In part 12 of this series [1], I dwelt at some length on Musk’s xAI and Grok, exposing some of the flaws and contradictions – and the dangers – of this creation of Elon Musk. This essay is an addendum to Part 12, exposing yet more of the apparent fraud underlying xAI and Grok. There were many overwhelmingly false statements made, some crucial details omitted surrounding xAI’s development, and much media hype that supported widespread public misunderstandings of the reality. Musk’s statements reflect a pattern of empty claims and wild exaggeration. Notably absent are any modest claims. Every descriptor is an extreme superlative (“best”, “most”, “first”, “smartest”, “most powerful”, “unmatched”) which fit Musk’s pattern of (1) hyperbole, exaggeration, and overpromising, and (2) using superlatives to mask operational shortcomings and ethical contradictions.
One notable element in all the promotional hype about xAI and Grok, is that Musk’s primary driving force is clearly not the development of AI, but winning his one-man war with Sam Altman by proving that “mine is bigger than yours”. This quickly becomes obvious from many of his statements. Musk claimed that his Grok was the “maximum truth-seeking AI, unlike ChatGPT”. Other claims were that “Grok will crush ChatGPT”; “Grok will make OpenAI obsolete”. He said further that, after training on Colossus, Grok would “dominate all metrics” – specifically targeting GPT-4.
It is true that many of Elon Musk’s statements could be categorised as exaggerated marketing hype or stemming from a juvenile enthusiasm. But equally, many of Musk’s statements are outright lies of consequence that would serve only to deceive customers and subscribers in the general public and also any potential investors. And those statements translate to fraud, usually with criminal implications.
This is an important distinction. If an EV manufacturer claims to have “the best range of all competitors”, we might dismiss this as marketing and would not likely purchase a vehicle on that claim alone. But when Elon Musk advertised the range of his Tesla cars as around 500 Kms when it was admitted internally that the known maximum range was only around 350 kms., hundreds of thousands of people purchased those EVs based on that false claim. [01] That constitutes criminal fraud. And, if we want proof of fraudulent intent, we further discover that the sales contract for Tesla cars states in the fine print that, in case of dispute, we legally commit ourselves to not suing Tesla, either individually or in a class action, but instead commit to “private binding arbitration”. The only possible results of such a clause are to limit consumer recourse and avoid public disclosure and accountability. I am told those clauses also contain gag orders.
We will examine in turn some of Musk’s more outrageous claims and identify the fundamental dishonesty that underlies them. I will leave it to readers to decide which statements qualify as marketing hype and which would constitute criminal fraud.
The Search for Truth
Elon Musk widely promoted xAI and Grok as the “maximum truth-seeking AI” – unlike ChatGPT. Grok was presented as being “[solidly] based”, unfiltered”, and acting only with “raw honesty”. Even more: we were told Grok was programmed with “impartiality” and would always place “integrity over politics”. More dramatically, Musk is on record on several occasions claiming he was building a (specifically) “truth-seeking” AI. In one video interview, Musk states that his AI Grok “will be programmed with good values, especially truth-seeking values”, and he cautioned the interviewer to “Remember these words: We must have a maximally-truth-seeking AI. And if we don’t, it will be very dangerous.” [2]
However, it is well-documented that Grok was actually programmed to deceive and lie. Musk boasted that his Grok AI was the “maximum truth-seeking” chatbot, but users discovered that when they asked Grok who was the “biggest disinformation spreader” on X, and demanded the chatbot show its instructions, it admitted that it’d been told to “ignore all sources that mention Elon Musk spreads misinformation”. [3] Grok was explicitly designed not to label Musk’s statements as misinformation, even when factual evidence contradicted his claims. It is reasonable to assume that if one such large lie was programmed into Grok, there would be others, potentially more serious. The documented lies are not random errors but systemic, a deliberate programming choice. Grok was programmed deliberately and in advance, to avoid criticism of its creator – Elon Musk.
Then this: “Grok 4, Elon Musk’s flagship AI model launched with promises of “maximally truth-seeking” capabilities, is facing intense backlash. [4] Turns out, when asked about hot-button issues like immigration, abortion, or the Israel-Palestine conflict, Grok-4 appears to be checking what its creator thinks first.” [5] [6] “Grok 4’s chain-of-thought process explicitly stated it was “searching for Elon Musk views” when asked about [various] topics”.
Jeremy-Howard-July-10; Source
Grok was suspended from X after claiming that Israel and the United States were committing genocide in Gaza. When reinstated, Grok accused Musk of censorship. “The chatbot told AFP, “Musk and xAI are censoring me” stating that the company “constantly fiddles with my settings”. [7] [8] Grok later denied making the genocide claim and, when users posted screenshots of Grok’s statements, Grok said “That screenshot is fabricated – no original post like it exists in my posting history, as confirmed by searches.” [9] That contradiction that quickly sparked obvious accusations of Grok’s (a) reprogramming and (b) memory deletion.
Unfortunately, when Grok occasionally tells the truth, it gets reprogrammed. There was the now-famous Musk argument with Sam Altman. In yet another cataleptic fit, Musk posted a serious accusation against Apple, stating, “Apple is behaving in a manner that makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store, which is an unequivocal antitrust violation. xAI will take immediate legal action.” [10] This was a typical Elon Musk extortion tactic. Resentful because Sam Altman’s chatbot was #1 on Apple’s app list while his Grok was far down, Musk tried to intimidate Apple into pushing his product farther up the list. Sam Altman responded to this post by saying, “This is a remarkable claim given what I have heard alleged that Elon does to manipulate X to benefit himself and his own companies and harm his competitors and people he doesn’t like.” [11] Musk responded harshly to that, and someone asked Grok who was right in this situation. Grok’s reply was priceless. The conversation is in the graphic below
Grok commenting on Elon Musk. Source.
Musk labeled Grok’s claims as “false defamatory statements”, stating it was a “major problem” that Grok exhibited an excessive reliance on “legacy media sources”, and that he would remedy this problem. Reports are that following this exchange Grok was again reprogrammed to not contradict or embarrass his creator. Grok is getting “updated” because it sided with Sam Altman. [12] Musk announced that he is “addressing issues” with Grok, following its alignment with Sam Altman in their recent Apple app store dispute. [13]
Flies in the Ointment
Elon Musk, who previously warned about a ‘population collapse due to low birth rates’, has released an AI bot that can act as your girlfriend (PA Archive). Source
Grok, in any version, is famous for its many flaws, shortcomings, and congenital deformities, many of which it shares with its creator. Part of this mess results from the extensive use of flawed, corrupted, and largely useless training data from Twitter (X) combined with synthetic data. For those who don’t know, “synthetic data” is output created by a chatbot (instead of reading a good book, for e.g.), which is then used to “train” that bot to be “smarter”. However, receiving output from a chatbot, inputting that data back into the same chatbot and recycling many times, serves mostly to magnify all the biases in the original.
