It means why do we care what the LinkedIn founder has to say about xAI.

The answer seems to be "we don't, he's on the board of a competiting AI company"

> answer seems to be "we don't, he's on the board of a competiting AI company"

That seems like a good reason to listen to him? He is prominently placed in the field. Has a lot to lose by knowingly making false statements in public about a competitor. And has an incentive (and the resources with which) to dig deeply into them in a way e.g. a trash-talking YouTuber does not.

He has his set of biases. But Board member at a multi-trillion dollar established software and AI kingmaker seems like a weird way to dismiss an opinion.

	▲	nailer 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> He is prominently placed in the field. No he isn't. He's the LinkedIn guy. That's his only success. Good for him but the LinkedIn founder doesn't know anything baout AI. > Has a lot to lose by knowingly making false statements in public about a competitor. The article ignores the conflict of interest - Hoffman is introduced as: > Reid Hoffman has watched the AI industry from virtually every vantage point—as a founder, a lead investor and as a decade-long Microsoft board member. they don't say: "Reid invested in both OpenAI and Anthropic" which seems to indicate that Fortune think they can get away with lying through omission.