Alright, imagine you have two best friends, Elon (like the musk from space) and Sam. They used to work together on a big project, but now they're having a little argument.

1. **The Project**: They started something called "OpenAI" together. It's like a super cool club where they learn about making smart computers that can talk and help us with stuff at home (like Siri or Alexa).

2. **Elon's Idea**: Elon thought, "Let's make the club special, so we only do things that are good for everyone in the world." So, they agreed to keep the club as a non-profit, which means no money-making projects.

3. **Sam's New Rule**: But now, Sam says, "Hey, it's okay if we start some money-making projects too!" Elon gets upset because he thinks that goes against their original plan to only do good for everyone. Plus, he thinks some of the cool stuff they learned in the club shouldn't be used for making money.

4. **Fighting Words**: Elon thinks Sam is being a "bully," which means he's not playing fair or listening to his friend. So, they're having an argument, and sometimes Elon says mean things on Twitter (which is like a big chat room) about Sam and OpenAI.

5. **Sam's Response**: Sam just wants to keep learning and helping people with their smart computers, but he doesn't want to fight with Elon all the time. So, he says they should focus on their work instead of arguing on Twitter. Read from source...

Based on the provided text, here are some criticisms and perceived inconsistencies:

1. **Ad Hominem Attacks**: Sam Altman calls Elon Musk a "bully" and suggests he likes to start fights. While Musk can be provocative, labeling him as such without evidence is an ad hominem attack that distracts from the main issues.

2. **Hypocrisy/Doublespeak**:
- In 2019, Musk suggested that OpenAI could start charging users for API access. Now, he criticizes OpenAI's shift towards a for-profit model.
- Altman claims their job is to build AGI that benefits humanity, but the focus has shifted to making OpenAI profitable.

3. **Irrational Arguments**:
- Musk argues that assets developed under nonprofit status shouldn't be used for private gain. While this might have some merit, it's also irrational given that all startups and innovations build upon previous work, often funded by taxpayers or philanthropy.
- Altman dismissing Musk's concerns as just a "Twitter fight" minimizes the significant implications of AGI development and regulation.

4. **Bias**:
- The text presents a one-sided view, largely focusing on Musk's actions and words while giving less detail about OpenAI's perspective or the complexities of AI ethics.
- It seems biased towards Musk given it highlights his legal battles against OpenAI and his alliances with other tech CEOs.

5. **Emotional Behavior**:
- Both parties often resort to public mudslinging and emotional language, such as Altman calling Musk a bully, or Musk's frequent critiques via X.
- This emotional behavior can cloud the actual issues at hand and make productive dialogue more difficult.

The sentiment of the article is largely **negative** due to the following reasons:

1. **Conflict**: The article discusses an ongoing feud between Elon Musk and Sam Altman, which paints a negative picture.
2. **Criticism**: Sam Altman refers to Elon Musk as "a bully" who "likes to get in fights," which is a negative characterization.
3. **Lawsuits**: The article mentions multiple lawsuits filed by Elon Musk against OpenAI, indicating legal disputes and tension.
4. **Disagreements over profit vs. public good**: Both parties have differing views on OpenAI's for-profit operations, which creates conflict.

While the article does mention some positive aspects such as their previous collaborations and recognition of each other's achievements (e.g., "a sort of legendary entrepreneur"), these are overshadowed by the negative elements. Overall, the dominance of negative aspects like criticism, lawsuits, and disagreements gives the article a negative sentiment.