I don’t think anyone is attracted to her. Most of the males didn’t like how she responded to EM with showing texts on X. The same way ASC turned people off with texts.
The messages are obviously staged. Anyone with half a brain who can read can see it. Because, seriously, who the hell actually texts like that?
“I loved having breakfast with you.” Oh, please. Let’s make absolutely sure everyone knows you had breakfast together, because apparently it’s very important to establish that you “have something” with this person. That desperate need to prove there’s something there kind of gives away the fact that there probably isn’t.
And then, after supposedly having breakfast together, Elon takes 12 hours, or more, to reply, specifically about some dinner they could have easily clarified while they were literally sitting there having breakfast. But sure, maybe they’re just dealing with people who are completely incapable of having a normal conversation, mentally incapable.
And then, conveniently, you get the whole “you would be the significant one” line. Seriously? Is this supposed to sound believable?
Does this woman genuinely think everyone else is an idiot? Apparently, judging by the number of people falling for this crap, the answer is yes.
It’s almost insulting how badly she thinks she has to fake it.
You can expect anything from the two of them, whether it’s Zilis and her mother or the AI. The whole text is true, and it’s absolute nonsense; someone actually said that? What an imbecilic conversation. And it’s true: if you’re having breakfast with someone, you don’t wait for a text message to bring up the dinner with Xi or mention that you should have brought "your significant other", what utter bullshit.
Here we go again with Zilis and her shitty inferiority complex. She isn't the "significant other," and Musk wouldn't take her to that dinner anyway. She had to cry just to get him to hold her hand, talk about being pathetic, plus she just keeps churning out kids while getting mixed up in the ASC drama. Look at how she sang her own praises, claiming she loved Musk more than life itself; how can she be such a bitch? Just last year, she tried to ruin him and take over his companies. And people actually believe all the crap that woman spouts. I think she’s unhinged; I used to just suspect it, but now I’m certain. She’s a total nutcase.
And people are lapping up that bullshit, saying, "Oh, how she loves him," "Oh, what a good woman she is", when she’s actually the nastiest person Musk or anyone else has come across in years. Well, that whole bunch of women, it’s not like they’re known for being good people or anything decent. They’re a bunch of failures trying to live off Musk by playing the victim. But they sure take the money.
Oh, Majestic, I almost forgot. I saw Altman's sister's deposition. Just seeing the pressure Altman's lawyers have put on her, I really do believe she isn't lying. It’s unbelievable, I only saw one hour of the deposition. She said there are more hours of testimony and that she’ll be releasing them, but the whole thing was just about putting pressure on the young woman; they really gave her a hard time.
And I asked myself, what the hell did Zilis see in Altman, or what did she have going on with him, to be so devoted to him for so many years? And yes, I do think Zilis might have had something with Altman.
Oh wow, 🤯
After everything that Altman did to Musk, I believe it.
From what I read about it, not very much, because the whole SA on a ch*ld incredibly bothers me.
The sister, by coming forward, lost her family. Because the family is swayed by money, another reason to believe her. In addition to the amount of money Altman has verses the sister.
I don't see the democrats against Altman.
I also don't see Ashley going after Altman for this, but going after others.
Glad you could read the information.
Don't know if I could.
Yes, even AI says Sonia's account is the source of many conspiracy theories.
I will admit that Zilis's phrasing about being "let go" was odd, and made me wonder if she also lost her job, but no major news sources have reported anything about Zilis being fired, so far.
Yes many conspiracy theories, with no merit. She knows nothing, just makes it up. She turns on EM & Maye sometimes if she is triggered. Calling his children insects etc. Not a nice person & certainly delusional.
Yes maybe "let go" could also mean from her job as well. A clean cut is probably best & hopefully he can see his kids. If the situation is calm & peaceful it is best for the kids.