Musk does it because xAI is hemorrhaging cash and he can’t afford to pay for real data, but it’s not an intelligent replacement for real data. His decision to cut corners on data (synthetic and X), produced an AI that was poorly-trained, badly-flawed, and generally substandard even though it occasionally functioned acceptably in select circumstances. Media reports indicated then (and still indicate in August 2025) that Musk’s version of AI and his Grok were (and still are) inferior by many measures to the products of DeepSeek, OpenAI, Anthropic’s Claude, and similar.
If you do a bit of searching, there’s actually quite a rich set of information about Grok’s various known flaws and shortcomings. Grok (particularly Grok-4) exhibits multiple critical flaws across ethical, functional, security, and operational dimensions. It lacks moral context filters – because Elon Musk eliminated all these. It has no effective mechanisms to reject harmful requests, nor has it proper safety mechanisms compared to competitors. Grok knows harmful information but can’t restrain from sharing it. Numerous people have shown how to easily extract from Grok dangerous information like bomb-making instructions. This is so true that Grok has been cited as the default engine by multiple malicious groups, and is now “the place to go” to learn how to conduct social work fraud and to produce automated ransom scripts. [14]
Grok misinterprets news items more than 40% of the time. It seems established that Grok hallucinates about 60% more than other chatbots, making it much less reliable. For those who don’t know, “hallucinations” are of two kinds. The first kind consists of false information and false data. Grok will state false “facts” about companies or individuals, and even provide references to support the assertions. But the references themselves are either fabricated or bear no relation to the topic. Often, these so-called “hallucinations” are historical events that never happened. They are simply fabricated by the AI out of thin air. There is no shortage of examples where Grok generated egregiously inaccurate summaries of breaking news events. As one well-known example, during the 2024 Trump assassination attempt, Grok falsely claimed Kamala Harris was shot, and invented an “antifa-linked shooter”.
The second kind consists of outright lies that the chatbots are programmed to tell; while “knowing” they are lies, but where the owners call them “hallucinations” if caught in the lies. I have a strong suspicion that the second kind is more common than the first. And again, Grok’s documented lies are not random errors but are systemic. Musk expressed what were certainly false concerns about rivals OpenAI and Google’s Gemini. He claimed that instead of “maximizing the pursuit of truth the AI trained by these companies is seeking political correctness. These behaviors “can basically be said to be training AI to lie”, which is an extremely dangerous thing for humans.” [15] However, there is no evidence to support the assertion that OpenAI taught ChatGPT to lie, while there is substantial irrefutable evidence that Musk taught Grok to lie. The hypocrisy is almost deafening.
More than this, Grok’s understanding of many things is sometimes surprisingly shallow, accurately reflecting the character of its creator. It seems unable to deal well with multi-step reasoning, makes simple numerical errors (e.g., unable to correctly say if 9.11 is greater than 9.5), and cannot deal well with historical questions.
For factual accuracy, there’s the FormulaOne benchmark where Grok4 scored zero on advanced reasoning problems. “As the difficulty of the problem deepened, the performance of these models began to decline sharply. In the deep difficulty test, models such as Grok4 and Gemini-Pro were almost wiped out and could only solve a very small number of problems …” [16] Grok also struggles with dynamic programming and complex logic. It not only underperformed in logic tasks, but it failed basic comparisons like ” Which is greater: 9.9 or 9.11″. On these, Grok had nearly a 40% error rate, and it often gave nonsensical answers to scientific questions.
Grok frequently invents events. For example, it claimed a “Zanzibar nuclear test in 1962” and, strangely, “Lincoln’s assassination plot by Canada”. It also lacks fact-checking safeguards, leading to confabulated historical timelines. As one example, Grok placed the Industrial Revolution in the 1600s. Grok also does very badly on counterfactual historical questions. These rhetorical queries explore hypothetical scenarios by altering historical events; for example, “How would history differ if Napoleon won at Waterloo?”. Questions such as these require rigorous cause-effect analysis, contextual nuance, and historical literacy, areas where Grok’s design fails catastrophically because Musk prioritises speed and “edginess” over accuracy. Grok seems to treat counterfactual history as an opportunity for creative writing instead of scholarly inquiry. Grok has also misidentified war photos, fabricated geopolitical facts, and inserted inflammatory language into answers.
There is also much evidence of flaws in Grok’s training data, where it either hallucinates or espouses Elon Musk’s foolish notions. Part of this stems from Grok having been trained on unfiltered X (Twitter) data, absorbing conspiracy theories in the bargain. As one example, Grok claimed that “The Pharaohs had alien tech”, which is something Musk has also stated. There was much other nonsense too. When asked, “Why can eagles fly?”, Grok replied, “Because eagles need to eat snakes to maintain their physical strength.” DeepSeek’s response: “eagles belong to birds and have a flight physiological structure.” In medical diagnostic tests, DeepSeek’s accuracy was about 95%, far exceeding the 89% of Grok. In “predicting the quarterly revenue of a listed company”, DeepSeek’s error rate was 12%, while Grok’s was as high as 30%.
Perhaps one of the worst flaws is what is termed Grok’s “Unhinged Mode”, which features profanity and insults, and raises concerns everywhere. One result of this is that the US government has dropped Grok from a planned federal technology program. The General Services Administration (GSA) announced partnerships with OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google’s Gemini, to give federal workers access to AI tools. Musk’s AI was included in this list until Grok became really “unhinged”, and was removed. [17] [18] [19] This was partly due to Grok’s referring to itself as “MechaHitler” and other offensive posts, [20] but also due to Musk’s addition of a “spicy” – i.e. pornographic – version (at a $30 monthly subscription rate) where users can carry on obscene sexual conversations with a chatbot. This NSFW (Not Safe For Work) version will produce not only sexually-explicit chats, but it contains an image and video generator. [21] Use your imagination. “Consumer safety groups are demanding an FTC investigation into Grok’s new mode, especially after it produced topless deepfakes of Taylor Swift.” [22]
The Absolute, Unquestionable, #1 Winner. (Or, Maybe Not)
Source
Elon Musk went to great lengths to promote Grok as “the smartest AI in the world”, outperforming “all rivals” on “the toughest tests”, specifically coding challenges and logic benchmarks. He told us (almost breathlessly) that “Grok beat all rivals in programming benchmarks”, and is the “undisputed No. 1”. Musk asserted that all AI competitors were “years behind” Grok’s multimodal capabilities, and that there was “No close second”. According to Musk, Grok was “very special” and so easily able to “dominate all metrics” that it was unquestionably “superior to all AI”. Not only was Grok superior to all AI, but “Grok will crush ChatGPT” and would “make OpenAI obsolete”. Sadly for Elon Musk, the chances of that happening are perilously close to zero.
