Technology

To be fair, $500 million is a lot of money.

You can barely blame them for not wanting to turn that down.

Should it pan out as planned, they'd get another quarter of a billion. That's money enough that if you're halfway sensible with it, you and your descendants would never have to work again.

Even when evenly divided across the entire company, it's still a life-changing amount. ($1.6 - 2.3 million per person)

Execs in this sort of company are narrative first, facts a distant second. LLMs speak their language, something agreeable that sounds right whether it is or not.

BTW, investors are largely in the same boat, they are investing with having no realistic way to know whether the nice things being said are backed by reality up front. They only know if/when it goes down in a blaze.

Further in gaming, maybe they tank some headliner properties with bad reviews if the mess them up, but it's possible that most of the 'sold' games barely even get played, thanks to Steam hoarding. A lot of businesses can coast on past glory for years and years before things blow up, if at all.

It's because in order to become a ceo, you have to be a very specific type of person, and the role also attracts this trait of putting money above all else, which fits perfectly to the role.

Imagine if you invested in a company that helmed a ceo that didn't try to make more money. Right? You'd be upset as the investor-role that your money wasn't working for you, and would take the guy out.

This is the common, public opinion.

So the same goes for the CEO: that maximum money be made by being different and taking good chances and staying on top of the technology curve. And OpenAI has been, at least what they, themselves, purport, overwhelmingly successful.

This is all to say that the role of CEO draws a ton of people who think a lot of themselves and their abilities, because they think fake it until you make it is the role, because it largely is: you have to make bets on decisions to lead like that. Which makes CEOs this sort of hollow, fake-person sort of capitalist sociopath.

And them betting on AI-first, then, makes a ton of sense if you're that specific type of person. Because, unless you have your own skills and opinions, you will be beholden to the dumbest, fakest, skewed statistical other bullshitters in the world.

Right now, the companies making all these mistakes that all of us with actual skills and opinions can clearly see, those are just the companies that don't matter, that are leeching off the backs of real industries. Like a group of kids all cheating off each other in a test, and suddenly a bunch of them get the same wrong answer.

They're literally the people, and boards of people who put them there, who have no fucking idea what they're doing, and in my personal opinion, are very clearly illustrating a weak point with society and humanity and our values and structures across the world. We'll get past this one, for sure. But there will be more. That is the both the curse and the gift of existence.

They're simply stupider than you thought. They buy into hype so fast without really listening to the experts already on the team.

Either they are even stupider than I thought, or the tech bros have some kind of massive blackmail machine they're using to take over everything and puppet all the CEOs.

I think it's a little of each.

The ones not being blackmailed are desperately trying to look like they're impactful enough to blackmail.

Ehhh 404 still has a bit more to say on

https://archive.is/yIkXA

The CEO will be fine at the end of the day.

The workers are going to get fucked, though.

Exactly, the fact this dude at Krafton can sign 250 million dollars deals but is also dumb enough to think a ChatGPT lawyer knows better than his own lawyers... It goes to show that many powerful people were just lucky or inherited their wealth but are definitely not successful because they are smart.