this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2026
197 points (96.7% liked)

Not The Onion

19823 readers
1005 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A man who worked an AI watchdog reveals how OpenAI representatives suddenly showed up at his door step, demanding documents.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Article wants you to think hired goons shows up with baseball bats or something. Issuing subpoenas for legal proceedings is a standard legal process and they're often required to be hand delivered to ensure receipt.

People have raised concern about decreasing transparency at OpenAI and that merits attention. But this article describes a standard legal practice.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 11 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Ah yes the old using legal processes to quash critics. Nothing to see here, just standard legal practice.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

If you can argue that the action was baseless harassment, then do so. Frivolous lawsuits have their own penalties. But you can’t argue with the subpoena process on its face.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 9 hours ago

Subpoena + publicity = uninsurable. And when you work for a low-profit endeavor, your "damages" are limited to the money you might have made were you insurable, at least that's how the courts measure it and the lawyers decide to take the case or not. OpenAI would probably gladly lose a case and pay whatever income The Midas Project lost as a result of OpenAI's actions - profit isn't the point of The Midas Project, reporting what is happening in the industry is, and that mission has been effectively thwarted with the uninsurable status.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)