In the high-stakes battle between Elon Musk and Sam Altman, it appears that the employees, policymakers and public who believed in OpenAI's nonprofit mission could be the biggest losers. Despite both parties’ claims of altruism, the evidence suggests a race to create AGI rather than serving the public interest.

The focus on building a multibillion-dollar company over fulfilling the original charitable mission raises questions about whether the public truly benefits from these tech giants' ambitions.

Jill Horwitz, a law professor from Northwestern University, notes that regardless of who prevails in court, the core mission of protecting AGI for humanity is at risk. The public interest in a nonprofit structure seems to have been sidelined in favour of corporate gains.

Former OpenAI researcher Daniel Kokotajlo criticises the company’s safety culture and highlights the fear among insiders that Musk and Altman are locked in a race to build superintelligence, with potentially dangerous consequences for all.

The origins of this conflict suggest a vision where OpenAI was always meant to be more like a startup than a traditional nonprofit. But as evidence emerged during the trial, it became clear that the nonprofit structure was merely a means to an end – one focused on profit over public good.