Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 300 posts

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#181

Post by mrhottakes »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #163
llm_nerd wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So, a guy with probably one of the largest incentives in the world to trash xAI is trashing xAI? He's just stating the obvious, so I really don't see this as contentious. xAI is irrelevant. It's so irrelevant that after being relegated hardware from Tesla, then pushed into Twitter to try to make that have value, then pushed into SpaceX because Elon Musk somehow gets away with hilarious levels of securities fraud, no…

XAI is very relevant. They have one of the best video models, they own cursor which has a good percent of the coding market. Anthropic runs thier ai on xai’s data centers. Saying they aren’t relevant is comical

They're relevant in the sense that all of their products are 100% silly junk compared to the rest of the market, which is about 80% silly junk.

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#182

Post by mrhottakes »

AJRF wrote: post #29
otterley wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the article said, Reid Hoffman is on Microsoft’s board and is an investor both in OpenAI and Anthropic.

I read the article - and many articles touting what Reid said - but my question remains - why in the name of god is he relevant. He is connected and gives money to people - why should that mean anyone should listen to him about any of this. He's not actually a do-er is he? Is there something I am missing? The amount of coverage he gets seems massively disproportionate to his skill, talent and insight.

All that Zuck, Altman, Musk, etc do is give money to people

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#183

Post by mschuster91 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #157
andsoitis wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ok boomer. Reid Hoffman is not a boomer. He was born in 1967. Also: ageism isn't sexy.

> Also: ageism isn't sexy Biology is ageist. The youngest baby boomers are still in their early 60s, and not yet subject to a precipitous-decline cut-off, but the median Boomer is about 71 and probably past it [1]. Given every President since 1993—with the exception of Obama—was born in 1942 or 1946 [2], I think it’s fair to admit this whole an-eighty-year-old-is-the-same-as-a-thirty-year-old tripe has swung to an un…

> Race is a social construct. Age is not. Mixing them up is fundamentally wrong and, I’d argue, dangerous.

Even worse. Our entire society, hell our biology is based on old people retiring to leave space for the young to develop themselves. When you got gerontocrats in power for too long and after them boomers, all you'll end with in 20 years is a bunch of dead boomers and gen silent, and a bunch of gen y/z that never had the opportunity to actually learn leadership skills and failing spectacularly as a result.

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#184

Post by jasonlotito »

jerf wrote: post #70
otterley wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the article said, Reid Hoffman is on Microsoft’s board and is an investor both in OpenAI and Anthropic.

So, a guy with probably one of the largest incentives in the world to trash xAI is trashing xAI? The information content of this is rather minimal. Even if everything he says is literally true it's hard to tell through the massive, massive vested interest he has. And it doesn't help that... 'Hoffman, who is an investor in both Anthropic and OpenAI, pushed back firmly on the narrative that the two companies are in a z…

> So, a guy with probably one of the largest incentives in the world to trash xAI is trashing xAI?

Why not? The guy with probably one of the largest incentives in the world to NOT trash xAI was trashing xAI.

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#185

Post by JumpCrisscross »

bobson381 wrote: post #119
vonneumannstan wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is largely escapism because the current paradigm of growth is ending, rather messily. The definition of living well is going through a forced change, and adjusting is hard.

> the current paradigm of growth is ending, rather messily

There is zero evidence for this time being different. Instead, there is evidence of zombie leverage and corruption coming home to roost while the global growth engine shifts towards China.

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#186

Post by [deleted] »

blenklo wrote: post #32
AJRF wrote: post #20

How is Reid Hoffman relevant? Someone like Elon being asked for their opinion on tech - I kind of understand - was at least at the coal face of SpaceX and Tesla for a time, seemed to understand the tech and was not terrible when it came to direction. Zuck I'd get, Bezos, Dario, Sam - but I don't actually get why Reid is always in the conversation - he's never been in front of anything

How is he less relevant than Elon Musk? He co-founded linkedin a platform every one knows. Elon Musk invented the Cybertruck and has a weird cult following through Tesla. i mean Elon Musk called some of his kids this: X Æ A-Xii Musk, Exa Dark Sideræl Musk and Techno Mechanicus Musk What opinion should i give more value?

[deleted]

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#187

Post by andsoitis »

jcgrillo wrote: post #149
andsoitis wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ok boomer. Reid Hoffman is not a boomer. He was born in 1967. Also: ageism isn't sexy.

I'm old too, it isn't about that. He's desperately trying to guilt young people into glomming onto his profoundly uncool thing by playing on some ancient "digital native" trope. It's, well, some boomer type shit.

I suppose you likewise think of Sam A, Dario A, and Dennis H, as boomers because they're signaling the same, just not being as direct.

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#188

Post by andsoitis »

mrhottakes wrote: post #173
andsoitis wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ok boomer. Reid Hoffman is not a boomer. He was born in 1967. Also: ageism isn't sexy.

> Also: ageism isn't sexy. Typical boomer needing things to be based on sex all the time.

sex drives everything.

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#189

Post by antiframe »

petilon wrote: post #26
AJRF wrote: post #20

How is Reid Hoffman relevant? Someone like Elon being asked for their opinion on tech - I kind of understand - was at least at the coal face of SpaceX and Tesla for a time, seemed to understand the tech and was not terrible when it came to direction. Zuck I'd get, Bezos, Dario, Sam - but I don't actually get why Reid is always in the conversation - he's never been in front of anything

Other than co-founding one of the most successful tech companies, that is.

If you are talking about LinkedIn, I don't know how universally they are considered a tech company. Is any company that does its core business on a website a tech company now, even if their innovations aren't tech? NY Times has some fancy tech, but you'd be hard pressed to consider them a tech company.

Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'

#190

Post by JumpCrisscross »

mschuster91 wrote: post #183
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also: ageism isn't sexy Biology is ageist. The youngest baby boomers are still in their early 60s, and not yet subject to a precipitous-decline cut-off, but the median Boomer is about 71 and probably past it [1]. Given every President since 1993—with the exception of Obama—was born in 1942 or 1946 [2], I think it’s fair to admit this whole an-eighty-year-old-is-the-same-as-a-thirty-year-old tripe has swung to an un…

> Race is a social construct. Age is not. Mixing them up is fundamentally wrong and, I’d argue, dangerous. Even worse. Our entire society, hell our biology is based on old people retiring to leave space for the young to develop themselves. When you got gerontocrats in power for too long and after them boomers, all you'll end with in 20 years is a bunch of dead boomers and gen silent, and a bunch of gen y/z that never…

> Our entire society, hell our biology is based on old people retiring to leave space for the young to develop themselves

This strikes me as a spin on the lump-of-labor fallacy.

The problem with a gerontocracy is you have masses in cognitive and physical decline at the peaks of power. Absent that condition, the model isn’t fundamentally broken. (You would probably see more patricide in hereditary lines…) Old people aren’t a problem, aged people in command are.

That’s what makes the comparison to race interesting—a society that brain drains gets wealthier for everyone. If we made our immigration 65+ only, on the other hand, it would be an almost-immediate disaster.

Post reply on HN