelligence (AGI) could be humanity’s most dangerous invention and thus would require a leader of “uncommon integrity” to run a company like OpenAI.<h2>AI, leadership and integrity: Sam Altman is “unconstrained by the truth”</h2>The article seeks to establish a pattern of deception, manipulation, and prioritisation of power and profit over safety commitments in Altman’s conduct. It claims that this pattern has been repeated across his career, from Loopt to Y Combinator and now OpenAI.Altman allegedly drifted from the AI safety mission, pushing aggressively for deals with businesses and governments.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/openai-brings-chatgpt-to-apple-carplay-for-hands-free-voice-interaction-while-driving-1775153637555">OpenAI brings ChatGPT to Apple CarPlay for hands-free voice interaction while driving</a><h2>Sam Altman had a consistent pattern of lying and misrepresentation</h2>In late 2022, Altman told the board that certain controversial features in an upcoming AI model had been approved by OpenAI’s safety panel. After board member Helen Toner asked for documentation, it turned out that the most controversial features had not been approved.Altman told Mira Murati that ChatGPT's GPT-4 Turbo model didn’t need safety approval, citing general counsel Jason Kwon. However, Kwon later said he was “confused” and had no idea where Altman got that idea. In his private notes, running to more than 200 pages, Dario Amodei documented several incidents, including one involving the 2019 Microsoft deal with OpenAI. Amodei wrote that Altman’s words were “almost certainly bulls***t”.<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/openai-to-introduce-ads-on-chatgpt-as-new-revenue-stream-1774169954470/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/openai-to-introduce-ads-on-chatgpt-as-new-revenue-stream-1774169954470/embed</a><h2>The betrayal of OpenAI’s nonprofit and safety mission</h2>Some OpenAI founders, including Altman, privately doubted its nonprofit structure early on, according to the report. Greg Brockman wrote in his diary: "If three months later, we’re doing B-corp, then it was a lie."One researcher reportedly told the board: “OpenAI has been going off the rails on its mission... We are prioritising product and revenue above all else.”<h2>Altman's deception and manipulation go back to his first startup</h2>According to the report, employees at his first start-up, Loopt, went to the board twice asking to fire Altman over a lack of transparency and a tendency for exaggeration. This included claiming he was a “Missouri high-school ping-pong champion” when he was not. He inspired loyalty in others but was accused of blurring the truth.During his time at Y Combinator, partners complained of divided loyalties, with Altman making personal investments while serving as president. Paul Graham, co-founder of Y Combinator, reportedly told colleagues Altman “had been lying to us all the time”.Altman was later pushed out as president but resisted and remained listed as chairman in SEC filings until 2021, which he said he was unaware of.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/hollywood/disney-exits-from-openai-deal-here-s-what-happened-1774549684205">Disney exits from OpenAI deal? Here's what happened</a><h2>Sam Altman's aggressive business dealings with questionable partners, and lobbying against regulation</h2>Altman reportedly sought funding and deals with Gulf autocracies in Saudi Arabia and the UAE for massive data-centre projects, despite security red flags. He internally discussed “playing world powers like China and Russia against each other in a bidding war for AI technology, according to the report. This plan was dropped after employee pushback.At one point, he claimed, without evidence, that China had an “AGI Manhattan Project”.Altman lobbied against AI regulation such as the European Union AI Act and bills in California, even as he publicly supported AI safety, said the report.&nbsp;<h2>Sister's abuse accusations and more: Sam Altman's personal character under scanner</h2>Sources cited in Farrow's reportage and interviews described Altman as having a “sociopathic lack of concern for the consequences”, and a desperate need to be liked.The article notes deeply personal allegations from Altman’s sister Annie, including of sexual abuse, which Altman fought in the courts. He denied the allegations. There were unsubstantiated Silicon Valley rumours involving minors, on which no evidence was found by the New Yorker reporters.<h2>Altman's board coup: He was ousted in 2023, but was reinstated, with limited probe</h2>Altman was fired as OpenAI CEO in 2023 by the board, citing a lack of candour. But he quickly returned to the position after organising a counter-campaign. He made Thrive Capital’s $86 billion investment in OpenAI conditional on his return, among other factors. He was reinstated within five days, with the board that ousted him practically disbanded. The subsequent “independent” WilmerHale review, overseen by new board members chosen in consultation with Altman, produced no written report. An 800-word announcement only cited a “breakdown in trust” without explicitly blaming Altman.<h2>‘Can't change my personality’: Altman’s response to allegations on his leadership, personal qualities</h2>Altman attributed the criticism of him to his avoidance of conflict. He said he “can’t change my personality”, and denied lying.He maintained that OpenAI would continue to run safety projects, “or at least safety-adjacent projects”.He also characterised OpenAI's shift to for-profit operations and aggressive deal-making as normal competitive business rather than a betrayal.The New Yorker article does not portray Altman as cartoonishly evil. It presents a complex, high-achieving figure whose traits led to breakdowns in trust. It suggests he exhibits a “reality-distortion field” and ruthless ambition.

