They were talking about backstops for chips, to get fabs constructed in the US. If anyone else said this, it would have been considered a great idea, both republicans and democrats talked about the same thing to get TSMC production into the US, but everyone pretended that OpenAI was talking about data centers in this context. They weren't/
The gist is altman was trying to be slick about requiesting a government bailout, got called out on his bullshit, and then decided to lie and say he never wanted a bailout
The implication being the bubble is getting closer and closer to popping, since even altman is thinking about how to survive the pop
I’m not holding my breath for hot takes, but I got what I came for: sama said some stuff, the thread.
I don’t see any particular contradiction. Moving fabs onshore is absolutely in the interest of both parties.
So: Altman did not ask for OpenAI loans to be guaranteed, nor did the CFO. It was on behalf of others drawn into the needs of the industry the AMIC grant was supposed to support. Self interested by OpenAI? Sure! And also not about to make the top 10k leaderboard for "sleezy things companies do".
Can you more explicitly describe what the X and Y points you allude to are?
The article as a whole just seems libelous? Almost personal?
Maybe I’m just old, but I don’t see the appeal?
If you’re trying to convince people, then you should probably have a convincing argument. Otherwise it feels like kiwifarms-posting with a megaphone.
Last time I checked Nouriel was partying up in the Hamptons so being a permabear is lucrative.
One of the major beliefs of this view is that LLMs are essentially impossible because there's not enough information in language to learn it unless you have a special purpose language-learning module built into the brain by evolution. This is Chomsky's "poverty of the stimulus" argument.
Marcus still defends this view and because of this bias is committed to trying to prove to everyone that LLMs are not possible or at least that they're some kind of illusion. There's a sense in which they threaten his fundamental concept of how the brain works.
In proposing and defending these views he appears to me and others to be having a sort of internal crisis that's playing out publicly where his need to be right about this is coloring his judgment and objectivity.
> trying to prove to everyone that LLMs are not possible or at least that they're some kind of illusion
This is such poor phrasing I can't help but wonder if it was intentional. The argument is over whether LLMs are capable of AGI, not whether "LLMs are possible".
You also 100% do not have to buy into Chomsky's theory of the brain to believe LLMs won't achieve AGI.
And my phrasing was wonderful and perfect.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2024/02/repor...
https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/w...
Capital denial to competitors.
I don't buy that they can create AGI by investing trillions in training models and infrastructure.
If you ask me, this is just more money spent on pollution.
The need to replace humans to be profitable, just sounds like the end goal is to destroy the planet with datacenters and hurt people generally.
Sounds like a net negative for the planet.
ChatGpt is also building other products/brands like Sora to capture more mindshare.
Linux is free and yet people use Windows.
Google has stayed on top for 25 years because they're better and free. LLM providers will have to compete on price doing expensive inference.
Chatgpt can become an Ad company just like Google probably bigger than Google.
Yes people use Windows. Go look up the history of how that came to be, it had nothing to do with their brand. Sam is looking for his IBM.
The 1.4 T amounts to a broad nearly decade long capex plan, not liabilities.
The loans and backstops etc were a request, not for OpenAI, but on behalf of manufacturers of grid equipment, manufacturers that OpenAI wouldike the government to consider as eligible for money already carved out by the AMIC national investment in chips and AI, and also probably more money as well-- it's a separate group of tangential industries that weren't initially considered, so why not ask? Sure it would help keep the wheels moving in OpenAI and the broad AI and US semiconductor industry, but it's far away from and ask by Altman for a bailout of his company.
https://entropytown.com/articles/2025-11-06-openai-cfo/
"If you want to sell your shares, I'll find you a buyer." OpenAI and Microsoft Detail Landmark Partnership, Navigate Future of AI and Compute
https://founderboat.com/interviews/2025-11-01-openai-sam-sat...
Crazy sequences in a week...
Altman is in bed with Trump. He isn’t all in. But Tuesday evidencing an electoral shift makes Friar’s comments exceptionally ill timed.
The AI bubble must really be about to pop.
Somebody please tell me how to short this. I'm going all in.
Also clear that the 1.4T figure includes some accounting for spend that does not come directly from OpenAI (grid/power/data infra for example). Obviously some government involvement is needed, but more at EPA/State/Local level to fast track construction permits, more-so than financial help from Treasury.
I'm confused why this generates such sensational headlines.
They were bank bailouts.
Unsecured government loans are either bailouts, entitlements in disguise, or (usually misguided) attempts at broad economic stimulus. This definitely isn't either of the latter two.
A "bailout" is what happened in 2009, in the sense the banks would literally have collapsed without it (and they probably should have).
OpenAI is not going to collapse without these loans. Huge difference.
Also for the record, not rationalizing, because I'm not in favor of either handouts or bailouts.
rhetocj23•5h ago
Someone I know who has been an absolute staunch advocate of chatgpt,and has been for the best part of the past 1.5 years suddenly changed their tune earlier this week. That is my signal that things are turning south.
There will be a reprieve for some time, with increasing revenue. But eventually that will jam to a halt and all the doubts will intensify.
an0malous•5h ago
Gary called it a long time ago but I think the Dwarkesh and Karpathy podcast is when the shift started.
rhetocj23•5h ago
pinnochio•4h ago
Edit: lol at the downvotes. You're just proving my point, goons.
rhetocj23•4h ago
I just wished the bozos actually replied to the post instead of hiding behind a button.
an0malous•4h ago
- Greed is blinding even to intelligent people, especially greedy people in groups
- Society is incredibly vulnerable to lying, we mostly rely on the disincentive that people usually feel bad about it, but the ones who don’t can get away with anything.
- There’s really only a subtle difference between many successful startups and Ponzi schemes. Sam Altman’s grift is only one level more sophisticated than SBF or Elizabeth Holmes
goatlover•4h ago
Spooky23•4h ago
We truly live in the dumbest timeline.