OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired

And in most places there was no such uprising, and incidentally, those places fared far better.

So no, Marx was resoundingly proven wrong.

Even during his own lifetime, some of his pseudoeconomic ideas/doomsaying was proven wrong.

He claimed, like many demagogues and economic laymen, that automation would reduce the demand for labor, and with it, wages:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour...

>>But even if we assume that all who are directly forced out of employment by machinery, as well as all of the rising generation who were waiting for a chance of employment in the same branch of industry, do actually find some new employment – are we to believe that this new employment will pay as high wages as did the one they have lost? If it did, it would be in contradiction to the laws of political economy. We have seen how modern industry always tends to the substitution of the simpler and more subordinate employments for the higher and more complex ones. How, then, could a mass of workers thrown out of one branch of industry by machinery find refuge in another branch, unless they were to be paid more poorly? and

>>To sum up: the more productive capital grows, the more it extends the division of labour and the application of machinery; the more the division of labour and the application of machinery extend, the more does competition extend among the workers, the more do their wages shrink together.

This was proven wrong in his own lifetime as factory worker wages rapidly grew in industrializing Britain.

I have nothing against him, it just seemed a bit off that most of the meeting was about this brand new coin, how it will be successful, and about the plans to scan biometric data of the entire world population. I mean, you don't have to be a genius to understand a few dozen ways these things can go wrong.

I’m done pretending they’re important. It’s a lie they and the boards have sold us and investors. The real meat of a company is who their smartest people are, and how much the company enables those people.

Pretty easy to see the difference if you consider between a company full of smart people who actually make things vs a company full of CEOs, which one will do better.