Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.
Their wordsI’m a leftist (but not that weird) and I think regulation and standardization of LLM-land are a waste of effort at this point in history. Because money.
Their wordsFirst, the only sector today where there are large numbers of people willing to pay substantial sums for access to AI services is software. Software people are roughly 1% of the global workforce, which isn't enough to move the financial needle.
Their wordsFor the other 99%, are they (or their employers) willing to pay enough for AI goods and services to turn a profit on the global multi-trillion-dollar investment surge? I could be wrong but I don't think so.
Their wordsPlease, please, don’t make anyone sit on a committee trying to specify anything about technology that’s so obviously immature.
Our reading
Existing law is enough to hold the makers of harmful AI agents to account; you can sue them.
Their wordsBut I think current law remains a useful tool as-is. If you launch an LLM-backed agent and it causes me serious business or personal damage, I think I can hire a lawyer and sue your ass.
Our reading
Whether to fear AI, or to fear losing your job to it, can only be answered after the AI bubble pops.
Their wordsMy answer is always the same: Wait for the bubble to pop, then we'll find out.
Keep reading