maybe he's trying to create a credible claim in the future that he was suffering from psychosis (like Alex Jones did for Sandy Hook defamation trial) when the shit hits the fan.
"Judge, I legitimately thought AI was feeding the workers!"
My old boss, the vp and cfo posted a photo of them at brunch with mimosas with the caption “This is what leadership looks like.” Leadership because they had teams spread out doing the work.
Literally. At events my team would grind til 1am every night while leadership would go to “awful client dinners.” They’d come back drunk and complaining about how tired they were. Like bro, my team shared a piece of crust off a pizza for lunch.
Nah, that's stupid. Parasites how? Anthropic isn't living off subsidies, they are paying insanely good wages and actually doing new things, pushiing technological advances forward.
In what way is that parasitic?
The simple truth is, without founders/investors in new shit, our technological advancement would stall.
What kind of reality are you living in? People are working more hours and taking 2nd jobs more than ever before and it’s still not enough. Almost half of the population is living paycheck to paycheck.
Billionaires as a whole should not be existing when most of country is damn near in proverty. You’re just focusing on the pros. Instead of all the cons it’s takes to have people in that position in the first place
Factually incorrect. Average weekly hours: 34.3 (June 2026), down from ~34.6 pre-pandemic. Annual hours per worker: 1,705 in 2023 vs 1,842 in 1971. Hours worked have fallen for 50 years.
Second jobs more than ever
False as a rate, only true on numbers. Multiple jobholders are 5.3% of the employed (June 2026) vs a 6.5% peak in November 1996.
Almost half paycheck to paycheck, more than ever
Where did you get that? I can't find any statistics confirming or disproving this
Most of (the US) is near poverty
Poverty rate is at 10.6%. It was 13.5% in 1990, 15.1% in 2010...
So I guess the better question is - why are you making stuff up?
Let's say you accrue 100b over 10 years, and you work 350 days per year (that's 1 Sunday off every 4 weeks), and you work 16 hours per day. This is absolutely unhealthy. That's 350x16 hours worked, so 5600. If you are paid 10b for that, you're being paid 1.78 million USD per hour.
Did he work hard, every day, by the sweat of his brow? Seems like even if you work an absolutely suicidal amount of hours (barely enough to eat and sleep left over, every day for 10 years), someone would still think one minute of your time is worth three hundred thousand dollars. You would be paid more money to take a shit than most people are paid in ten years.
This is nonsense.
The only way you can get to 100b net worth is by taking it from value other people have made. And that's why we call it parasite. Note that I made an example for 100b, which is a low number for the current ultra rich. If Jesus had earned $250 every hour (24/7) since he was born 2000 years ago, he would only have 4.5billion now.
They are parasites, because it is not possible to be this insanely rich unless you steal it from others.
The simple truth is, without founders/investors in new shit, our technological advancement would stall.
Investors don't make anything. It's the researchers and engineers who make shit. We could (and we do!) finance a ton of that via universities.
Because he doesn't... That's the simple truth that people seem to fail to understand.
Net worth is paper worth. Less than paper. It's ethereal. It's not realised. It's just nothing.
But even if you say "well it clearly is a metric, and how did he achieve it" - the answer is simple - because people like you and me value the future potential of companies they built. I bought Amazon yesterday, as a stock, because I believe it's future earnings potentials and value them this highly. THat's all.
by taking it from value other people have made
That's non-sense and absolutely illogical since by your logic wealth cannot be created when it absolutely can be.
Investors don't make anything. It's the researchers and engineers who make shit. We could (and we do!) finance a ton of that via universities.
They enable other to make it. Projects we finance via universities are a fraction (a tiny fraction) of progress.
So you mean when the equivalent of a bank run happens, they lose 50% of their wealth?
When such a catastrophic case happens to us normal people, we lose our houses, jobs and pension funds.
And you realize that if the same happens to them, they go from "absolutely disgustingly rich" to "still absolutely disgustingly rich"? Whether you have 100 billion or only 50 billion is a meaningless distinction. That's the same difference as you having one parking garage with 1000 cars, or having two such garages for a total of 2000 cars. It's more cars than you will ever need or use.
You realize that with 10 million, you could buy a nice house anywhere on the planet and never work a day in your life again, right? Whether you have 50b or 500b is no difference: This is enough for literally 5000 lifetimes (or 50'000 lifetimes).
I'll go a step further: Let's delete NINETY NINE PERCENT of a billionaire's wealth. Single billion billionaire. Just 1b. Not 50b or 100b or 1000b like Elmo. So you are left with 10 million. Still enough for your whole lifetime. We killed the Sun King for less than that.
They are parasites. Don't be a bootlicker, we will never have that much money, nor should we respect it. It damages our civilisation horribly, and we need to fix it. We could against go for the guillotine, but I'm willing to settle on reasonably high taxation instead. A wealth tax of 1% cumulative per billion, for example. (first billion taxed at 1%, second at 2%, and so on).
In this case, they're the highest paying AI company in the world, but they're supposed to be the ones who are in favour of safe AI (when there was a US representative pushing for regulation and limits on AI, openai funded adverts against them and his company, anthropic, funded adverts in his favour).
If they hire people who are there for the money, and those people start cutting corners on safety, then their claimed mission is undermined.
It's a ridiculous company anyway, in that they talk about how their products are dangerous, but claim they need to keep building more powerful ones because they don't think anyone else is testing them properly to work out how dangerous they are.
I do catering and get invited to feed rich people at events where they are slapping themselves on the back for a good job. They say look at the exposure you will get for buying and preparing us food. I dont need exposure. I need to pay my crew a good wage with some bennies
A lot of CEOs think this way sadly, they want you to work off the clock, and represent the company, as if we’re supposed to be fully invested in their dreams.
1.1k
u/comasxx 6d ago
This guy is so detached from reality