Why would a company warn that their technology is dangerous if it wasn't?

The whole point of the article is to answer this question, and here's the answer:

Because all the AI doom fear-mongering is driving sky-high valuations. The more the public panics, the more investors open their wallets.

▲

ajyoon 2 days ago | parent [-]

Is there any evidence of this? It seems like a thing people say all the time, but completely unsubstantiated.

▲

chongli 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

What else is there? The product as delivered today doesn't come anywhere near a justification for these valuations. All of it is built on an expectation of future capabilities, and that's where the Dario-penned doom papers come in.

▲

ben_w 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You cold also drive valuations like Musk does.

Hype up the *positives*.

Even here on HN, Tesla fans try to justify the market cap by pointing at Optimus, even though nobody can buy it and there's already competition for it which you can buy.

▲

chongli a day ago | parent [-]

The positives aren’t there though, beyond what people are already using it for (pair programming aid, fancy auto complete, refactoring tool). Hence the article’s thesis: the doom justifies the valuation.

	▲	ben_w a day ago \| parent [-]
		Lack of physical reality doesn't stop Musk from hyping in an endless loop. Or hyperlooping, if you will. SpaceX announced a private flight around the moon in 2017 to launch in 2018, but instead in February 2018 SpaceX cancelled the certification of vehicle it was supposed to use and said they were switching to BFR. In September 2018, that became dearMoon and was due to fly there in 2023. Starship did actually launch in 2023, but exploded twice, and dearMoon was cancelled by the customer in 2024. Starship still isn't getting its test orbits circularised, because SpaceX doesn't trust the engines will relight correctly. What's in the IPO docs, to justify the price? Space based data centres that only make any sense (and even then barely) with cheap rockets that don't work right yet. Can say the same for self-driving, or Optimus, or TBC, or Neuralink, or Cybertruck, or X, or Grok (where the closest he gets to "doom" these days seems to be how he considers "woke" a dirty word). And in the past even how many cars Tesla expected to sell vs. what they actually sold, which is a demonstration of how shifting goalposts, and not just missing them, still fails to undermine hype. It's all "jam tomorrow" with him, even though when tomorrow comes there's still no jam; and yet, how many trillion in market cap?

▲

shard972 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲

ben_w 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

In fairness, it is true that there is a correlation such that:

> The more the public panics, the more investors open their wallets.

I don't believe this to be causation, but I can see the correlation.