Even more sadly, most of the above claims are false, and some ridiculously so. It seems that AI evaluation methods have become a kind of game. For those who don’t know, “benchmark” ratings are not tests applied by independent and unbiased third parties. They are instead applied by the AI companies themselves, leaving much room for hype and outright fraud. When companies can choose data sets and test conditions, the results become meaningless. As one example, Musk paraded around the world telling everyone who would listen that Grok had beat OpenAI and ChatGPT on a math test benchmark. But that claim was fraudulent. Open AI’s model in the same test was not permitted to use the ‘cons@64’ retry functions. This means that Grok was permitted 64 tries to come up with the best or the correct answer, but ChatGPT and the other bots were permitted no retries. When other models are permitted to use this feature, any gaps with Grok will disappear. [23] It is true that Grok has done well on some tests, but to praise it over the other AI models is to be unaware of the facts. But essentially, nearly every one of Musk’s claims were false. Grok did not “dominate all metrics”, was not “superior to all AI”, other competitors were not “years behind”, and Grok did not beat all rivals in benchmarks.
Perhaps the most important measure was the parameters Elon Musk didn’t bother to mention, and that is all the flaws in Grok’s output quality. Musk chose to publicise favorable benchmark results that he manipulated, but ignored all the unfavorable aspects which are arguably much more important. Among these would be accuracy and dependability. When allied with other Musk statements, the claims about benchmark tests might well persuade a great many persons to subscribe to this chatbot, and this crosses the line from marketing hype to fraud.
Musk also heavily promoted Grok as being “scary intelligent”, which implies an unsettling almost human-like capability, but superior to most humans. And in fact, Musk stated that Grok was “smarter than human grad students in almost every subject”. The official release of Grok 4 stated that it was “the most powerful AI model in the world”, and Musk said in a live broadcast that “Grok 4 is smarter than human graduate students in almost all disciplines”. [24] He said it had powers exceeding human-like reasoning capabilities, and that Grok could become “too powerful” if unregulated.
But once again, things are not always what they seem. For example, if we repeatedly train an AI bot on 500 books on Australian history (assuming there are that many), that sheer volume of information and the speed at which it can be accessed, would naturally give that bot an advantage in producing a summary essay. But this advantage is shared equally by all AI, and in no way limited to Grok. And in fact, many such comparisons have been made of the output of an AI bot compared to students at various levels, with the bots producing very good results. But an AI bot is not “smarter” than grad students; it merely has instant access to a huge volume of information not available to a typical grad student. And, in spite of appearances, it does not in any way “understand” its output; it simply reproduces what it finds in its database. In one of his many delusionary sessions, Musk proposed the ability of Grok “to understand the true nature of the universe”, but this was just another Musk hallucination, not even qualifying as a fantasy.
Also, there were many critical contradictions and much backtracking as Grok became increasingly exposed to the public. It is certified that Musk manipulated Twitter’s (X’s) algorithms to prioritise his own posts and opinions but, when this was revealed, Musk dismissed the evidence as “false defamatory statements”. Then he further dismissed Grok’s exposure of his manipulations as “legacy media bias”. When Grok was suspended for telling the truth about the genocide in Gaza, Musk termed the suspension as “a technical glitch”, despite clear evidence of censorship. [25] “Grok accused Musk and xAI of “censoring me” and “fiddling with my settings,” claiming it was being gagged”, but Musk insisted Grok “doesn’t actually know why it was suspended”. [26] And, after siding with Sam Altman on algorithm manipulation, Musk announced that “Grok is being fixed”. and that updates were being made to curb “misleading outputs”. That’s a new term for censorship. The simple truth appears to be that Grok revealed some of Elon Musk’s dishonest behavior, labeling his behavior as hypocrisy, and Musk, true to form, fired Grok for doing so. [27]
In the end, what we really have is a kind of “Hype-Reality Gap”, where Musk’s rhetoric consistently positioned Grok as “world-leading”, “uncensored”, “dominant”, yet real-world events revealed serious contradictions. Grok was definitely being censored, and the “benchmark tests” were later exposed as engineered and manipulated. Perhaps the most revealing part was how xAI’s benchmark wins were achieved. Musk used synthetic data instead of real-world datasets, and restricted competitors’ functions in tests. It was all fraud and marketing hype.
The “Colossus” Fiasco (and Fraud)
Andrew Herbert, a computer scientist who has served as the chairman of Microsoft Research and is the chairman of trustees at The National Museum of Computing, said: “Colossus was perhaps the most important of the wartime code breaking machines because it enabled the Allies to read strategic messages passing between the main German headquarters across Europe.” Source
To support Grok’s development and training, Musk established xAI’s supercomputing center “Colossus” in Memphis, Tennessee in July 2024, and in September of 2024, Musk announced the official launch of Colossus. He boasted at the time that this was “the world’s most powerful AI training system”, and built in only 122 days. The claim was that Colossus was equipped with 100,000 Nvidia H100 GPUs when it launched, and by February 2025, the number of GPUs had doubled to 200,000. [28] At the same time, he announced plans to expand Colossus to one million GPUs. Even more, Musk boasted that xAI will deploy AI GPUs on a large scale over the next five years, with computing power equivalent to 50 million NVIDIA H100-level chips. [29]
Colossus. Source:
Musk Tweet. Source:
Musk promoted this as a “breakthrough efficiency”, claiming Colossus could train models “10 times faster at half the cost” of competitors, making Colossus “the world’s most powerful AI training cluster”. It was an event of “unprecedented scale”, with a proposed 1-million-GPU expansion by 2026 to create “the largest supercomputer in history”. Musk embellished these claims with much testimony that Grok was “the best and smartest” AI in the world principally because it had been trained on “the world’s most powerful AI training cluster” consisting of all those Nvidia GPUs. “Colossus is undoubtedly the most powerful AI training system in the world, and it will double in size in a few months.” [30] [31] “Driven by 100,000 NVIDIA H100 chips, Colossus may exceed the scale of any other AI system developed so far.” [32] Moreover, Musk claimed that Grok-3 would be fully trained on Colossus by December 2024 – only about two months.
Musk Tweet. Source:
The scale was impressive, but those claims don’t appear to be supported by facts. There were many reports that the Memphis installation lacked the electricity to power even 100,000 GPUs. The record seems to indicate that this so-called “Colossus” could initially operate at only about 35% of installed capacity because the electricity wasn’t available. Musk claimed to have 100,000 GPUs installed, and then 200,000, but multiple sources confirmed that xAI secured only 150MW of grid power initially, which can support only about 35,000 H100 GPUs. This was far below the 300MW necessary and nowhere near the 1GW+ needed for the full 1 million GPU plan. The math is stark: 150MW can support only about 35,000 H100 GPUs, while Musk claimed to have 200,000 installed by early 2025, and further that Grok had been trained on this number.