Elon Musk has shared a Robin Farrow interview citing allegations against Sam Altman, appearing to agree with the contents of Farrow's New Yorker ‘hit piece’ on the OpenAI CEO. Altman is accused of dishonesty, with the article questioning his leadership amid AI integrity and safety issues.

Elon Musk recently shared an interview with Robin Farrow, who wrote a 'hit piece' on Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, the artificial intelligence firm behind ChatGPT. In the interview, the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist behind the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse exposé that sparked the MeToo movement, said that former associates of Altman described him as a sociopath and a pathological liar. Sharing the interview, the X chief, who was part of the founding team of OpenAI, said this man cannot be trusted with a superpowerful AI. Sam Altman accused of excessive lying Musk posted the Farrow interview, in which the journalist from The New Yorker highlighted allegations of repeated dishonesty, exaggeration, and misleading statements to board members and partners by Altman. Farrow claimed that Altman was fired from OpenAI in 2023 - before being reinstated - partly for excessive lying. He also spoke about untested AI models being released to India, and false assurances on AI safety provisions, under Altman. While sharing the interview, Musk wrote: "Not someone you want in charge of superpowerful AI." Farrow's allegations against Sam Altman Farrow made several allegations in a piece for the New Yorker, titled "Sam Altman May Control Our Future—Can He Be Trusted?". Written by Farrow along with Andrew Marantz and published on 6 April, the article came after 18 months of reporting and investigation. It is based on interviews with more than 100 people, including former and current OpenAI board members, executives, employees, investors, and colleagues. The article also claims to have reviewed previously undisclosed internal documents. This includes the “Ilya memos”, which contain Ilya Sutskever’s Slack messages and HR documents. Also reviewed were the private notes kept by Dario Amodei, the co-founder of rival AI firm Anthropic. Amodei was previously associated with OpenAI. The article questioned whether Altman can be trusted with control over transformative AI technology, in the context that artificial general intelligence (AGI) could be humanity’s most dangerous invention and thus would require a leader of “uncommon integrity” to run a company like OpenAI. AI, leadership and integrity: Sam Altman is “unconstrained by the truth” The article seeks to establish a pattern of deception, manipulation, and prioritisation of power and profit over safety commitments in Altman’s conduct. It claims that this pattern has been repeated across his career, from Loopt to Y Combinator and now OpenAI. Altman allegedly drifted from the AI safety mission, pushing aggressively for deals with businesses and governments. Also read: OpenAI brings ChatGPT to Apple CarPlay for hands-free voice interaction while driving Sam Altman had a consistent pattern of lying and misrepresentation In late 2022, Altman told the board that certain controversial features in an upcoming AI model had been approved by OpenAI’s safety panel. After board member Helen Toner asked for documentation, it turned out that the most controversial features had not been approved. Altman told Mira Murati that ChatGPT's GPT-4 Turbo model didn’t need safety approval, citing general counsel Jason Kwon. However, Kwon later said he was “confused” and had no idea where Altman got that idea. In his private notes, running to more than 200 pages, Dario Amodei documented several incidents, including one involving the 2019 Microsoft deal with OpenAI. Amodei wrote that Altman’s words were “almost certainly bulls***t”. https://www.wionews.com/videos/openai-to-introduce-ads-on-chatgpt-as-new-revenue-stream-1774169954470/embed The betrayal of OpenAI’s nonprofit and safety mission Some OpenAI founders, including Altman, privately doubted its nonprofit structure early on, according to the report. Greg Brockman wrote in his diary: "If three months later, we’re doing B-corp, then it was a lie." One researcher reportedly told the board: “OpenAI has been going off the rails on its mission... We are prioritising product and revenue above all else.” Altman's deception and manipulation go back to his first startup According to the report, employees at his first start-up, Loopt, went to the board twice asking to fire Altman over a lack of transparency and a tendency for exaggeration. This included claiming he was a “Missouri high-school ping-pong champion” when he was not. He inspired loyalty in others but was accused of blurring the truth. During his time at Y Combinator, partners complained of divided loyalties, with Altman making personal investments while serving as president. Paul Graham, co-founder of Y Combinator, reportedly told colleagues Altman “had been lying to us all the time”. Altman was later pushed out as president but resisted and remained listed as chairman in SEC filings until 2021, which he said he was unaware of. Also read: Disney exits from OpenAI deal? Here's what happened Sam Altman's aggressive business dealings with questionable partners, and lobbying against regulation Altman reportedly sought funding and deals with Gulf autocracies in Saudi Arabia and the UAE for massive data-centre projects, despite security red flags. He internally discussed “playing world powers like China and Russia against each other in a bidding war for AI technology, according to the report. This plan was dropped after employee pushback. At one point, he claimed, without evidence, that China had an “AGI Manhattan Project”. Altman lobbied against AI regulation such as the European Union AI Act and bills in California, even as he publicly supported AI safety, said the report. Sister's abuse accusations and more: Sam Altman's personal character under scanner Sources cited in Farrow's reportage and interviews described Altman as having a “sociopathic lack of concern for the consequences”, and a desperate need to be liked. The article notes deeply personal allegations from Altman’s sister Annie, including of sexual abuse, which Altman fought in the courts. He denied the allegations. There were unsubstantiated Silicon Valley rumours involving minors, on which no evidence was found by the New Yorker reporters. Altman's board coup: He was ousted in 2023, but was reinstated, with limited probe Altman was fired as OpenAI CEO in 2023 by the board, citing a lack of candour. But he quickly returned to the position after organising a counter-campaign. He made Thrive Capital’s $86 billion investment in OpenAI conditional on his return, among other factors. He was reinstated within five days, with the board that ousted him practically disbanded. The subsequent “independent” WilmerHale review, overseen by new board members chosen in consultation with Altman, produced no written report. An 800-word announcement only cited a “breakdown in trust” without explicitly blaming Altman. ‘Can't change my personality’: Altman’s response to allegations on his leadership, personal qualities Altman attributed the criticism of him to his avoidance of conflict. He said he “can’t change my personality”, and denied lying. He maintained that OpenAI would continue to run safety projects, “or at least safety-adjacent projects”. He also characterised OpenAI's shift to for-profit operations and aggressive deal-making as normal competitive business rather than a betrayal. The New Yorker article does not portray Altman as cartoonishly evil. It presents a complex, high-achieving figure whose traits led to breakdowns in trust. It suggests he exhibits a “reality-distortion field” and ruthless ambition.

