"I don't understand the point of this piece."

Its purpose is entertainment

It highlights the age of the Situational Awareness founder and what he was doing before he started the fund

"There is nothing breaking or remotely interesting which we didn't already know."

It's a weekly column not "breaking news"

The column author shares his perspective on current events and usually reflects on the past. It's unlikely that readers "already know" which current events the columnist will select, what he will write about them, including which comparative history he might reference. As such, it does provide something readers "don't already know", namely, the columnist's views on the current event he has selected. As for "remotely interesting", that's an opinion. Surely this column has a readership that finds the author's writing "remotely interesting"

The Economist does at times try, incorrectly, to predict the future

But that's not what is going on in this column. It's looking backward, not forward

If the parent comment is coming from a 20-something recipient of Silicon Valley VC funding and hoping to profit from an "AI" startup, then perhaps a bias disclosure is in order

If, hypothetically, no predictions were ever shared with the public over the internet, what would that do to Silicon Valley. What would happen to the volume of HN submimssions/comments

It's like asking what is the point of Matt Levine's column as it contains no breaking news, nor anything readers don't already know nor anything remotely interesting

What would happen to "AI" startups if there was no "AI" hype, including endless predictions about the future

Of course there is no way to know unless and until it occurs

*submissions