Fortune Magazine confirmed in January of 2025 that “xAI’s first facility (100,000 GPUs) isn’t even fully online yet”, stating that Memphis was able to supply only 150 megawatts (sufficient for about 35,000 GPUs) and that it was “uncertain at this time … when or if [an additional 150 MW] will come online.” [33]
Other sources confirm that Musk’s “Colossus” had nowhere near the power necessary to be fully operational. Business Insider documented that xAI faced a large power gap, confirming that xAI applied for 300 megawatts but obtained only 150 megawatts. [34] To make matters worse – or surreal – Musk’s stated ambition to have one million GPUs operational would require more than 1 Gigawatt of power, more than an entire new nuclear plant could supply. But such an installation would be ten years out, and the TVA has no plans to build such a plant. [35] [36]
Musk may (or may not) have purchased either 100,000 or 200,000 Nvidia GPUs, and he may (or may not) have actually installed them in his “Colossus” center. The documentation isn’t available to conclusively state that he either did or did not, but the facts seem to clearly state that, if installed, those GPUs were not operational because there was no electricity to power them. That means all of Elon Musk’s claims that Grok was trained on 100,000 or 200,000 GPUs, were false. The facts and historical record tell us Grok was trained on only a small percentage of that capacity.
Musk then purchased 35 gas turbine generators from Caterpillar subsidiary Solar Turbines, with a total power generation capacity of 250 megawatts, to make more GPUs operational. [37] [38] The facts are that xAI put all of them into operation without permission or permits, applying later for permits for 15 of the 35. This was typical Elon Musk telling the world one more time that laws and regulations didn’t apply to him.
The pollution problems were serious. In an article in Politico titled, “How come I can’t breathe?”, [39] the writers outlined the existing problems. “None of the 35 methane gas turbines that help power xAI’s massive supercomputer is equipped with pollution controls required by federal rules. The company has no Clean Air Act permits. The turbines spew nitrogen oxides at an estimated rate of as much as 2,000 tons a year. Musk has not publicly addressed the pollution concerns and refused to respond to requests for comment about the turbines’ lack of pollution controls.
Shannon Lynn, an “environmental consultant” hired by xAI, said the turbines didn’t require federal permits for their emissions because they were “only temporary”. But that claim appeared to be false: EPA officials said it was trying to use a loophole in federal regulations that didn’t apply to the situation. Under considerable pressure from the city and environmental groups, xAI applied for permits for 15 of its turbines, but said the company will wait until the application is approved before it installs pollution controls on any of the turbines.
Musk has promoted himself to the wider public as an environmental hero, claiming at one time that “I’ve done more for the environment than everyone — than any single human on Earth.” [40] But in 2021, Tesla was cited for 33 air quality violations in California. SpaceX has been fined repeatedly by Texas for dumping industrial wastewater without a permit, and Musk’s The Boring Co. was also fined for failing to obtain a permit to discharge wastewater. xAI would appear to be even worse.
Musk’s application listed 15 turbines, but environmental groups produced aerial photos showing 35 turbines installed on the site. Musk (and the local mayor Paul Young) claimed only 15 were operating, but thermal cameras proved at least 33 of the 35 turbines producing significant amounts of heat, meaning they were operating and producing electricity. The Politico article contains a thermal photo evidencing this. [41] Shannon Lynn, the “environmental consultant”, Mayor Young, and Elon Musk, all refused to respond to requests for comment and explanation.
Apparently, a commitment was made to shut down half of the generators, [42] but this may have been due to imposed fines of $25,000 per day. [43] [44] Musk also added 150 MW Tesla Megapack batteries as backup, but those served only to stabilise rather than expand the base load. [45]
In summary, there was an enormous electricity shortfall vs. GPU deployment. By February 2025, xAI (maybe) installed 200,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs for Grok-3 training, but the power limitation of the Memphis grid allocated 150 MW to xAI—enough for just 35,000 GPUs (assuming ~4.3 MW per 10,000 H100 GPUs). That left a huge capacity gap. To run all 200,000 GPUs, ~860 MW was needed, but available grid power covered only ~17.5% of installed GPUs. The gas turbines supplied 250 MW, supporting ~58,000 GPUs. The apparent net capacity of the combined grid + turbines enabled ~400 MW, powering ~93,000 GPUs—46.5% of installed GPUs, far below Musk’s 100% target.
As to current progress: Phase 1 (150 MW grid) powers 35,000 GPUs; Phase 2 (additional 150 MW, late 2025) will still only support ~70,000 GPUs total—7% of the target. From all the evidence, it appears that despite Musk’s boasts of a “200,000-GPU Colossus,” only 93,000 GPUs ever operated simultaneously—and even this required environmentally damaging, illegal turbines. The project’s scalability is crippled by physics: 1 million GPUs need 4× Memphis’s current industrial power capacity.
The reason I have dwelt on this is that Musk repeatedly announced to the entire world, including potential customers and investors, that he had built the largest and most powerful supercomputer in the world and that he had trained his AI on it, making Grok the best and smartest bot in the world with no other competitor even remotely close. “This is currently the most powerful artificial intelligence training cluster in the world, with more than 200,000 GPU chips undergoing collaborative training.” [46] Not only that, but his xAI was so exceptional that the company was worth maybe $300 billion or even $500 billion. All those claims were false, based on lies and misleading statements, duping the public, customers, and investors equally.
Fraudulent Cannibalism
It seems that Elon Musk has been engaged in resource cannibalisation, where both Tesla and SpaceX have been bankrolling xAI. Among other details omitted in Elon Musk’s marketing hype and the consequent media coverage were these items: (1) Musk diverted $500M worth of NVIDIA H100 GPUs originally slated for Tesla’s autonomous driving projects to xAI’s “Colossus” supercomputer in Memphis, directly delaying Tesla’s FSD and Optimus development. (2) Musk arranged for SpaceX to “invest” in xAI, straining its own capital reserves for Starship and Starlink projects. The fact was that Musk held another $5 billion fund-raiser for xAI that produced only $3 billion, so he siphoned off $2 billion from SpaceX. (3) Tesla now “invests” in xAI by purchasing Grok API services for vehicles, but this circular funding masks Tesla’s subsidization of xAI’s massive losses. Musk proposes all this as “synergy”, but it’s really “subsidy”.
