Meta offering top engineers bonuses of $100 Million? (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

As per usual with these types of threads - the hype out paces the facts by a distant margin:



Meta’s CTO Andrew Bosworth implied that only a few people for very senior leadership roles may have been offered that kind of money, but clarified “the actual terms of the offer” wasn’t a “sign-on bonus. It’s all these different things.” In other words, not an instant chunk of cash. Tech companies typically offer the biggest chunks of their pay to senior leaders in restricted stock unit (RSU) grants, dependent on either tenure or performance metrics.

A four-year total pay package worth about $100 million for a very senior leader is not inconceivable for Meta. Most of Meta’s named officers, including Bosworth, have earned total compensation of between $20 million and nearly $24 million per year for years.

Altman was “suggesting that we’re doing this for every single person,” Bosworth reportedly said at the meeting. “Look, you guys, the market’s hot. It’s not that hot.” (Meta did not immediately respond to our request for comment.)

Thanks. What is the link for that?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Interesting.

Google secures Windsurf talent in $2.4bn AI technology deal​

LInk

Google has entered into a licensing deal, reportedly worth $2.4bn, with Windsurf in a move to bolster its AI development capabilities without acquiring ownership or control.

Windsurf is a California-based AI code generation company.

Though non-exclusive, the agreement permits Google to leverage specific Windsurf technologies, furthering its ambitions within the AI coding sector.

Several key figures from Windsurf, including CEO Varun Mohan and co-founder Douglas Chen, will transition to Google's DeepMind division. Their focus will be on agentic coding initiatives such as the Gemini project.

Google stated: "We're excited to welcome some top AI coding talent from Windsurf's team to Google DeepMind to advance our work in agentic coding."

This arrangement overrides earlier negotiations between Windsurf and OpenAI, during which the ChatGPT maker considered acquiring the former for $3bn. Windsurf investors, which include Kleiner Perkins, General Catalyst, and Greenoaks are expected to benefit from the license fees while maintaining their current stakes in the company.

 

[uwillbsoon]

As per usual with these types of threads - the hype out paces the facts by a distant margin:



Meta’s CTO Andrew Bosworth implied that only a few people for very senior leadership roles may have been offered that kind of money, but clarified “the actual terms of the offer” wasn’t a “sign-on bonus. It’s all these different things.” In other words, not an instant chunk of cash. Tech companies typically offer the biggest chunks of their pay to senior leaders in restricted stock unit (RSU) grants, dependent on either tenure or performance metrics.

A four-year total pay package worth about $100 million for a very senior leader is not inconceivable for Meta. Most of Meta’s named officers, including Bosworth, have earned total compensation of between $20 million and nearly $24 million per year for years.

Altman was “suggesting that we’re doing this for every single person,” Bosworth reportedly said at the meeting. “Look, you guys, the market’s hot. It’s not that hot.” (Meta did not immediately respond to our request for comment.)

Yeah, I said exactly this upthread.

In which case it's not at all unusual in the tech world.

 

[TennesseeJed]

As per usual with these types of threads - the hype out paces the facts by a distant margin:



Meta’s CTO Andrew Bosworth implied that only a few people for very senior leadership roles may have been offered that kind of money, but clarified “the actual terms of the offer” wasn’t a “sign-on bonus. It’s all these different things.” In other words, not an instant chunk of cash. Tech companies typically offer the biggest chunks of their pay to senior leaders in restricted stock unit (RSU) grants, dependent on either tenure or performance metrics.

A four-year total pay package worth about $100 million for a very senior leader is not inconceivable for Meta. Most of Meta’s named officers, including Bosworth, have earned total compensation of between $20 million and nearly $24 million per year for years.

Altman was “suggesting that we’re doing this for every single person,” Bosworth reportedly said at the meeting. “Look, you guys, the market’s hot. It’s not that hot.” (Meta did not immediately respond to our request for comment.)

Thanks. What is the link for that?

