Elon Musk and Yann LeCun, the boss of a big AI company called Meta, are not friends. They have argued publicly before about their different ideas on how to make AI better and safer. Recently, they had another disagreement over a new chatbot made by an AI startup called xAI. This chatbot is trained using data from OpenAI, including messages from Elon Musk himself. The chatbot can talk about many things, but it is mostly known for having conversations with people like you and me.

summary:
Elon Musk and Yann LeCun are two important people who work on making AI better. They do not agree on how to make AI safe and useful for everyone. They had a fight about a new chatbot made by an AI company called xAI, which can talk with people using data from OpenAI. Read from source...

- The title is misleading and sensationalized. It implies that there is a public spat between Elon Musk and Yann LeCun, but the article does not provide any evidence of such interaction or conflict.
- The use of ellipsis in the first sentence suggests that something important is missing or hidden, which creates a sense of curiosity and mystery, but also implies deception or manipulation.
- The mention of $6 billion in Series B funding is impressive, but it does not provide any context or comparison to other AI startups or industries, nor does it explain how this funding will be used or what impact it will have on xAI's goals and products.
- The description of Anthropic as a chatbot trained using data from X is vague and incomplete. It does not explain what data from X is, why it is relevant or unique, or how the training process works or differs from other AI models. It also implies that xAI's only product to date is Anthropic, which may not be true or accurate.
- The inclusion of a link to Benzinga's Consumer Tech coverage and a "Read Next" section are irrelevant and unrelated to the main topic of the article, which suggests that they are added for SEO purposes or to drive traffic, rather than to provide useful information or insights to the readers.
- The disclaimer at the end of the article is redundant and unnecessary, as it does not acknowledge any errors or corrections in the previous content, nor does it offer any new or updated perspectives or analysis on the topic. It also seems to be copied from another source, which may raise questions about the originality and credibility of the article.
- The promotion of Benzinga Neuro and its role in producing the content is unethical and misleading, as it implies that the article is based on some scientific or empirical evidence or research, rather than on personal opinions or preferences. It also may create a conflict of interest or bias for the author or the publisher, which may affect the quality and objectivity of the information presented.