let's make up imaginary scenarios and get offended by them

mistakes happen. sometimes catastrophic decisions (or indecision) are made, and people and companies are held accountable for them, or not

some companies are too big or too important to fall. we can all agree or disagree on things, but what AI specific behavior are we actually talking about?

Spoken like a true middle manager doing damage control against ethics complaints.

This is some Rollerball-level handwashing right here, I'm afraid.

No company is too big or too important to fail.

Some, unfortunately, survive because of the expedient choice to keep them in place.

"JO-NA-THAN!"

ETA: more to the point, neither OpenAI nor Anthropic are too big, too important, or too structurally essential to fail. (Slightly more challenging to make the third claim for Google or SpaceX, but either of those could see their governmentally/militarily essential parts nationalised).

If the USA grants either Anthropic or OpenAI too-big-to-fail status, and that privilege is invoked in a crisis, it could mean the end of the US economy.

The scenarios set out in the article happened. And it is generally accepted that negligent behaviour should lead to consequences.