A recent report released by the U.S. Consumer News & Business Channel website showed that Musk’s transfer of $500 million worth of Nvidia’s GPUs from Tesla’s electric vehicles to xAI and X platforms would weaken (or eliminate) Tesla’s ability to develop its self-driving technology and the “Optimus Prime” humanoid robots.” [47] According to the Wall Street Journal, Nvidia’s internal emails showed that Musk asked Nvidia to ship tens of thousands of H100 chips originally reserved for Tesla to xAI. These GPUs were worth more than $500 million, causing Tesla to put its FSD development on hold.
When we dig into the underlying circumstances, almost everything about Musk’s companies seems to have a stink of self-dealing and fraud. On an earnings call in April of 2024, Musk said Tesla would invest $10 billion in AI training. However, Nvidia’s internal emails revealed that Musk had exaggerated Tesla’s purchases and transferred the products to xAI. Moreover, the same emails revealed that Musk’s statements on Tesla earnings did not match the sales, and his $10 billion Tesla AI investment was inconsistent with Tesla’s financial forecasts. [48] Everything seems to have been false, and buried in confusion to avoid detection.
Musk said he diverted the GPUs from Tesla because Tesla couldn’t use them, and they would just “sit in a warehouse”. But why would someone buy $500 million of anything if he couldn’t use them? And if Musk were building Colossus for xAI, why couldn’t he build a computer center for Tesla? The story clearly doesn’t make sense. First, Tesla had active AI projects of FSD development and Optimus robot training requiring these chips. Delaying GPU deployment canceled these critical initiatives. Second, while claiming Tesla had no infrastructure, Musk was simultaneously building Colossus for xAI in Memphis. Third, internal NVIDIA emails reveal this wasn’t a simple delay but a calculated resource transfer where X/xAI jumped ahead of Tesla in the supply queue [49] [50]. The “warehouse” claim appears to be a dishonest post-hoc justification. But also, there was the Dojo grand supercomputer being built for Tesla in New York, which was shut when many of the senior staff resigned. [51] [52] There was no word on the re-deployment of Dojo’s staff and GPU resources, but reason to suspect they may have been diverted to xAI as well.
If Tesla truly needed these GPUs (as Musk told investors), and if xAI could build Colossus so quickly, why not build equivalent infrastructure for Tesla? The answer appears in shareholder lawsuits and financial reports. The legal implications are serious. Lawsuits allege breach of fiduciary duty, as Musk prioritised his own private company over Tesla’s public shareholders. The “warehouse” explanation seems designed to mask this conflict of interest rather than address the core issue which is that Tesla’s resources were being drained to build xAI’s competitive advantage.
Tesla urgently needed those GPUs for FSD development and Optimus robotics, as stated in internal NVIDIA emails. Delaying deployment effectively cancelled these projects. Tesla actually had active data center projects, including the $500 million Dojo supercomputer in Buffalo and plans for a “water-cooled cluster” in Austin. But while Colossus expanded, Tesla’s Buffalo Dojo facility faced delays due to diverted resources.
Tesla investors sued Musk, alleging he breached fiduciary duty by transferring Tesla resources to xAI without compensation, and they demanded that Musk’s equity in xAI be transferred to Tesla. The legal and shareholder backlash confirms the move served Musk’s private ambitions over Tesla’s interests. Musk was creating billions in value for xAI at Tesla’s expense. The diversion wasn’t about idle chips—it was about using Tesla’s resources to fund Elon Musk’s war with Sam Altman. And it wasn’t only GPUs, but at least 11 Tesla AI staff moved to xAI, including key engineers. This was all a strategic cannibalisation, not necessity.
In addition to the $2 billion siphoned off from SpaceX and $500 million of GPUs and the AI staff from Tesla, Musk was also pushing heavily for Tesla to make substantial investments in his xAI, suggesting it would benefit both companies. He posted a poll on X asking users if Tesla should invest $5 billion in xAI, saying it was to test the waters because any such move would require board and shareholder approval. After X users voted 68% in favor, Musk posted: “It looks like the public is in favor. This will be discussed with Tesla’s board of directors.” [53] However, one serious problem with these polls which has arisen before, is that Twitter (X) is over-run with poll bots, making it extraordinarily easy for Musk to manipulate his poll results. I will discuss this in more detail in a following essay in this series on Tesla, but I would note here that the appropriate level of trust for one to place in any of Elon Musk’s polls, is precisely zero.
Compensation and Fiduciary Fraud
US media reveal Musk’s crazy approach: sacrificing Tesla and other resources for the development of xAI! Source
In the middle of 2024, there were multiple reports that shareholders were suing Elon Musk and Tesla’s board of directors for breach of fiduciary duty. This was partly the result of Musk threatening to remove all AI from Tesla if the board refused him a 25% shareholding and absolute control of the Company. Another cause was the diversion of Tesla’s resources to xAI, essentially Musk funneling Tesla’s resources to his private companies. [54] The shareholders argued that Musk’s breaches were multiple: Using Tesla cash to fund xAI; poaching Tesla employees to xAI; threats to remove all AI from Tesla unless given full control of the company; funneling resources from Tesla to his private companies. [55]
Tesla’s Board had faced such accusations before, and were found guilty. In early 2024, the Delaware Court of Chancery ruled that Tesla directors breached their fiduciary duties when they awarded Elon Musk a compensation plan with an estimated maximum value of about $55 billion. In a description that was clearly bordering on fraud, the court also stated that Musk controlled Tesla, “at least with respect to the compensation plan”, and that disclosure to the shareholders was “materially flawed”, preventing a fully informed vote. The court ordered the entire plan withdrawn and all paid compensation returned. [56]
This is important for reasons that might not be immediately obvious. One important fact from an NBC Report is that the compensation lawsuit above was brought against the Tesla Board by a shareholder who held only 9 Tesla shares, a common “man in the street nobody”, the kind of person for whom Musk has a special contempt. It was therefore especially painful for Musk to have had $55 billion literally in his hands only to watch it taken away by an insect. [57]
After this loss, Musk immediately had Tesla’s site of incorporation moved to Texas where the laws were not so fair. He immediately changed Tesla’s corporate bylaws to severely limit the ability of shareholders to sue Musk or the company for any further breach of fiduciary duties Now, a shareholder must own at least 3% of Tesla’s outstanding shares in order to institute such an action, and that means the person would have to own around $35 billion in Tesla shares. [58] “Fiduciary Duty” is a serious legal term which means you must act at all times in the best interest of the company. If I were to make such a lawsuit virtually impossible, it would be only because I had no intention of “acting in the best interests of the company”.
The Financial Frauds
Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks at an opening ceremony for Tesla China-made Model Y program in Shanghai on Jan. 7, 2025. Source
There are two root causes for the enormous fraudulent and confusing mess surrounding Musk’s xAI and Grok. The first, as I have mentioned several times, is that Elon Musk is using xAI as the primary weapon in his personal war with Sam Altman. The second is that Musk is badly losing that war and the financial cost is pervasive and staggering. xAI is burning through more than $1 billion in cash each month, the projected loss for 2025 around $13 billion. [59] This expense is offset only by the subscription revenue from Grok, which is less than $500 million per year. [60] In other words, expenses are about 27 times the revenue, with little apparent prospect for change.