Meta is offering multimillion-dollar pay for AI researchers, but not $100M 'signing bonuses' | TechCrunch

Meta is offering multimillion-dollar pay packages to AI researchers. But no one is really getting a $100 million "signing bonus."

techcrunch.com

 

[tymarsas]

Am I reading this wrong? https://www.reuters.com/business/sa...-million-bonuses-openai-employees-2025-06-18/

Competition for AI talent has reached a feverish pitch as superstar researchers are being courted like professional athletes on the belief that individual contributors can make or break companies.

"They (Meta) started making giant offers to a lot of people on our team," Altman said on the Uncapped podcast that aired on Tuesday, hosted by his brother. "You know, like $100 million signing bonuses, more than that (in) compensation per year."

Which part are you unsure about Joe?

That they'd actually pay engineers $100 million signing bonuses.

Software engineering =/= to AI engineering, and to poach AI talent from competitors, you will need to pay a king's ransom.

Of course. I don't think anyone is saying software engineers are the same as AI engineers.

Does $100 million as a signing bonus to an engineer not sound remarkable?

Are other companies doing that?

What are the meaningful differences?

They are two different disciplines. It is like comparing a neurosurgeon and a dermatologist. They have some of the same fundamental knowledge, but they aren't interchangeable. I'm a software dev and understand the basics of modern AI (ie. neural nets), but I wouldn't be able to just switch over without a lot of learning/training.

 

[Joe Bryant]

As per usual with these types of threads - the hype out paces the facts by a distant margin:



Meta’s CTO Andrew Bosworth implied that only a few people for very senior leadership roles may have been offered that kind of money, but clarified “the actual terms of the offer” wasn’t a “sign-on bonus. It’s all these different things.” In other words, not an instant chunk of cash. Tech companies typically offer the biggest chunks of their pay to senior leaders in restricted stock unit (RSU) grants, dependent on either tenure or performance metrics.

A four-year total pay package worth about $100 million for a very senior leader is not inconceivable for Meta. Most of Meta’s named officers, including Bosworth, have earned total compensation of between $20 million and nearly $24 million per year for years.

Altman was “suggesting that we’re doing this for every single person,” Bosworth reportedly said at the meeting. “Look, you guys, the market’s hot. It’s not that hot.” (Meta did not immediately respond to our request for comment.)

Thanks. What is the link for that?

Meta is offering multimillion-dollar pay for AI researchers, but not $100M 'signing bonuses' | TechCrunch

Meta is offering multimillion-dollar pay packages to AI researchers. But no one is really getting a $100 million "signing bonus."

techcrunch.com

Thank you. That makes more sense.

 

[Harry Frogfish]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial. Have hoped and figured one would pop up by now. One that is specifically geared toward the investment side of things. Let's face it, we're all in that demographic and it could at a minimum, be interesting, and at best, life-changing. You never know. With how fast this is all unfolding, why not? Some very bright minds in this mix. If even as a cautionary road sign on the inevitable road blocks coming, that alone could be worth it.

And no, the stock thread is a different animal and should be left to its own productive devices.

Someone get this bullet train on the tracks, please. Thanks!

 

[tymarsas]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial. Have hoped and figured one would pop up by now. One that is specifically geared toward the investment side of things. Let's face it, we're all in that demographic and it could at a minimum, be interesting, and at best, life-changing. You never know. With how fast this is all unfolding, why not? Some very bright minds in this mix. If even as a cautionary road sign on the inevitable road blocks coming, that alone could be worth it.

And no, the stock thread is a different animal and should be left to its own productive devices.

Someone get this bullet train on the tracks, please. Thanks!

Thread '***Official Artificial Intelligence (AI) Thread*** Latest: US Air Force confirms first successful AI dogfight'

May 6, 2023

I know we have a ChatGPT thread, but this space is moving at warp speed right now, so I think it's time to launch a general AI thread for news, tools, links, etc. I have run across some unbelievable tools thus far and I think we are just scratching the surface. IMHO, I feel like this is the beginning of a movement something like when the internet was born.

To kick the thread off, (and there are many other sources of this if you want to Google, or ask an AI bot), this is an alleged leaked document from a Google employee, which is internal discussions that are talking, basically, about how...

