This doesn’t mean they fold as a company, or give up on AI, or stop working. But what exactly is the explanation for continuing to train ever larger frontier models in the current context?
And while their alignment is less than good, there are criteria by which it is the best available (eg no hugging face-scale attack on their end) So it is strictly worse to allow a competitor with worse alignment to take the lead.
I am pointing out that at least one of the stated reasons the article is wrong, is wrong.
“What is the endgame?” Is a question about them being misguided, rather than lying. I don’t know what the endgame is, whether they want to do all the things you are describing. Dario has written very very long essays on the topic.
All I’m trying to do here is, for those that are interested, say “go read his essays and read them as if the author is not lying. Then decide if he is misguided”