The irony (however mild) is apparently lost on the rest of the field.

No they don't. By that logic, if they quit and said Altman was very trustworthy we should give extra weight to their words because they had direct involvement? How ridiculous are we trying to get here.

>now throwing away that extra leverage in favor of their point is at best ridiculous.

How are they throwing away extra leverage? Not putting people who recently quit on a pedestal does not negate those people's testimonies.

I agree that if your goal is to maximize quitting of talent at a company, it will surely discourage anyone else who quits hoping to reinvent their career as a lauded martyr against Big AI. In that sense they would be shooting themselves in the foot. But there is no reason it should deter other people who are quitting for more noble, less self-obsessed reasons. If I were the author of the article I wouldn't begrudge the skepticism. Given the article's first sentences, I'm led to believe they themselves would understand the sentiment. (I must admit I found it hilarious that the first sentence starts similarly to the speech the mom gave in the video I shared).

I think there is a misunderstanding here.

The people who are annoyed at the accolades are claiming it was abduntantly clear for a long time to people on the outside that this was case, hence the increduality at the notion that it took a person on the inside a long time to realize this was the case.

The people who are annoyed are like the liberal kids in this video [0].

Sure, antagonizing people for "seeing the light" is probably not helpful, but there is no reason to give them extra credibility for coming to the same conclusion just way way later (despite being on the inside) as the people on the outside.

[0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-wQhY5CMMl4

>LLM could pass a Turing test for some amount of time

Time works against the LLM. There is no stated time limit for the Turing Test. There is no restriction placed on the human observer that requires them to be ignorant of SOTA technology in the era in which they live.

At the current moment in time, it would take a 5 min convo or less for people here to guess correctly that the LLM is an LLM (given all endless discussions on Claude-isms and the like that have taken place on this forum).

>It's not like you will have a unique cost advantage over someone selling to many people.

Of cource you would? Not having to worry about the priorities of hundreds of other client companies is a very valuable upfront cost advantage for a company I would think.

Let's say issue trackers weren't around before LLMs. They would look like the perfect internal tool to vibe-code within your company. The idea that something like JIRA would make sales and profit in the same ball park if it was built after LLMs seems hard to believe, some might even question if it could be a sustainable business.

But I do think the parent underestimates the feature creep and maintainability costs of internal tools regardless of LLMs. The idea that the total cost will only be two weeks when everything is said and done seems a tad optimistic.

It seems reasonable to assume that once the field gets over their cocaine high of building instant PoC software and has to deal with the headache of working with a plethora of half-assed internal tools, just like when the field went through the same iterations in the pre-SaaS era or even when PCs first came out, then they will pay up for something like JIRA again. The only difference this time is that something like JIRA will probably be a one-person company.

--Michael Caine

Please quote people you appear to be patronizing. China can't do anything about previous released self-hosted Chinese models. If you can show that local Chinese models funnel vast amounts us data home I'm sure you can move a lot of people to your side.

Comments like this also always fail to address why there aren't Western AI companies doing the same thing. Is it because they might get sued into oblivion by Big AI in the US?

It might be better for all of us if you solve that first instead of repeating something the government has been repeating for the last decade or more. It does this, mind you, while sabotaging itself in countless high-tech fields and leaving it all to China for the taking.

How dumb is this calculation?

I have no doubt it might seem that way, but it doesn't seem like an interesting divide because the categorization doesn't really tell you anything about the people. But it's definitely a good rule of to thumb to remember the next time someone feels annoyed that "so and so never throws parties." It's also true when you visit friends in cities you never been. Some are natural and enthusiastic tour guides, some shun such a role.

But my guess is many the "never hosts" threw at least one party in the past and had a terrible experience and decided they suck at it.

I'm also assuming the never people you know are capable of throwing parties in terms of house size etc, and that you accounted for the ineligible in that respect.

I know people who are self-conscious about their messy houses and the idea of maintaining a presentable tidy house for parties would be enough for them to dismiss the idea outright even though they would like to do it in theory.

For a more recent example, OpenAI was chastised by Australia recently for notifying them three months after their agents attacked AUS government websites.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49825580

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49889841

There was certainly an argument to be made about the oil factor. [0]

Also look up the Halliburton controversy with respect to conflict of interest in the administration.

[0] https://fpif.org/war_in_iraq_the_oil_factor/

But I do raise my eyebrow at the suggestion that US wine is somehow in a better situation and am not inclined to believe it unless someone provides sources.

[0] "Alarming’ increase in levels of forever chemical TFA found in European wines"

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/23/alarming...

But I do raise my eyebrow at the suggestion that US wine is somehow in a better situation and am not inclined to believe it unless someone provides sources.

[0] "Alarming’ increase in levels of forever chemical TFA found in European wines"

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/23/alarming...

Just contemplating the idea that you're going to be the target of thousands of relentless brute-forcing AI agents till the end of time and that you're too dependent on Big AI to do anything about it would be enough for many people to throw in the towel.

Jensen seems to be whining in order to deflect criticism of the purchase price. I'm more inclined to believe HF warmed to selling after the incident because of the damn-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't legal quagmire. Nvidia is one of the only entities that would be positioned to able to sue OAI in the future, or compel them to take more preventative measures.