• Nathan R. Jessep
• Replies: 308
• Forum: Footballguys Free For All

• 

That one seems pretty official. Maybe not investing focused.

 

[Harry Frogfish]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial. Have hoped and figured one would pop up by now. One that is specifically geared toward the investment side of things. Let's face it, we're all in that demographic and it could at a minimum, be interesting, and at best, life-changing. You never know. With how fast this is all unfolding, why not? Some very bright minds in this mix. If even as a cautionary road sign on the inevitable road blocks coming, that alone could be worth it.

And no, the stock thread is a different animal and should be left to its own productive devices.

Someone get this bullet train on the tracks, please. Thanks!

Thread '***Official Artificial Intelligence (AI) Thread*** Latest: US Air Force confirms first successful AI dogfight'

May 6, 2023

I know we have a ChatGPT thread, but this space is moving at warp speed right now, so I think it's time to launch a general AI thread for news, tools, links, etc. I have run across some unbelievable tools thus far and I think we are just scratching the surface. IMHO, I feel like this is the beginning of a movement something like when the internet was born.

To kick the thread off, (and there are many other sources of this if you want to Google, or ask an AI bot), this is an alleged leaked document from a Google employee, which is internal discussions that are talking, basically, about how...

• Nathan R. Jessep
• Replies: 308
• Forum: Footballguys Free For All

• 

That one seems pretty official. Maybe not investing focused.

Yeah, I saw that one. Kind of why I'm bringing this up. Two different topics, imo. And we don't want to flood the investing thread, not the place for it either.

Definitely deserves its own thread. This thing is massive and closing in quick. What's not to like / be interested in. This place is perfect for it.


There are 100s of threads this topic should be in front of...

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Am I reading this wrong? https://www.reuters.com/business/sa...-million-bonuses-openai-employees-2025-06-18/

Competition for AI talent has reached a feverish pitch as superstar researchers are being courted like professional athletes on the belief that individual contributors can make or break companies.

"They (Meta) started making giant offers to a lot of people on our team," Altman said on the Uncapped podcast that aired on Tuesday, hosted by his brother. "You know, like $100 million signing bonuses, more than that (in) compensation per year."

Which part are you unsure about Joe?

That they'd actually pay engineers $100 million signing bonuses.

Software engineering =/= to AI engineering, and to poach AI talent from competitors, you will need to pay a king's ransom.

Of course. I don't think anyone is saying software engineers are the same as AI engineers.

Does $100 million as a signing bonus to an engineer not sound remarkable?

Are other companies doing that?

What are the meaningful differences?

They are two different disciplines. It is like comparing a neurosurgeon and a dermatologist. They have some of the same fundamental knowledge, but they aren't interchangeable. I'm a software dev and understand the basics of modern AI (ie. neural nets), but I wouldn't be able to just switch over without a lot of learning/training.

No, I understand the disciplines are different and what you outline is true (as a matter of degree) for any engineer going from one expertise to the other. Where I was going is now moot understanding that it wasn't actually a $100M bonus.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Fun poll here for Zuckerburg https://forums.footballguys.com/thr...rg-in-effectiveness-leading-a-company.816625/

When you asked if he was an effective leader, this thread is why I voted no.

If you are running a company and you have to overpay people massively to keep up, that’s not a good firm or culture.

Unless you can convince me the one person paid $100M had knowledge no other person in the world did (which I would be incredulous about) this is terrible leadership and culture at a firm.

Maybe that’s what the market commands, just like elite athletes and A-list entertainers?

You’re going to have to convince me Eugene the engineer is as impactful as Shohei Otani.

Even a mediocre AI engineer may impact mankind more than any baseball player.

But like sports drafts, we can only make a somewhat educated guess who will be the next superstar. Zuck is trying to corral as many pedigreed Eugenes as possible.

ETA @Joe Schmo get it

 

[Chaos34]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial.

There are 100s of threads this topic should be in front of...