Elon Musk has shared a Robin Farrow interview citing allegations against Sam Altman, appearing to agree with the contents of Farrow's New Yorker ‘hit piece’ on the OpenAI CEO. Altman is accused of dishonesty, with the article questioning his leadership amid AI integrity and safety issues.

Sam Altman a sociopath, pathological liar and abuser? Musk agrees to claims on OpenAI chief's past and leadership

SpaceX, led by Elon Musk, has applied to US regulators for permission to launch up to one million satellites into low-Earth orbit as part of a proposed space-based orbital data-center network. The satellites are expected to support AI computing powered by solar energy in space, dramatically expanding capabilities beyond the existing Starlink system.


Musk's SpaceX Applies to Launch One Million Satellites 

Elon Musk's X platform restricted its AI chatbot Grok amid concerns over misuse, particularly banning its ability to generate or process "undressing" images that simulate removing clothing from photos.


Grok Deepfake Scandal: AI Synthetic Media Raises Trust Fears

SpaceX has confidentially filed for an initial public offering (IPO) that could value the space exploration, satellite internet and AI company led by world's richest person Elon Musk at around $2 trillion. The IPO could raise as much as $75 billion, potentially making it the largest listing in history.&nbsp;<h2>Listing imminent: SpaceX confidential SEC filing</h2>The filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was made on April 1, according to Bloomberg and other reports. The company could go public as early as June, subject to regulatory review and market conditions, said the reports.Reports indicate SpaceX is targeting a valuation above $1.75 trillion, with some estimates approaching $2 trillion. At this level, it would rank among the world’s largest companies, alongside Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, and Amazon. It could also surpass Meta and Tesla, the electric vehicle company also led by Musk.<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/spacex-crew-12-docks-at-international-space-station-four-new-astronauts-arrive-via-spacex-rocket-1771128001120/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/spacex-crew-12-docks-at-international-space-station-four-new-astronauts-arrive-via-spacex-rocket-1771128001120/embed</a><h2>SpaceX expecting the biggest IPO ever</h2>The IPO could raise between $50 billion and $75 billion, surpassing the previous record set by Saudi Aramco. The Saudi Aramco IPO in 2019 raised about $29.4 billion and valued the company at roughly $1.7 trillion at listing.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/-google-will-win-the-ai-race-in-the-west-china-on-earth-and-spacex-in-space-says-elon-musk-1773990362750">‘Google will win the AI race in the West, China on Earth, and SpaceX in space,’ says Elon Musk</a><h2>Starlink, the real star of SpaceX</h2>SpaceX develops rockets, space exploration systems but Starlink, its satellite internet service, is the primary revenue driver. It generates more than two-thirds of the company’s total revenue by providing internet connectivity via low-Earth orbit satellites. SpaceX is estimated to have generated around $15–16 billion in revenue in 2025, with EBITDA of approximately $7.5 billion. The company recently entered into a $19.6 billion spectrum deal with EchoStar to expand its direct-to-cell capabilities.Reusable rockets such as Falcon 9 underpin SpaceX’s dominance in commercial and government launches. Future growth is expected to depend heavily on the success of Starship, the company’s next-generation rocket designed for Mars missions and large-scale satellite deployment.<h2>xAI deal adds AI angle to SpaceX products and services</h2>SpaceX’s integration with xAI, the artificial intelligence venture behind the popular Grok chatbot, values the combined entity at approximately $1.25 trillion and adds an AI dimension to its broader space and communications strategy.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/what-is-autonomous-drone-swarming-tech-musk-s-spacex-xai-place-bids-in-secret-pentagon-competition-wion-explains-1771301948635">What is autonomous drone swarming tech? Musk's SpaceX, xAI bid in secret Pentagon competition | WION Explains</a><h2>Analysts think the stock could perform well long term, but risks remain</h2>SpaceX is expected to list at a high valuation, with analysts such as PitchBook and Morningstar suggesting it could trade at more than 90 times revenue. However, they argue that over a five to seven year period, the valuation could be justified if Starship development succeeds and Starlink continues its rapid expansion.Risks include delays in Starship development, regulatory challenges, limited public financial disclosure. The broader market volatility and selling pressure from early investors after the IPO could also hit the stock.SpaceX’s IPO could mark a historic moment, bringing its combined strengths in space launch, satellite internet, and AI-linked infrastructure into public markets, provided it delivers on its ambitious growth expectations.