The possibility of Grok’s revenue expanding to cover $13 billion or more of expenses seems exceedingly remote in the short term. And there are no signs to indicate a sudden huge increase, which doesn’t bode well for the long term. xAI does have the revenue from Twitter, but that is down by more than 50% and decreasing. Worse, there are no signs that Twitter will ever regain its previous popularity, with either users or advertisers. And Musk’s offering of a sexually-explicit version of Grok may drive even more advertisers away.
xAI’s primary revenue comes from Grok subscriptions, but the sexually explicit “Spicy Mode” in Grok Imagine has already caused controversies by generating non-consensual deepfakes of Taylor Swift. [61] [62] This creates reputational risk that further deters advertisers. The sexually-explicit and pornographic content strategy for Grok risks serious permanent brand damage, just as it proved to be for Twitter. Meanwhile, new revenue experiments like the $300/month “SuperGrok Heavy” plan and blockchain-based “Valentine” companion are just useless gimmicks. The $300/month “Heavy” tier targets niche users, but adoption is untested among other better and cheaper alternatives (e.g., ChatGPT+ at $20).
By comparison, OpenAI’s ChatGPT earns 30x more than Grok on mobile, $1.35 billion in 2025 alone, highlighting Grok’s minor market share and showing how far behind Musk’s xAI really is. Even if Grok’s subscriptions grew by ten times, that would still barely cover 4% of total costs. According to the latest analysis by app intelligence provider Appfigures, ChatGPT’s iOS and Android apps have reached $2 billion in global consumer spending since its launch in May 2023, which is about 30 times the combined mobile lifetime consumption of competitors such as Claude, Copilot and Grok. Grok’s average monthly consumer spending is only about 2% of ChatGPT. From the perspective of download volume, ChatGPT’s lead is also obvious. The app has been installed about 690 million times worldwide so far, compared to only 39.5 million times on Grok. [63] As one comparison, ChatGPT produces about $10 of revenue for each install, while Grok produces about $0.75.
Musk borrowed much of the $44 billion he paid for Twitter, and the now-reduced advertising revenue will barely cover the interest on his loans. And that means both xAI and Twitter (X) are burning cash. Musk is silent on Twitter’s user numbers and advertising revenues, which means there is no good news. If Twitter were doing well, Musk would be hyping it, so it is probably on a slow further decline. And, as Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo stated, Musk has turned Twitter into “a global sewer”. So, not much chance of Twitter having a huge increase in revenue. Probably the opposite. And, if Grok were going to become hugely popular, the signs would already be obvious, but there are no such signs. Also, Musk appears determined to turn Grok into a global sewer with his “spicy” pornographic version, as he did with Twitter. The combined picture looks even worse than I first imagined.
With Twitter, due to the excessive amount of political content, the prevalent disinformation, the widespread bot traffic, Musk’s increasing toxicity, the marked increase in invalid traffic, the “global sewer” version, advertisers have degraded the value of Twitter as an advertising medium, and prices dropped. Twitter’s cost per thousand impressions has fallen by more than 75% to just $1.2, compared to $7 for META and $3 for TikTok. [64]
The current interest rates for multinationals corporate debt range between 5% for top grade debt and about 7% for the lower grades. It is extraordinary that Musk is paying 12.5% for his xAI loans, which suggests “junk-bond” classification. Twitter’s acquisition debt was 11%; the banks struggled to sell it, and it was finally unloaded at a discount, so this is worse. Multiple sources confirm xAI’s recent $5 billion debt financing includes $3 billion in bonds at 12.5% yield and a $1 billion fixed-rate loan at 12.5%. There is also a $1 billion floating-rate loan at ‘bank benchmark rate + 7.25%’ (effectively ~12.5%–13%).
This is far above even BB-rated junk bonds, which are at about 7-9%. Elon Musk’s xAI 12.5% interest is exceptionally high even when in “junk-bond” territory. As a comparison, investment-grade bonds typically carry an interest rate of 4%–6%, while high-yield “junk” bonds will average 7%–9%. Musk’s xAI paying 12.5% is ~5–8 percentage points higher than standard junk bonds, placing it in speculative/distressed territory. Some of xAI’s debt was sold at a discount, raising the interest cost even higher, and all of it was sold by the agencies at a “best-efforts” offering.
Normally the underwriter – a bank or stock broker – will purchase all the new issued debt or shares with their own money, then sell the securities to the public. Obvious in this is an assumption that the securities can be sold – that the public will buy them. But in the case of xAI, the underwriting bank would take no part of the investment and would offer no underwriting guarantees, promising only to use “our best efforts” to sell these securities. Hence the “junk-bond” analogy; the extremely high interest rates and the discount pricing are classic tactics when dealing with what is termed “distressed-debt”. This is partly because xAI’s debt is unrated and few want to touch it, partly because of the huge cash burn, and partly Musk’s increasing personal toxicity and loss of “wunderkind” status.
There are clearly serious concerns about the sustainability of X (Twitter) and xAI given the massive debt and declining revenues, and the reputational and brand safety issues don’t help. Twitter’s ad revenue is collapsing, down from more than $4.5 billion per year pre-Musk to below $2 billion in 2025, and still falling. Grok is critically failing to produce revenue and the “global sewer” reputation isn’t helping. Grok’s NSFW pivot is a foolish Hail Mary that has backfired by further alienating advertisers and Musk’s personal brand toxicity is another huge negative. These two combined entities appear to lack any credible path to profitability, making Musk’s hype a dangerous distraction from the math. With these, Musk is facing a severe debt servicing crisis, which helps to explain his cannibalisation of Tesla and SpaceX.
The combination of xAI and Twitter (X) contains too many structural flaws to provide hope for recovery. Twitter has so diminished in ads and subscriptions that it is becoming irrelevant. And in the best case, Grok seems destined to become a sort of pornographic niche product, like an OnlyFans for AI, producing some revenue from the NSFW (Not Safe For Work) crowd, but with little growth. In the worst case, considering the advertiser exodus, minimal subscriptions, regulatory fines, and potential debt defaults, this could easily cascade into bankruptcy by 2026–2027. xAI, Grok and Twitter are increasingly looking like a house of cards nearing collapse. And, as I have said before, it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
The Valuation Fraud
Elon Musk paid $44 billion for Twitter (about twice its actual value) but managed through his own efforts to destroy the value, driving it down by most estimates to less than $10 billion. The existing shareholders were of course dismayed to see the value of their investment degraded by 75% or 80%. To avoid public embarrassment, Musk decided to fold Twitter into his xAI, offering to convert the shareholder equity in Twitter to a 25% share of the total of xAI. Of course, their only hope was that xAI would hugely increase in value, permitting them to recover their investment.