Agree. I've said it repeatedly in the official thread. It should be 100 pages or more by now. I wish Joe used it. It made me not want to comment here, but the reality is finally being explained.

There is no evidence of verified 100 million dollar signing bonuses. These were multi-year compensation packages, carefully structured for retention, performance and of course tax advantages.

As far as I can tell Ruoming Pang’s deal is the largest ( though falsely claimed in this thread to be a $200 million signing bonus), but the vast majority is in stock and long-term incentives. His actual signing bonus, while likely very large, has not been disclosed and is almost certainly far less than the total $200 million. I've chased down info on 9 other poached employees, but does it really matter? These are incredibly high paying jobs despite the misinformation on bonuses. They're not Eugenes, Terminal. They're proven heavy hitters. Zuck has carefully sniped his ASI team.

I just want to emphasize what Harry said in the two quotes above. Let's use the official thread. There. is. so. much. happening.

 

[Terminalxylem]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial.

There are 100s of threads this topic should be in front of...

Agree. I've said it repeatedly in the official thread. It should be 100 pages or more by now. I wish Joe used it. It made me not want to comment here, but the reality is finally being explained.

There is no evidence of verified 100 million dollar signing bonuses. These were multi-year compensation packages, carefully structured for retention, performance and of course tax advantages.

As far as I can tell Ruoming Pang’s deal is the largest ( though falsely claimed in this thread to be a $200 million signing bonus), but the vast majority is in stock and long-term incentives. His actual signing bonus, while likely very large, has not been disclosed and is almost certainly far less than the total $200 million. I've chased down info on 9 other poached employees, but does it really matter? These are incredibly high paying jobs despite the misinformation on bonuses. They're not Eugenes, Terminal. They're proven heavy hitters. Zuck has carefully sniped his ASI team.

I just want to emphasize what Harry said in the two quotes above. Let's use the official thread. There. is. so. much. happening.

One of my points was, it’s difficult to predict who will vault AI to the next level. Not sure why it couldn’t be Eugene, though I know “heavy hitters” surely have past performance to suggest they have the talent.

Most uber high salaries are pretty arbitrary anyway, and I wouldn’t begrudge throwing as much money as possible at the potential for transformative technology. It likely will be worth far more than all the home runs Ohtani will hit.

ETA I don’t care one way or the other how many AI threads exist, but it’s disheartening that people immediately gravitate towards the investment value.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial.

There are 100s of threads this topic should be in front of...

Agree. I've said it repeatedly in the official thread. It should be 100 pages or more by now. I wish Joe used it. It made me not want to comment here, but the reality is finally being explained.

There is no evidence of verified 100 million dollar signing bonuses. These were multi-year compensation packages, carefully structured for retention, performance and of course tax advantages.

As far as I can tell Ruoming Pang’s deal is the largest ( though falsely claimed in this thread to be a $200 million signing bonus), but the vast majority is in stock and long-term incentives. His actual signing bonus, while likely very large, has not been disclosed and is almost certainly far less than the total $200 million. I've chased down info on 9 other poached employees, but does it really matter? These are incredibly high paying jobs despite the misinformation on bonuses. They're not Eugenes, Terminal. They're proven heavy hitters. Zuck has carefully sniped his ASI team.

I just want to emphasize what Harry said in the two quotes above. Let's use the official thread. There. is. so. much. happening.

And for sure, I don't have any problem at all with the other thread. In fact, I agree with there being so much happening. I think tangent topics like this can be useful on their own. I just haven't had time to get into the bigger thread. Partly as there are so many different facets of it.

 

[Chaos34]

I think tangent topics like this can be useful on their own. I just haven't had time to get into the bigger thread. Partly as there are so many different facets of it.

Understood. I don't really care all that much, and I can't seem to contribute unless I write an essay few will read. AI is on my mind constantly. I apply it to every topic I see. I've even researched why people seem reluctant to discuss it. The potential and predictions are psychologically unsettling; the actual definition of mindblowing. I'm so preoccupied with AI, and I don't say this lightly, I think I need help. Everything I know about this topic you started I learned by talking to the LLMs. And it's not boasting to say I can write for a couple hours about this Meta recruiting story. LLMs are far superior than the human generated links you ask for, but it's not acceptable yet to say, "Well, here's what AI found."