SpaceX has confidentially filed for IPO that could value the company near $2 trillion and raise up to $75 billion, reports said. The valuation is being driven by Starlink internet growth and long-term space and AI ambitions that includes Mars exploration

SpaceX has confidentially filed for an initial public offering (IPO) that could value the space exploration, satellite internet and AI company led by world's richest person Elon Musk at around $2 trillion. The IPO could raise as much as $75 billion, potentially making it the largest listing in history. Listing imminent: SpaceX confidential SEC filing The filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was made on April 1, according to Bloomberg and other reports. The company could go public as early as June, subject to regulatory review and market conditions, said the reports. Reports indicate SpaceX is targeting a valuation above $1.75 trillion, with some estimates approaching $2 trillion. At this level, it would rank among the world’s largest companies, alongside Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, and Amazon. It could also surpass Meta and Tesla, the electric vehicle company also led by Musk. https://www.wionews.com/videos/spacex-crew-12-docks-at-international-space-station-four-new-astronauts-arrive-via-spacex-rocket-1771128001120/embed SpaceX expecting the biggest IPO ever The IPO could raise between $50 billion and $75 billion, surpassing the previous record set by Saudi Aramco. The Saudi Aramco IPO in 2019 raised about $29.4 billion and valued the company at roughly $1.7 trillion at listing. Also read: ‘Google will win the AI race in the West, China on Earth, and SpaceX in space,’ says Elon Musk Starlink, the real star of SpaceX SpaceX develops rockets, space exploration systems but Starlink, its satellite internet service, is the primary revenue driver. It generates more than two-thirds of the company’s total revenue by providing internet connectivity via low-Earth orbit satellites. SpaceX is estimated to have generated around $15–16 billion in revenue in 2025, with EBITDA of approximately $7.5 billion. The company recently entered into a $19.6 billion spectrum deal with EchoStar to expand its direct-to-cell capabilities. Reusable rockets such as Falcon 9 underpin SpaceX’s dominance in commercial and government launches. Future growth is expected to depend heavily on the success of Starship, the company’s next-generation rocket designed for Mars missions and large-scale satellite deployment. xAI deal adds AI angle to SpaceX products and services SpaceX’s integration with xAI, the artificial intelligence venture behind the popular Grok chatbot, values the combined entity at approximately $1.25 trillion and adds an AI dimension to its broader space and communications strategy. Also read: What is autonomous drone swarming tech? Musk's SpaceX, xAI bid in secret Pentagon competition | WION Explains Analysts think the stock could perform well long term, but risks remain SpaceX is expected to list at a high valuation, with analysts such as PitchBook and Morningstar suggesting it could trade at more than 90 times revenue. However, they argue that over a five to seven year period, the valuation could be justified if Starship development succeeds and Starlink continues its rapid expansion. Risks include delays in Starship development, regulatory challenges, limited public financial disclosure. The broader market volatility and selling pressure from early investors after the IPO could also hit the stock. SpaceX’s IPO could mark a historic moment, bringing its combined strengths in space launch, satellite internet, and AI-linked infrastructure into public markets, provided it delivers on its ambitious growth expectations.

