> I knew then and there this guy was hot air and I never took him seriously since.

He's definitely not a software guy, and has been dead wrong on the software use-cases for LLMs. They are really, really bad in most other areas though (because we haven't built decent harnesses for broader "knowledge work").

We'll get there, but it'll take a decade or two. My plan is to ride this wave into retirement/death/immanence of the machine god, whichever comes first.

Just remember to come back to this comment in a year or two.

I've seen a lot of his interviews and he often makes two arguments: 1. LLMs are not fit for purpose and aren't nearly as useful as people say. 2. It is literally impossible for OpenAI and Anthropic to generate enough profits in the next decade for them to fulfill all of their obligations and return money to investors.

I agree that the first one is sometimes iffy, but even if you think LLMs will replace x% of white collar work by 2030, the second point remains.