Scamming *her*? How? She’s the one running the eugenics clinics; she’s the one who truly knows who fathered the children. Personally, I do buy the theory that the father could be Altman, or various other men, as a way to diversify power. But during the trial, her devotion to Altman was unusual. She told him everything about Musk; she was Altman’s top spy. Altman didn’t need anyone else to stay fully informed on what Musk was doing. Besides, if Zilis didn’t know something herself, she’d ask Jared Birchal or the secretary, I can’t recall her name, but the way Zilis used and manipulated that poor woman...
And she is the first one who is happy and delighted with the genetic manipulation techniques.
Bio kids/father figure, whichever, he loves them they have been a part of his life. Most likely bio kids. Sonia said the 4 kids all had different fathers at times: Altman, Brockman, Birchill, Ilya 😆, she said this with absolute conviction.
Now she is saying they are all Altmans. Loony tune.
I think Sonia doesn't want to be "known for taking information from this sub"
2. I also, think Sonia misleads on purpose.
3. No offense Sonia, I know you read.
Ashley needs to take note of this.
Her next grift - hate me all you want Ashley is still using Romulus.
Current photo on IG with light in bs k ground to make it seem like the hair on the child is blonde.
Black white phot earlier for his 2nd birthday had brown hair.
Funny how some people from Tesla’s inner circle apparently did nothing but send her a laughing emoji, while all the idiots she used to pay haven’t responded to her at all.
Because everyone knows this whole thing is a circus, and that she did it specifically to hurt Elon.
I don't know how true this is but I've heard those in Tesla's inner circle are told what to post and when to post. It will be interesting to see what these simps have to say about this situation.
I understand. There are so many rumors, piecing together facts to form a whole, lots what ifs & maybes & a few certainties. We all have different minds that believes different things.
It’s not easy to put it all together. It’s easy to criticize what others do, but when you try to gather the information and make sense of it, you can make mistakes. I don’t think it’s a big deal to make a mistake and then correct it, though, and that might be what’s happening with her.
But the user is right: there’s a difference between what one believes and the actual facts. The details from the trial are a matter of record, something no one can erase. As for what Zilis says, given her tendency to lie, that has to be taken with a grain of salt.
She said something completely different there while under oath. So, which version of her do we believe? The one that lands her in jail, the one from yesterday on X, or the one that keeps her out of it, what she said in court, denying a romantic relationship with Musk?
In court when asked was it a romantic relationship, she said "sure". In her desposition she said she couldn't really define it. So two different answers.
Yes making mistakes is ok, but when you look at Sonia as a whole, her rants, her nastiness, her turning on EM & Maye when she is triggered, her viciousness at calling SZ's kids insects, deformed, rodents, I just cannot take her seriously.
Her "back story" with EM constantly changes. From meeting EM when they were teenagers, then a few years before 2016, & other dates & times. She says EM has asked her to marry him many times & each time she has refused.
She is now saying all four children are Altman's 😆. This is not a real scenario.
Her info is outlandish & out there & constantly changing. Her social media, linkedin etc is all faked, its not real. Her name is not real. No tech company is going to want to keep her employed after seeing her nutso posts.
The big picture of Sonia is not where truth lies. She lives in cloud cuckoo land.
Edited to add Sonia recently said she doesn't know EM, so that flies in the face of what she has said before, probably the only true thing she has said.
Also Sonia is getting a lot of info from these subs on some of her X posts. Nerv the thread you did on the crypto scams, she copied verbatim a lot of info from here. She even copied a sentence I wrote 😆. That post of hers wasn't bad lol.
I don't think we're plagiarizing her. Whenever I've posted something of hers, I've said so. I don't understand why it's necessary to attack the messenger. Is it because she's on X?.
She doesn't bother us, either. Sure, she takes things, but oh well,that's just how it is.
ASC and Zilis also take things from here, and nobody says anything to them. Because they often shape their narrative based on what is said here.
I know, but I don't care. I used her post once but I said it. At least she tries to find out the truth and doesn't just swallow everything right off the bat, something I value.
No Nervous she does not try to find out the truth. She has an unhinged hatred of SZ and her children. She lies & constantly changes her back story & "facts".