SpaceX has confidentially filed for IPO that could value the company near $2 trillion and raise up to $75 billion, reports said. The valuation is being driven by Starlink internet growth and long-term space and AI ambitions that includes Mars exploration

'$2 trillion valuation': SpaceX blockbuster IPO could raise $75 billion, say reports

Elon Musk’s social media platform X came under fire on April 1 after confusion spread rapidly over several viral posts claiming that the platform had disabled the ability to copy video links. The claims quickly gained attention as users reported that they were unable to share videos via direct links, resulting in a widespread concern among netzines about the possible changes. Several posts, some garnering millions of views, claimed that X had secretly disabled the ability to copy video links, with a few even suggesting the change was deliberate and aimed at certain content, such as political videos. Memes quickly spread across the platform, fueling concerns that a new restriction had been introduced.<h3>Fact or prank?</h3>So what actually happened? Did X, formerly known as Twitter, really remove this feature for millions of users? The truth is that the option to copy and share video links on X remains unchanged. The viral claim that gained massive traction overnight appears to have been nothing more than an April Fool’s Day prank, as users can still access and use the feature as usual.<h3>How does it all begin?</h3>The confusion started with a single post from a user, which rapidly went viral. It seems to have been part of an April Fool’s joke designed to drive engagement, a tactic often used on the platform to attract views and, in some cases, generate revenue. Several accounts on the X, along with some with a premium badge, pranked the netizens on April Fool’s Day to get millions of views. When we verified the information independently, it was discovered that the feature to copy video links is still available on the social media platform X and works just fine.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">You can’t Copy the link of a video anymore on X: <a href="https://t.co/DbPHYXE02l">pic.twitter.com/DbPHYXE02l</a>&mdash; Pintu (@Pintuu0) <a href="https://twitter.com/Pintuu0/status/2039536567610695702?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 2, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">You can no longer copy the link of a video anymore on X <a href="https://t.co/gfxCbYsBdr">pic.twitter.com/gfxCbYsBdr</a>&mdash; sachin. (@sachinyadav699) <a href="https://twitter.com/sachinyadav699/status/2039515768648618044?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 2, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The episode underscores how rapidly misinformation can spread on social media, especially when it coincides with April Fools’ Day, even when no actual changes have occurred. The claims may have begun as a joke, but the viral post still briefly led many users to believe that an important feature had been removed.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/love-returns-why-iranian-couples-resuming-weddings-after-postponements-amid-war-1774975118484">Love returns: Why Iranian couples resuming weddings after postponements amid war?</a>

Several posts on X garnering millions of views claimed that the platform has secretly disabled the ability to copy video links, with a few even suggesting the change was deliberate and aimed at certain content, such as political videos.

Elon Musk’s social media platform X came under fire on April 1 after confusion spread rapidly over several viral posts claiming that the platform had disabled the ability to copy video links. The claims quickly gained attention as users reported that they were unable to share videos via direct links, resulting in a widespread concern among netzines about the possible changes. Several posts, some garnering millions of views, claimed that X had secretly disabled the ability to copy video links, with a few even suggesting the change was deliberate and aimed at certain content, such as political videos. Memes quickly spread across the platform, fueling concerns that a new restriction had been introduced. Fact or prank? So what actually happened? Did X, formerly known as Twitter, really remove this feature for millions of users? The truth is that the option to copy and share video links on X remains unchanged. The viral claim that gained massive traction overnight appears to have been nothing more than an April Fool’s Day prank, as users can still access and use the feature as usual. How does it all begin? The confusion started with a single post from a user, which rapidly went viral. It seems to have been part of an April Fool’s joke designed to drive engagement, a tactic often used on the platform to attract views and, in some cases, generate revenue. Several accounts on the X, along with some with a premium badge, pranked the netizens on April Fool’s Day to get millions of views. When we verified the information independently, it was discovered that the feature to copy video links is still available on the social media platform X and works just fine.

Several posts on X garnering millions of views claimed that the platform has secretly disabled the ability to copy video links, with a few even suggesting the change was deliberate and aimed at certain content, such as political videos.

