unityByFreedom

That kind of "power" can turn on a dime. I'd be wary of it. In this case the mob learned they have influence when they work together. That doesn't mean they are loyal to Altman, rather that they are influential when united.

> the level of "entanglement" into our daily life with massive core-AI systems, such as the capabilities of GPT-'N' has, cannot be understated.

Entanglement of big business and government is not new. Yes, we should be very concerned, but the solution is not to worship idols like business leaders or politicians. They will not solve that problem for us. You have to think carefully before handing more authority to individuals who've already been ascribed far more than is due.

> from a security guy just saying he doesnt care who runs the black box, is weird

One cannot select the "right" person to run that black box. We're all biased, flawed, etc. So yes, you should be concerned. But use that concern to drive your actions towards distributing authority– not centralizing it through more idol worship.

In response to your edit:

> I do not "worship" or "idolize" SA, and especially Thiel - I am terrified of them.

This is idol worship. You're ascribing a power to Altman and Thiel that they do not have. Bad behavior has consequences that are beyond what even the government can impose. If Altman or Thiel were to make a habit of targeting people, he or his adherents/descendants would eventually find themselves friendless in a house built on sand. Altman almost lost his job that way. The fact that consequences may play out slowly in some cases doesn't make it less true. Nobody can infinitely violate the golden rule without eventually facing consequences.

Hah I just read about "Bohemian Grove." Do techies consider that sacred ground because Oppenheimer discussed the atomic bomb there? The idol worship present in SV is so thick I can hardly see anything else.

> I hope that all the youngin's in tech (like the actual teenagers, like my children) are really paying attention to where we are in tech history with AI in general - and with OpenAI in particular - as SA can attempt to look like a Carnegie but actually be a Rockefeller.

You should hope that they go back to school and study history. All of this has happened before, many times over.

And yet, he nearly lost his job. None of us are perfect, nor are any of us better than any other. Let's cut the idolizing.

> he just posted a thread on how much of a visionary he is

The thread you linked is from 2020.

What is the case against them? You can't claw back without demonstrating some law was broken. Making a bad financial decision that causes a business to fail isn't against the law unless you somehow profited from it. And, from what's publicly known, SVB's CEO didn't come away with more money from the bank's closure than he would have had he continued running the bank.

> The mission of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is to maintain stability and public confidence in the nation's financial system.

I see nothing there about "we will guarantee deposits of any amount over $250k."

The decision to guarantee SVB may wreak havoc on the financial system as banks feel comfortable continuing to make risky bets and thus attracting more customers, knowing that the fed will rescue the customer deposits that backed those bets.

Greg Becker isn't going to jail, and he isn't going to be financially ruined. There are thousands of people willing to fill the role of extracting money from the government. The trick is to not give into their attempts to bend the rules.

> odds are, just about every bank by now has either reviewed or scrambling to review their exposure

The lesson they learned is to shout global emergency when your regional bank can't meet withdrawals due to poorly managed finances.

Banks will not be more prudent, in the long run. They've just been taught that the government will protect depositors beyond federally insured limits. So now they can make riskier bets.

The question is, what would it take for a bank to be allowed to fail? The FDIC insurance line of $250k must've meant something.

Yes, now I wonder if anyone is allowed to fail. David Sacks complained that if the regionals aren't protected, then everyone will only bank with the big four. Yet if everyone is protected even when the bank makes poor decisions, that's a run on the FDIC itself. So as you say, where is this new line, and who can be trusted to allow those who cross it to fail?

The run they were tweeting about was a wider one on all regional banks. Did not happen at time of their tweets, they were speculating about the future.

Why was it the VCs impacted by the SVB collapse, and not the wider banking world, who stood to lose more, who were loudest to make that claim?

I'm sorry to see "I don't care" as the top response to your thoughtful comment.

We are better off if we can argue the merits of both sides of issues. Trying to ram one answer down everyone's throats is not productive and does not make for good conversation.

I like your honest answers here. It's refreshing to hear in the tech space after a decade of wanna-be Jobs copycats. Good luck with the business.