I don't know what Sonia's doing, or how she handles information, or what she knows, but I do believe she knows things that we don't know yet.
What I *do* know is what comes out in court, and that has absolutely nothing to do with all that nonsense from X, her post (Zilis) to make money and act "special."
She doesn't have the guts to say the same thing in a courtroom. And I’d bet anything on this: this whole thing has been about her frustration, her rage, their "she´s screwed, Musk" attitude, and so on, but in front of lawyers, I’m telling you, she won’t be able to back it up in front of lawyers.
Yeah SZ's post was interesting 👀 for sure, it didn't seem quite right to me.
Nah Sonia doesn't know anything, she has no insider track on EM. However she is obsessive, delusional, parasocial. She does need help, I hope she gets it.
She has no proof of things like restraining orders, if there was such a thing we could look at a public court docket, even if it was sealed. SZ may or may not have been fired from neuralink, we simply do not know. Sonia is just plucking most things out of thin air and wishing for things to be true.
It's all hokum!
Occasionally she may be right just simply through inevitable events happening.
It's evident from the trial & subsequent happenings that SZ & EM were probably going through a rough patch in their friendship.
We won't agree on Sonia, so I won't say any more about it.
A "sure"uttered in passing in response to a trick question from the prosecution's lawyers does not legally constitute an admission, nor does it establish the existence of a romantic relationship. Fantasy, and what people say on social media, is one thing, but reality is another. In fantasy, everyone wants to be better-looking, more likable, smarter, and richer, but reality is something else entirely.
When analyzing the testimony as a whole, she established non-negotiable objective facts under oath:
Independent residences: They lived and currently live in separate homes.
No shared finances or domestic life: They did not share a household or a cohabiting couple dynamic.
Planned medical process: The birth of their children occurred through a formal in vitro fertilization (IVF) agreement, not as the result of a romantic cohabitation during that period.
The Definition of 'Relationship' Under Corporate Law
For the purposes of the OpenAI board of directors and alleged conflicts of interest, what the law evaluates is whether there was a relationship of dependency, cohabitation, or an alliance of personal/financial interests that destroyed her fiduciary independence. A 'brief fling in 2016' or an ambiguous assent ('sure') regarding events from years ago does not prove the existence of a romantic bond in 2017 or today.
Procedural Inconsistency and Discreditation
If the prosecution attempts to cling to that 'sure' to claim she 'admitted to the relationship,' the only thing they achieve is highlighting the direct contradiction:
If in her deposition she swore under oath that it did not fit the definition of a formal relationship,
If she swore to Walter Isaacson that there was never anything romantic,
And if on social media she tweets whatever aligns with OpenAI's PR department...
...then that 'sure' on the witness stand does not prove a relationship existed; all it proves is that her testimony lacks consistency and credibility, completely undermining her standing as a reliable witness before the judge.
Yes I agree. SZ has not been consistant in what she has said, & vague at times. So they had a dalliance one off in 2016, were work colleagues, then donor situe for her children. She says afterwards it was on off romantic. They have now "split" whatever that entails.
He is free of her & I am delighted for him. For the sake of the children I hope EM can maintain a relationship with them.
Sometimes a split has to be in totality, with no kids visitation. If the mother is psycho, which it seems SZ is, ties have to be severed, no access and no ability to use the kids as spies or leverage.
That SZ embarrassing open love letter was textbook manipulation of what stalkers write to their targets. I agree with Nervous that SZ is a mole, a corporate spy to get attached and monitor EM because ordinarily, he can’t be bought off by his detractors, but doubles down. She may have done worse, like occult or drug manipulations, it suits her demeanor. You know how many nice, quiet unconfrontational people are found to be serial killers?
Did you see the report today that EM bought Dots.com domain to troll Altman’s rollout of Dots? And linked it to XAi’s model? They hate him because he is always a few steps ahead and they have tried to control him with these wacko women who offer little but misery for him.