Feature update or April Fool’s prank? Viral video rumours baffle X users over link copying issue

The Indian government on Saturday (March 28, 2026) refuted the claim that billionaire Elon Musk was involved in the call between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which took place on March 24 to discuss the war with Iran. This has been four weeks into the US-Israel-Iran war, and still there are no such signs of ending the escalation, even after giving a 15-point ceasefire plan to Tehran by America. "We have seen the story. The telephone conversation on 24 March was between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Donald Trump only," a spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs said. "As has been stated earlier, it provided the opportunity for exchange of views on the situation in West Asia," the spokesperson added. The denial of India followed after the New York Times quoted unnamed US officials claiming that Musk participated in the phone call between the two leaders. "Elon Musk participated in a phone call on Tuesday with President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, an unusual appearance by a private citizen on a call between two heads of state during a wartime crisis," the New York Times reported. Donald Trump and Elon Musk reportedly had a fallout last year after the billionaire left his government role, where he had been assigned to reduce the workforce. The report added that it remains unclear why Musk was present on the call or whether he actively participated.<h3>PM Modi describes diplomatic conversation</h3>In a post on X, Prime Minister Narendra Modi described the diplomatic conversation, noting that both sides emphasised the need for a Strait of Hormuz that is “open, secure, and accessible,” while reaffirming India’s position in favour of de-escalation and peace in the region. "Received a call from President Trump and had a useful exchange of views on the situation in West Asia. India supports de-escalation and restoration of peace at the earliest. Ensuring that the Strait of Hormuz remains open, secure and accessible is essential for the whole world. We agreed to stay in touch regarding efforts towards peace and stability," the PM said in his post. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, said on Friday that he expects Iran to engage in talks with Washington soon, expressing hope that discussions could take place within the week. Speaking at a business forum in Miami, he added that the US is awaiting Iran’s response to a 15-point peace proposal, which he believes could potentially resolve the conflict.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/houthis-launch-first-attack-on-israel-since-outbreak-of-iran-war-fire-ballistic-missiles-1774700386350">Houthis launch first attack on Israel since outbreak of Iran war, fire ballistic missiles</a>

India's denial followed after the New York Times quoted unnamed US officials claiming that Elon Musk participated in the phone call between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The Indian government on Saturday (March 28, 2026) refuted the claim that billionaire Elon Musk was involved in the call between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which took place on March 24 to discuss the war with Iran. This has been four weeks into the US-Israel-Iran war, and still there are no such signs of ending the escalation, even after giving a 15-point ceasefire plan to Tehran by America. "We have seen the story. The telephone conversation on 24 March was between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Donald Trump only," a spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs said. "As has been stated earlier, it provided the opportunity for exchange of views on the situation in West Asia," the spokesperson added. The denial of India followed after the New York Times quoted unnamed US officials claiming that Musk participated in the phone call between the two leaders. "Elon Musk participated in a phone call on Tuesday with President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, an unusual appearance by a private citizen on a call between two heads of state during a wartime crisis," the New York Times reported. Donald Trump and Elon Musk reportedly had a fallout last year after the billionaire left his government role, where he had been assigned to reduce the workforce. The report added that it remains unclear why Musk was present on the call or whether he actively participated. PM Modi describes diplomatic conversation In a post on X, Prime Minister Narendra Modi described the diplomatic conversation, noting that both sides emphasised the need for a Strait of Hormuz that is “open, secure, and accessible,” while reaffirming India’s position in favour of de-escalation and peace in the region. "Received a call from President Trump and had a useful exchange of views on the situation in West Asia. India supports de-escalation and restoration of peace at the earliest. Ensuring that the Strait of Hormuz remains open, secure and accessible is essential for the whole world. We agreed to stay in touch regarding efforts towards peace and stability," the PM said in his post. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, said on Friday that he expects Iran to engage in talks with Washington soon, expressing hope that discussions could take place within the week. Speaking at a business forum in Miami, he added that the US is awaiting Iran’s response to a 15-point peace proposal, which he believes could potentially resolve the conflict. Also read: Houthis launch first attack on Israel since outbreak of Iran war, fire ballistic missiles

India's denial followed after the New York Times quoted unnamed US officials claiming that Elon Musk participated in the phone call between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