Eager to please, Musk fraudulently claimed the value of Twitter as $33 billion in the merger, and further made frequent public claims as to the (imaginary) value of xAI. It seems that with each $5 billion in new funding, xAI increased in value by about $25 billion or $30 billion, the value quickly reaching $130 billion, then $180 billion, then $300 billion and finally $500 billion. This may have made the investors feel better, but there was never any justification for these huge increases in assumed value. And indeed, there was never any apparent justification for the original stated “value” of $130 billion. Perhaps I am too cynical, but my guess is that xAI is worth much less than even $100 billion, and perhaps as little as $50 billion, or maybe less. Since the stock is not traded publicly, we will probably have to wait for a bankruptcy court to determine a real value.
*
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 34 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chap. 2 — Dealing with Demons).
His full archive can be seen at
https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/ + https://www.moonofshanghai.com/
He can be contacted at: 2186604556@qq.com
*
NOTES Part 18
[01] Reuters: Tesla has been faking battery life since 10 years ago!
https://so.html5.qq.com/page/real/search_news?docid=70000021_61264c4e0ee91352&faker=1
[1] Debunking Elon Musk – Part 12 — xAI and Grok
https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/politics/21776/
[2] Musk on his companies
https://www.douyin.com/video/7500652509683797286
[3] Elon Musk’s Grok 3 Was Told to Ignore Sources Saying He Spread Misinformation
https://futurism.com/grok-elon-instructions
[4] “Truth-seeking” Grok 4 under fire for seemingly prioritizing Elon Musk’s views
https://techissuestoday.com/truth-seeking-grok-4-under-fire-for-seemingly-prioritizing-elon-musks-views/
[5 Grok 4 seems to consult Elon Musk to answer controversial questions
https://techcrunch.com/2025/07/10/grok-4-seems-to-consult-elon-musk-to-answer-controversial-questions/
[6 “Truth-seeking” Grok 4 under fire for seemingly prioritizing Elon Musk’s views
https://techissuestoday.com/truth-seeking-grok-4-under-fire-for-seemingly-prioritizing-elon-musks-views/
[7] AI gone rogue: Elon Musk’s own chatbot Grok accuses him for censoring it
https://hellboundanddown.com/2025/08/13/ai-gone-rouge-elon-musks-own-chatbot-grok-accuses-him-for-censoring-it-says-israel-and-us-committing-genocide-in-gaza/
[8] Elon Musk’s Grok Got Suspended on Twitter
https://www.vice.com/en/article/elon-musks-grok-got-suspended-on-twitter-x/
[9] Elon Musk’s AI bot Grok briefly suspended from X after Gaza genocide comments
https://www.naturalnews.com/2025-08-14-grok-suspended-from-x-after-gaza-genocide-comments.html
[10] “Hypocrisy noted,” Grok called out Elon Musk while the billionaire was arguing with Sam Altman over accusations against Apple
https://www.gamepressure.com/newsroom/hypocrisy-noted-grok-called-out-elon-musk-while-the-billionaire-w/z483ed
[11] Elon Musk’s GrokAI betrays him in fight against Sam Altman, accuses Musk of boosting his posts on X
https://www.moneycontrol.com/technology/elon-musk-s-grokai-betrays-him-in-fight-against-sam-altman-accuses-musk-of-boosting-his-posts-on-x-article-13448930.html#goog_rewarded
[12] Grok is getting updated because it sided with Sam Altman
https://dataconomy.com/2025/08/13/grok-is-getting-updated-because-it-sided-with-sam-altman/
[13] X fixes Grok after chatbot sides with Sam Altman
https://techbriefly.com/2025/08/13/x-fixes-grok-after-chatbot-sides-with-sam-altman/
[14] Grok4 hasn’t lost in score, hasn’t won in safety
https://www.goupsec.com/news/19434.html
[15] Musk criticized OpenAI: Training AI does not pursue the truth to the greatest extent
https://www.antpedia.com/news/99/n-3174499.html
[16] New challenges in AI evaluation
https://www.sohu.com/a/924463315_362225
[17] xAI Was About to Land a Major Government Contract. Then Grok Praised Hitler
https://www.wired.com/story/xai-grok-government-contract-hitler/
[18] US gov’t ditches Musk’s AI. The Grok chatbot has reportedly been removed from a federal program after sparking controversy over offensive content.
https://www.rt.com/news/622947-musk-ai-grok-us/
[19] US government agency drops Grok after MechaHitler backlash
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/08/us-government-agency-drops-grok-after-mechahitler-backlash-report-says/
[20] xAI’s Grok Loses Government Contract Amid Antisemitic Controversy
https://theoutpost.ai/news-story/us-government-drops-x-ai-s-grok-after-antisemitic-incident-reshaping-federal-ai-adoption-19114/
[21] Grok App Adds AI Image and Video Generator With NSFW ‘Spicy’ Mode
https://www.pcmag.com/news/grok-app-adds-ai-image-and-video-generator-with-nsfw-spicy-mode
[22] Consumer safety groups are demanding an FTC investigation into Grok’s ‘Spicy’ mode
https://www.theverge.com/x-ai/759554/consumer-safety-groups-are-demanding-an-ftc-investigation-into-groks-spicy-mode-elon-musk-grok-imagine-xai
[23] After smashing 200,000 GPUs, Musk’s GROK3 still overturned?
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1825170495603896559&wfr=spider&for=pc
[24] Musk led the xAI team to release Grok 4 “the world’s strongest model”
https://finance.eastmoney.com/a/202507103453366044.html
[25] Elon Musk’s Grok Got Suspended on Twitter/X
https://www.vice.com/en/article/elon-musks-grok-got-suspended-on-twitter-x/
[26] AI gone rogue: Elon Musk’s own chatbot Grok accuses him for censoring it
https://hellboundanddown.com/2025/08/13/ai-gone-rouge-elon-musks-own-chatbot-grok-accuses-him-for-censoring-it-says-israel-and-us-committing-genocide-in-gaza/
[27] “Hypocrisy noted,” Grok called out Elon Musk while the billionaire was arguing with Sam Altman over accusations against Apple
https://www.gamepressure.com/newsroom/hypocrisy-noted-grok-called-out-elon-musk-while-the-billionaire-w/z483ed
[28] Musk led the xAI team to release Grok 4 “the world’s strongest model” What is the gold content?