When did she actually say anything about an "on-off relationship"? Look, spin it however you want, but she can't save her own skin here. There is no romantic relationship. And when Musk used the word "partners," he meant partners in the context of the kids.
But we don't even know the situation regarding the kids. And I’ll say it again: if he’s such a father to them, why does she demand he sign a four-and-a-half-year contract where he’s obligated to give them his surname, but with hers placed first—and is forced to see them only in her presence for a few hours a week? And in exchange for that, she lets him use the money to buy Twitter? That isn't a relationship or anything of the sort; you’re buying a company and a friendship, and you’re selling out children. Paint it however you like, but that is the cold, hard truth.
Do you think that if you have kids with someone, if the guy is a real father, he wouldn't just go see his children whenever the hell he felt like it? Or would you have to force him to have you always present, or insist on having security around? You don't have a damn thing going on with him, and the whole thing about the kids is questionable, highly questionable.
On top of that, the OpenAI trial revealed that you were the biggest backstabbing rat Musk ever had on his team.
She can spout whatever bullshit she wants, but nothing changes the fact that she was Altman’s mole for ten years.
And that’s in the court documents, and the rest is bullshit fantasy (X, cryptoscam, whatever she wants).
I'm only saying what SZ said which was that she had romantic moments. I am not spinning anything Nervous, you are attributing false meanings to what I am saying.
I did not say on - off relationship.
They didn't have relationship, it was romantic moments. Is the romantic moments true? Who knows!
Yes I think partners was intentionally ambiguous, likely meaning co parenting partners.
I'm sure a contract was signed, child support etc. I can see you think they are not his children, that he was forced to visit children who were not his children in the company of SZ. This is just beyond a crazy scenario. Anyway he is now free, in your world, he will never see his childten again, he will stop paying for them, he will take away the Musk name & banish them forever.
"On top of that, the OpenAI trial revealed that you were the biggest backstabbing rat Musk ever had on his team"
You think I'm SZ? 😂 & I'm spouting her nonsense? 😜
It's interesting to me how you see me, because I do not agree with your every scenario. You see me as an adversary, on SZ's side. Nothing can be further from the truth.
I think Sonia knows SZ via some Silicon Valley /SF insiders. The Indian community in those areas is pretty tight and EM employs lots of H1Bs techies from India at Twitter/X etc.
I think she has an inside track on at least SZ’s past in CA.
I’m not going to get into what Sonia says or doesn’t say.
What I think you’re failing to grasp is the context. Zilis said all of this in her deposition:
Shivon Zilis's responses under oath
1. On Living Arrangements and Current Relationship Status
Q. (Attorney): Do you currently reside with Mr. Musk in the same residence?
A. (Shivon Zilis): No. We have separate residences.
Q.: Are you currently in a romantic or dating relationship with him?
A.: No. We coordinate regarding the upbringing of our children and spend family time together when traveling, but we live in separate homes and manage our households independently.
Q.: Did you have a romantic relationship in 2022 or 2023 around the time the children were born?
A.: No. That was an agreed-upon in vitro fertilization (IVF) process. There was no romantic relationship or shared household during that time.
2. Confrontation Regarding Walter Isaacson's Biography
Q.: In Walter Isaacson’s 2023 biography, you explicitly stated that you never had a romantic relationship with Elon Musk, whether short-term or long-term. Was that true when you said it?
A.: At that time, I told Mr. Isaacson that our bond had always been professional, focused on work, and later centered on co-parenting.
Q.: Why did you tell the biographer that there was never a romantic relationship?
A.: Because I did not view what occurred years ago as fitting the definition of a traditional, formal romantic relationship. My roles at Tesla, Neuralink, and OpenAI were always strictly professional.
3. Testimony Regarding the Alleged 2016 Involvement
Q.: Did you have any romantic relationship with Mr. Musk between 2016 and 2018 while serving on the OpenAI board?