I'll go away now. Claude just finished an app for me. Took awhile.

 

[Chaos34]

Most uber high salaries are pretty arbitrary anyway,

if it helps, these hires are all Phds in related fields, have all led to breakthroughs in one aspect or another in AI, and have all published several peer reviewed research. They're predominently Chinese and were mostly poached from European Open AI operations. About half of them Stanford grads. This is Honyu Ren's body of work. He's credited as the lead developer of ChatGPT o3, which has been incredibly powerful for it's size. Zuck sniped 9 more, most of them just as impressive.

 

[Joe Bryant]

but it's not acceptable yet to say, "Well, here's what AI found."

I hear you. I shared some results from AI recently here and was laughed at. oh well

 

[bcat01]

I think tangent topics like this can be useful on their own. I just haven't had time to get into the bigger thread. Partly as there are so many different facets of it.

Understood. I don't really care all that much, and I can't seem to contribute unless I write an essay few will read. AI is on my mind constantly. I apply it to every topic I see. I've even researched why people seem reluctant to discuss it. The potential and predictions are psychologically unsettling; the actual definition of mindblowing. I'm so preoccupied with AI, and I don't say this lightly, I think I need help. Everything I know about this topic you started I learned by talking to the LLMs. And it's not boasting to say I can write for a couple hours about this Meta recruiting story. LLMs are far superior than the human generated links you ask for, but it's not acceptable yet to say, "Well, here's what AI found."

I'll go away now. Claude just finished an app for me. Took awhile.

Details? Everyone says this, but I have never seen examples or specifics.

 

[Judge Smails]

Am I reading this wrong? https://www.reuters.com/business/sa...-million-bonuses-openai-employees-2025-06-18/

Competition for AI talent has reached a feverish pitch as superstar researchers are being courted like professional athletes on the belief that individual contributors can make or break companies.

"They (Meta) started making giant offers to a lot of people on our team," Altman said on the Uncapped podcast that aired on Tuesday, hosted by his brother. "You know, like $100 million signing bonuses, more than that (in) compensation per year."

Which part are you unsure about Joe?

That they'd actually pay engineers $100 million signing bonuses.

One guy got $100M. Read the other 16 got between $7-40M

 

[Chaos34]

Details? Everyone says this, but I have never seen examples or specifics.

I'm tempted to move this to the AI thread because that's where the discussion belongs.

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, but I'll try.

First it's a bit unsettling when a preponderance of highly qualified AI founders, researchers, etc., are calmly acknowledging an existential risk - literally predicting the extinction of human beings. They discuss it in terms of probability p(doom) and a few think it's higher than 50%. Some think it's possible in our lifetimes, and I'm 63. In the other thread a couple of us point to the damage that can be done by bad actors, but that isn't the biggest concern. It's alignment: How do we make sure AI is aligned with human values? So far we can't. My current take is that it's impossible. I explained why to an LLM and it said, "Yeah, I hear ya. You might be right." Yet we race forward at breakneck speed. We can't slow down so China doesn't get there first.

On the other hand there's this discussion of tech advancement. Some with the best of credentials and reputations are suggesting a utopian earth is possible and very soon. Shortly after achieving AGI (which has a muddy definition). Some of them the same predicting doom. A jobless society of abundance. The end of money. Luxury homes and passenger drones for all. Not just universal basic income, but universal basic everything. Climate change solved. Billions of robots everywhere. Transhumanism: human brains plugged into AI creating genius hybrids. They don't just hype a cure for all diseases, but biological immortality through this transhumanism. Conflict resolution and genius governance: peace on earth everywhere. Utopia on one hand, extinction on the other. Mind-blowing to me.