India denies Elon Musk’s role in Modi-Trump phone call on West Asia war

When US President Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke by phone Tuesday (Mar 24) about the escalating crisis in the Middle East, there was a third voice on the line — one that had no obvious business being there. According to a NYT report citing two US officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, X CEO, Trump's former DOGE chief, Elon Musk, joined the call with the two world leaders. But why was the businessman who no longer holds a government position part of the call? Here's what we know.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/-fake-news-will-say-trump-rebrands-hormuz-the-strait-of-trump-was-it-a-slip-of-tongue-or-deliberate-watch-1774667533281">'Fake news will say...': Trump rebrands Hormuz 'The Strait of Trump'—was it a slip of tongue or deliberate? Watch!</a><h2>What did White House say about the alleged Modi-Trump-Musk call?</h2>When asked about Musk's alleged presence in the call, House press secretary Karoline Leavitt evaded and instead only said, “President Trump has a great relationship with Prime Minister Modi, and this was a productive conversation”.<h2>The conflicts of interest are hard to miss</h2>Musk's companies have received significant investment from sovereign wealth funds in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, two countries involved in the Iran war's regional fallout. Musk has long pursued a larger commercial footprint in India, where Tesla has struggled against import tariffs, and Starlink is still awaiting regulatory clearance to operate. And SpaceX has been eyeing an IPO later this year — one that a worsening global economy could quickly derail.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-modi-and-musk-report-reveals-surprise-third-voice-on-key-iran-war-call-what-was-he-doing-there-1774659712400">Did Musk join key Modi-Trump Iran war call—what was he doing there? All we know</a><h2>What was the call about?</h2>The call, officials said, centred on the Strait of Hormuz and Iran's stranglehold over it. The halt to shipping through the strait has sent energy prices surging worldwide. Some Asian nations are already edging toward fuel rationing."Ensuring that the Strait of Hormuz remains open, secure and accessible is essential for the whole world," PM Modi wrote on social media afterwards. "We agreed to stay in touch regarding efforts towards peace and stability," he added.<h2>Trump-Musk bromance back on?</h2>Musk's presence on the call is notable for another reason: it suggests the world's richest man is back in Trump's good graces. The two had a falling out last summer after Musk left his role overseeing DOGE, the cost-cutting operation that put him at odds with several senior Trump aides. They appear to have quietly patched things up since.On X, which Musk owns, he's been unusually restrained about the Iran war. Last week, he responded to a post about global dependence on the Strait of Hormuz with: "We got lazy." Days later, he shared a meme suggesting the Strait disruptions would slow AI growth and broader economic progress.&nbsp;Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.

Why was Elon Musk on a call between Donald Trump and Narendra Modi? A report says the X CEO joined discussions on the Strait of Hormuz crisis. What exactly was he doing there? Scroll down to read more.

When US President Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke by phone Tuesday (Mar 24) about the escalating crisis in the Middle East, there was a third voice on the line — one that had no obvious business being there. According to a NYT report citing two US officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, X CEO, Trump's former DOGE chief, Elon Musk, joined the call with the two world leaders. But why was the businessman who no longer holds a government position part of the call? Here's what we know. Also read | 'Fake news will say...': Trump rebrands Hormuz 'The Strait of Trump'—was it a slip of tongue or deliberate? Watch! What did White House say about the alleged Modi-Trump-Musk call? When asked about Musk's alleged presence in the call, House press secretary Karoline Leavitt evaded and instead only said, “President Trump has a great relationship with Prime Minister Modi, and this was a productive conversation”. The conflicts of interest are hard to miss Musk's companies have received significant investment from sovereign wealth funds in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, two countries involved in the Iran war's regional fallout. Musk has long pursued a larger commercial footprint in India, where Tesla has struggled against import tariffs, and Starlink is still awaiting regulatory clearance to operate. And SpaceX has been eyeing an IPO later this year — one that a worsening global economy could quickly derail. Also read | Did Musk join key Modi-Trump Iran war call—what was he doing there? All we know What was the call about? The call, officials said, centred on the Strait of Hormuz and Iran's stranglehold over it. The halt to shipping through the strait has sent energy prices surging worldwide. Some Asian nations are already edging toward fuel rationing. "Ensuring that the Strait of Hormuz remains open, secure and accessible is essential for the whole world," PM Modi wrote on social media afterwards. "We agreed to stay in touch regarding efforts towards peace and stability," he added. Trump-Musk bromance back on? Musk's presence on the call is notable for another reason: it suggests the world's richest man is back in Trump's good graces. The two had a falling out last summer after Musk left his role overseeing DOGE, the cost-cutting operation that put him at odds with several senior Trump aides. They appear to have quietly patched things up since. On X, which Musk owns, he's been unusually restrained about the Iran war. Last week, he responded to a post about global dependence on the Strait of Hormuz with: "We got lazy." Days later, he shared a meme suggesting the Strait disruptions would slow AI growth and broader economic progress. Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.

Why was Elon Musk on a call between Donald Trump and Narendra Modi? A report says the X CEO joined discussions on the Strait of Hormuz crisis. What exactly was he doing there? Scroll down to read more.

Trump, Modi...and Musk? Report reveals surprise third voice on key Iran war call—what was he doing there?