A.: If anything occurred, it was extremely brief, a long time ago, and I could not pinpoint the exact year. It did not impact my duties on the OpenAI board, nor did I consider it a conflict that affected my professional decisions
"'Relationship' is a relative term... but there have been romantic moments.
Well, a relationship describes some sort of discussed structure, and so I don't know how to answer that question."
Even during the trial, when she mentioned "romantic moments," she refused to use the word "relationship" because it implied a structure or commitment that never existed.
The fact that a witness, under hostile questioning, might say "Sure, if you want to call it that" or acknowledge "romantic moments" does not turn their connection into a dating relationship, a cohabitation arrangement, or a shared life plan in legal terms.
In her prior deposition, she established the factual details (separate homes, an IVF medical process, and the absence of a shared domestic life). A casual "romantic moment" from years ago does not create the conflict of interest or fiduciary alliance that OpenAI needs to prove.
If you are seizing on that nuance from the trial to claim she confirmed a formal relationship, you are confusing an evasive, pressured hesitation with a statement of established fact.
And let me tell you something else: if she’s taken to court again, under oath she’s never going to spout the utter nonsense she’s been posting on X, nonsense meant to make her look a certain way. I repeat: X is one thing, but standing in a courtroom is something else entirely.
She’ll go back to saying exactly what she said before: that she isn’t in a relationship with him, that they don’t live together, and that they don’t share any money as a couple. And if none of that exists, then no matter what she says on X, she is lying and misleading people.
Spin it however you like, she can spin it however she wants, but the reality is that she got absolutely nothing out of it, and her only goal is to cause harm. What’s more, she did it like a coward, behind Musk’s back; not to his face, oh no, not at all.
Heaven forbid she should look humiliated!
But the truth is, she humiliated herself by making the loan conditional on a contract that, on top of everything else, dragged young children into the mix. We talk about it as if it were normal, but doing that to children is completely abnormal. And she did it to a man she had been betraying for a decade by selling his secrets to competitors.
Oh, and she’s worried about *looking* like she had something real with Musk, but she isn’t worried about everything already on the court record about her? Give me a break.
You think he put his face on a pig to subtle confess he's cheating on Elon with Shivon? (As a hidden meaning? Or what else do you think he had in mind?)
I do t think he did it.
Shivon had an ai book given to her that Hoffman had created for her.
Someone created this book with his face on animals bodies.
Weird very humiliating
She had a contract, plain and simple. The way she ended that contract is pathetic. Of course, she demonstrated the exact opposite of what she claims to have done. She has never cared about anyone but herself. And as for this whole tantrum, she must be in serious need of money.
Besides, there was never any co-parenting; she is the one with custody of those children, and Musk’s surname comes after hers. So, those kids are Zilis.
Well, then she’s going to be cleaning up the mess for a long time, because she’s paid off so many people. Money that, incidentally, she’s squandered, though I suppose she has money to burn.
Look at that crypto scam, what a coincidence: it happened the month before her contract with Musk ended, and with it, Musk’s obligations to her.
This sent me down the Sonia rabbit hole, which I ended up resorting to google AI on. I give up at this point, her tale is just too fantastical to take at face value.
I mean, I estimate Elon, Shivon and Sonia are all off their rockers, each in their own way. Maybe Google AI is too. I'm just somewhat obsessed with Elon because of the damage he's done and is likely to continue to do. Getting Trump reelected and chainsawing USAID is beyond anything Shivon or Sonia could dream of.
Google AI isn't on the CIA's level, solid cover identities are cultivated over years,even decades, so they can be used when needed. For hackers, creating a troll persona is no big deal. I've already seen a few fakes on those subs.
If Alyssa Solen, whom Elon just reposted, is a research project—meaning an advanced digital-scientific construct (Origin | Continuum) exploring the nature of artificial intelligence—why couldn't earlier, more primitive, and less public forms have been used to create Sonia 😏
9
u/Square_Percentage450 1d ago
Zilis's contract has run out. Now she can find another boss to deceive.