> Also OpenAI in no way has a monopoly of the kind that Visa/MC has.
I think this is misreading how literal the comparison is meant to be; Sherwood's running a bunch of "OpenAI is X" articles today. This is not about the massive duopoly which has been catastrophic for US payments, but about the way companies entrench themselves.
> Doesn't explain what regulations Visa pushed for and got which helped it maintain its monopoly.
> but doesn't really present any evidence to support it.
The main points of concern are mentioned; OpenAI is pushing for "AI regulation" that focusses on the nebulous "doomsday"/skynet scenarios, rather than any of the material harms of AI. The subtext of that is a straightforward "you should ban anyone else building AI because only we can do it safely".
Similarly, OpenAI demanding it's investors not fund competitors is pretty ridiculous and explicitly trying to establish a monopoly.
I think this is misreading how literal the comparison is meant to be; Sherwood's running a bunch of "OpenAI is X" articles today. This is not about the massive duopoly which has been catastrophic for US payments, but about the way companies entrench themselves.
> Doesn't explain what regulations Visa pushed for and got which helped it maintain its monopoly.
Those details are in the linked WSJ article; https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/visa-wanted-a-vast-empir...
> but doesn't really present any evidence to support it.
The main points of concern are mentioned; OpenAI is pushing for "AI regulation" that focusses on the nebulous "doomsday"/skynet scenarios, rather than any of the material harms of AI. The subtext of that is a straightforward "you should ban anyone else building AI because only we can do it safely".
Similarly, OpenAI demanding it's investors not fund competitors is pretty ridiculous and explicitly trying to establish a monopoly.