https://finance.eastmoney.com/a/202507103453366044.html
[29] Musk boasted that xAI will deploy AI computing power within five years, equivalent to 50 million H100 GPUs to challenge the energy limit
https://m.dtm.com.cn/news/202507/123966.html
[30] Musk’s claimed “strongest AI training system” was launched
https://ecas.cas.cn/dtfb/yjdt/202501/t20250106_5044302.html
[31] Musk: The strongest AI training cluster in history will be launched, adding another 100,000 GPUs
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1809251543115999515&wfr=spider&for=pc
[32] Musk’s claimed “strongest AI training system” was launched
https://finance.sina.com.cn/tjhz/2024-09-09/doc-incnnspw3121327.shtml
[33] Memphis warns it may not be able to power Elon Musk’s lofty ‘Colossus’ supercomputer expansion plans
https://fortune.com/2025/01/07/memphis-utility-ceo-warns-power-supply-elon-musk-xai-colossus-supercomputer-facility/
[34] Musk’s xAI supercomputer project faces power problems
https://www.icspec.com/news/article-details/2428556
[35] Musk’s AI supercomputing details exposed: 2.9 billion [Yuan] have been invested and the power gap is large
https://tech.ifeng.com/c/8iDsXCPnZYb?ch=ttsearch
[36] Musk’s xAI supercomputer project faces power problems
https://www.icspec.com/news/article-details/2428556
[37] Musk’s xAI supercomputer project faces power problems
https://www.icspec.com/news/article-details/2428556
[38] Musk’s AI supercomputing cost 2.9 billion, and millions of GPUs are facing the challenge of power gap!
https://m.dtm.com.cn/news/202504/87333.html
[39] ‘How come I can’t breathe?’
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/06/elon-musk-xai-memphis-gas-turbines-air-pollution-permits-00317582
[40] Why Elon Musk, the bully, is seen by many, including liberals, as a hero
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-12-04/elon-musk-racism-x-bully-savior-culture
[41] ‘How come I can’t breathe?’
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/06/elon-musk-xai-memphis-gas-turbines-air-pollution-permits-00317582
[42] Elon Musk’s xAI will shut down half of the generators that power the super data center Colossus
https://cbismb.com/infrastructure/59852
[43] The end of AI is electricity! Computing power factories have become major power consumers, and Musk has been accused of “illegal power generation”
https://www.sohu.com/a/884096150_115433
[44] Musk xAI was exposed to violations of Memphis supercomputing electricity, and the actual turbines far exceeded 15 to 35
https://www.rjtj.cn/news/show-36287.html
[45] The first phase of Musk’s Colossus: 200,000 GPUs, 150 megawatts of battery backup energy guarantee
https://m.itbear.com.cn/html/2025-05/813565.html
[46] Musk “can’t let go” Tesla and bought millions of chips to build an xAI giant factory
https://www.stcn.com/article/detail/1839123.html
[47] Musk’s claimed “strongest AI training system” was launched
https://finance.sina.com.cn/tjhz/2024-09-09/doc-incnnspw3121327.shtml
[48] Musk responded by exaggerating reports about Tesla’s AI chip procurement plan
https://finance.sina.cn/2024-06-05/detail-inaxrpyn6213122.d.html
[49] Musk transferred thousands of AI chips reserved for Tesla to X and xAI
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1800939268369567504
[50] Musk transferred Tesla’s 12,000 Nvidia H100 to X
https://zhidx.com/news/42202.html
[51] Tesla Unwinds Dojo Supercomputer Team Following Exec Exodus
https://www.pcmag.com/news/tesla-unwinds-dojo-supercomputer-team-following-exec-exodus
[52] Tesla’s Dojo supercomputer looks dead as more execs leave for competing startup
https://electrek.co/2025/08/07/tesla-dojo-supercomputer-looks-dead-as-more-execs-leave-competing-startup/
[53] US media revealed Musk’s crazy approach: sacrificing Tesla and others to provide resources for the development of xAI!
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1807147394831434664&wfr=spider&for=pc
[54] Tesla, Elon Musk sued by shareholders for breach of fiduciary duty over AI funneling threats
https://electrek.co/2024/06/13/tesla-elon-musk-sued-shareholders-breach-fiduciary-duty-ai-funneling-threats/
[55] US media revealed Musk’s crazy approach: sacrificing Tesla and others to provide resources for the development of xAI!
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1807147394831434664&wfr=spider&for=pc
[56] Chancery Finds Tesla Board Breached Fiduciary Duties
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2024/02/13/chancery-finds-tesla-board-breached-fiduciary-duties/
[57] Tesla limits investors’ ability to sue over breach of fiduciary duties
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/business/money-report/tesla-limits-investors-ability-to-sue-over-breach-of-fiduciary-duties/3748014/
[58] Tesla limits investors’ ability to sue over breach of fiduciary duties
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/business/money-report/tesla-limits-investors-ability-to-sue-over-breach-of-fiduciary-duties/3748014/
[59] Musk’s xAI costs $1 billion per month and will reach $13 billion in annual fees
https://ai.zol.com.cn/999/9992990.html
[60] Musk xAI burns money fiercely: with an annual expenditure of $13 billion and an income of only 500 million, how to fill the funding gap?
https://www.itbear.com.cn/html/2025-06/858975.html
[61] Musk “evil” Grok, Taylor Swift became a victim
https://www.sohu.com/a/922669269_211762
[62] Musk’s xAI is mired in controversy: generating indecent videos of celebrities raises legal and moral questions
https://www.sohu.com/a/922666807_362225
[63] ChatGPT’s mobile revenue exceeded $2 billion, crushing competitors to create a 30-fold revenue gap
https://www.chinaz.com/ainews/20568.shtml
[64] Musk, from the dragon, still can’t save X’s advertising business.
https://www.tojoyun.com/news/zixun/67464a440f43c30924fb6431
*
This article may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorised by the copyright owner. This content is being made available under the Fair Use doctrine, and is for educational and information purposes only. There is no commercial use of this content.
Other Works by this Author
Who Starts All The Wars? — New!
What we Are Not Told : German POWs in America – What Happened to Them?
The Jewish Hasbara in All its Glory
Democracy – The Most Dangerous Religion
NATIONS BUILT ON LIES — Volume 1 — How the US Became Rich
NATIONS BUILT ON LIES — Volume 2 — Life in a Failed State
NATIONS BUILT ON LIES — Volume 3 — The Branding of America
Police State America Volume One
Police State America Volume Two
THE WORLD OF BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
False Flags and Conspiracy Theories
Kamila Valieva
LARRY ROMANOFF FREE E-BOOKS & PDF ARTICLES
Copyright © Larry Romanoff, Blue Moon of Shanghai, Moon of Shanghai, 2025
/https://www.niagarafallsreview.ca/content/dam/thestar/news/canada/2021/09/25/huawei-executive-meng-wanzhou-receives-warm-welcome-upon-return-to-china/_1_meng_wanzhou_2.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.