US social media platform X, formerly known as twitter is experiencing an outage as of March 26, 2026. Thousands of users have reported an inability to load feeds and carry out basic searches. According to the website Downdetector, more than 10,000 issues have been detected as of 7.15 am.&nbsp;50 per cent of the problem was regarding the timeline, 41 per cent was about the app, while 6 per cent was about the website. The outage was initially reported in the US, and now it has spread to India, with at least 1000 users in India reporting the outage. According to Statusgate, another outage reporting website, the outage is experienced in the US, UK and India, among many other countries.Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/figure-03-humanoid-robot-white-house-melania-trump-ai-summit-1774505265887">Melania Trump walks along humanoid robot Figure 03 in White House</a>One person posted on Downdetector, &nbsp;"I thought something happened to my account lol as I could see people’s posts, but then when I clicked on the posts it says nothing to show here yet." Another person commented, “Here we go again”, while another lamented: “My morning doomscrolling!!” “Twitter is down again for like the fifth time this month or something. I guess this is what happens when you fire all of your engineers,” wrote one user on Threads.&nbsp;On March 18, 2026, at around 8.00 pm IST, several thousand users reported similar outages. Around 45,000 users in the US and thousands in India reported issues with blank timelines, inability to open notifications. Billionaire Elon Musk took over Twitter for $44 billion in October 2022. He then fired many top executives, roughly 80 per cent staffs and subjected the company to structural changes, and then rebranded it to X in 2023. In 2025, Musk fired an engineer for reportedly correcting him on his own declining post impressions.&nbsp;

US social media platform X, formerly Twitter, is down in the US, India, and the UK. Users report issues with timelines, app, and website access as of March 26, 2026.

US social media platform X, formerly known as twitter is experiencing an outage as of March 26, 2026. Thousands of users have reported an inability to load feeds and carry out basic searches. According to the website Downdetector, more than 10,000 issues have been detected as of 7.15 am. 50 per cent of the problem was regarding the timeline, 41 per cent was about the app, while 6 per cent was about the website. The outage was initially reported in the US, and now it has spread to India, with at least 1000 users in India reporting the outage. According to Statusgate, another outage reporting website, the outage is experienced in the US, UK and India, among many other countries. Also Read: Melania Trump walks along humanoid robot Figure 03 in White House One person posted on Downdetector, "I thought something happened to my account lol as I could see people’s posts, but then when I clicked on the posts it says nothing to show here yet." Another person commented, “Here we go again”, while another lamented: “My morning doomscrolling!!” “Twitter is down again for like the fifth time this month or something. I guess this is what happens when you fire all of your engineers,” wrote one user on Threads. On March 18, 2026, at around 8.00 pm IST, several thousand users reported similar outages. Around 45,000 users in the US and thousands in India reported issues with blank timelines, inability to open notifications. Billionaire Elon Musk took over Twitter for $44 billion in October 2022. He then fired many top executives, roughly 80 per cent staffs and subjected the company to structural changes, and then rebranded it to X in 2023. In 2025, Musk fired an engineer for reportedly correcting him on his own declining post impressions.

US social media platform X, formerly Twitter, is down in the US, India, and the UK. Users report issues with timelines, app, and website access as of March 26, 2026.

X (Twitter) down today: Thousands report login issues on Elon Musk’s platform

elon-musk

Elon Musk, News on Elon Musk, stories on Elon Musk, articles on Elon Musk, Elon Musk stories at Wion, Elon Musk news, Elon Musk latest news

elon musk

OpenAI Power Struggle: $30 Billion Stake Row Deepens as Musk Questions Independence

OpenAI Trial: Courtroom Exchange Raises Strategic Risks For Musk Team

No Mars, no moolah: SpaceX ties Musk's appraisal to settling 1mn people on Mars

Musk vs OpenAI: Musk Alleges OpenAI Abandoned Public-Interest Mission

Elon Musk accuses OpenAI lawyer of ‘trying to trick me’ in court

Elon Musk Testifies In Explosive OpenAI Trial That Could Reshape AI Industry

Elon Musk testifies against OpenAI in major AI industry trial

Musk vs OpenAI: Elon Musk Claims OpenAI Betrayed Founding Mission

Elon Musk’s Legal Battle With OpenAI Intensifies As Jury Selected In California

Musk vs OpenAI: Musk Claims He Was Misled Over OpenAI's Original Mission

Musk vs Altman AI clash heads to court on April 27 in OpenAI legal battle

Elon Musk Takes OpenAI To Court; What The Lawsuit Alleges?

Elon Musk Versus OpenAI Trial Set To Begin In US

Elon Musk's X Exposed In UK? Study Says 13-Year-Olds Are Shown Explicit Content

Musk calls South Africa racist over Starlink block

Musk re-ignites COVID-19 vaccine debate; calls dosages ‘too high’

Is Sam Altman a sociopath, abuser, liar? Questions arise about his AI leadership

Musk's SpaceX Applies to Launch One Million Satellites

Grok Deepfake Scandal: AI Synthetic Media Raises Trust Fears

'$2 trillion valuation': SpaceX blockbuster IPO could raise $75 billion

Update or prank? Viral video rumours baffle X users over link copying issue

India denies Elon Musk’s role in Modi-Trump phone call on West Asia war

Did Musk join key Modi-Trump Iran war call—what was he doing there? All we know

X (Twitter) down today: Thousands report login issues on Elon Musk’s platform