zlacker

>>fnbr+(OP)
This has just been crazy both to watch and in some small ways interact with up close (I’ve had some very productive and some regrettably heated private discussions advising former colleagues and people I care about to GTFO before the shit really hits the rotary air impeller, and this is going to get so much worse).

This thread is full of comments making statements around this looking like some level of criminal enterprise (ranging from “no way that document holds up” to “everyone knows Sam is a crook”).

The level of stuff ranging from vitriol to overwhelming if maybe circumstantial (but conclusive that my personal satisfaction) evidence of direct reprisal has just been surreal, but it’s surreal in a different way to see people talking about this like it was never even controversial to be skeptical/critical/hostile to thing thing.

I’ve been saying that this looks like the next Enron, minimum, for easily five years, arguably double that.

Is this the last straw where I stop getting messed around over this?

I know better than to expect a ticker tape parade for having both called this and having the guts to stand up to these folks, but I do hold out a little hope for even a grudging acknowledgment.

>>benree+sY
OpenAI was incorporated 9 years ago, but you easily saw that it's the next Enron 10 years ago?

>>daniel+rd1
I said easily five, not easily ten. I was alluding to it in embryo with the comment that it’s likely been longer.

If you meant that remark/objection in good faith then thank you for the opportunity to clarify.

If not, the thank you for hanging a concrete example of the kind of shit I’m alluding to (though at the extremely mild end of the range) directly off the claim.