>It just so happens that the highest and best use is also what makes him the most money.
Something being self serving doesn't make it false, and you don't have to rabidly deny basic economic theory just because you hate the guy.
Something being self serving doesn't make it false, and you don't have to rabidly deny basic economic theory just because you hate the guy.
Let me know when you're ready to move onto advanced economic theory, including what happens to efficiency and value when a tiny number of entities concentrate an in-demand commodity in their hands and refuse to share.
(I say some of this tongue in cheek).
Does he actually call for expropriation without compensation? That part just feels like people massively extrapolating from what he said.
The small snippet, no, you're correct, he doesn't call for expropriation, though on its own it does seem an odd thing to say.
The full podcast, no, you're correct, the interpretation folks make isn't reflected in the podcast itself.
In the full scope of what the public believes it knows about Sam Altman, from allegations of familial abuse, to the board fiasco, to the expropriation of art and other works by humans to train the frontier models with reckless abandon, one sees that the absolute cynicism by the public writ large regarding anything Mr. Altman does or says is probably appropriate.
Perhaps unfortunately for Mr. Altman, as is the case for most public figures, his statements aren't seen as encapsulated logic statements to be taken individually, but in the scope of his broader public persona.
But you're denying both basic economic theory and basic political theory. If RAM is to be allocated, it has to be done in a safe manner too. Something like publicly funded and controlled datacenters, protected against data leaks and spying by private interests who want to use people's research to then steal their credit, ideas and businesses.
Let's now move from basic politics to economics - upwards of a Trillion dollars of debt has been sank into AI, most of it for free, subsidized AI services provided both domestically and internationally - how's that for "basic economics"?
But there's more, for $1 trillion, you could build 100 chip factories for RAM or other chips - 100 of them - 10 times more than we now have. Not building any or not building enough, means you're severely overpaying for RAM and compute - how's that for "basic economics"?
If Sam wants to plan the economy for efficiency, let's do it the way it has to be done, simplistic self-serving BS doesn't cut it.