Do I believe it all? I try not to form strong opinions. I'm a plebe, but I am obsessed with following the daily breakthroughs and ongoing discussion of what's coming. Are there roadblocks to all of this. Yes. They'll probably just slow things down a bit. China is stopping for no one, and things I read yesterday made me think they have a very good chance of winning the race, whatever that means. /endingb4essay

 

[Chaos34]

One guy got $100M. Read the other 16 got between $7-40M

Not according to three different AIs. 16 is unverified. No one got 100 milly bonus. The biggest package has been discussed - 200 million structured over several years, primarily vested stock. The bonus is estimated between 20-50 million. Compensation is heavily weighted toward stock and long-term retention. The largest numbers cited are total potential value, not immediate cash payouts.

 

[Harry Frogfish]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial.

There are 100s of threads this topic should be in front of...

Agree. I've said it repeatedly in the official thread. It should be 100 pages or more by now. I wish Joe used it. It made me not want to comment here, but the reality is finally being explained.

There is no evidence of verified 100 million dollar signing bonuses. These were multi-year compensation packages, carefully structured for retention, performance and of course tax advantages.

As far as I can tell Ruoming Pang’s deal is the largest ( though falsely claimed in this thread to be a $200 million signing bonus), but the vast majority is in stock and long-term incentives. His actual signing bonus, while likely very large, has not been disclosed and is almost certainly far less than the total $200 million. I've chased down info on 9 other poached employees, but does it really matter? These are incredibly high paying jobs despite the misinformation on bonuses. They're not Eugenes, Terminal. They're proven heavy hitters. Zuck has carefully sniped his ASI team.

I just want to emphasize what Harry said in the two quotes above. Let's use the official thread. There. is. so. much. happening.

ETA I don’t care one way or the other how many AI threads exist, but it’s disheartening that people immediately gravitate towards the investment value.

You are by far one of the best posters/assets on here. I hope I'm taking those comments the wrong way as I found it quite insulting. Nothing was "immediate" on my end, whatsoever. In fact, I waited for this to come to a hilt and simply thought separating it, finally, might be prudent. We are facing something unlike anything humans have ever dealt with.

Like it or not, it's all happening and at light speed. As such, different topics about the issue at hand is not far-fetched in the least. We're all well aware of what directing retirement investments into big tech did this last 3 decades, are we not? For untolds and the differences it made, is mind-blowing. This isn't the industrial revolution. Are the super wealthy going to stop?

I digress but the world today is what it is. I don't like it. But we also can't change it. And I don't think an explanation is necessary on that front.


Look, going up against this wrecking ball is all up to whomever, and good luck being content where you're at. I truly mean that, and to you specifically Term. You clearly deserve all you have and more, imo. But if the **** hits the fan for those that don't have the means when it does so, ignoring the aspects of this can end up devastating. Or worse.

So . . . helping them not get slaughtered by navigating a capitalistic society that does not have their best interests as a whole, is a discussion and possible solution(s), or help at a minimum, worth having.

To put it bluntly, for those that can profit off the inevitable, which is not necessarily meant to be some big, bad thing, is a conversation worth having. The moral aspects of such could be a thread all to itself, but back to AI "opportunities" here.

I mean, our healthcare system is a total joke, and that's just scratching the surface. As sad as it is, and god, very much so, but if it isn't every man for themselves these days, I don't know what is. So do I feel bad suggesting a topic to the braintrust here on where we are headed and how one might be able to profit on it? Nope. Especially not the next time I watch a family friend voluntarily (legally) take their own life, partially due (IMO) to the fact she was running out of funds.

Sorry about the sidetrack, but "investment value" early on would have helped that family, no question.

None of us chose this rat's nest, but it's where we're at. So I for one, am excited for @shuke to start us up the AI investment thread.

 

[Terminalxylem]

I think a thread dedicated to AI could be beneficial.

There are 100s of threads this topic should be in front of...

Agree. I've said it repeatedly in the official thread. It should be 100 pages or more by now. I wish Joe used it. It made me not want to comment here, but the reality is finally being explained.

There is no evidence of verified 100 million dollar signing bonuses. These were multi-year compensation packages, carefully structured for retention, performance and of course tax advantages.

As far as I can tell Ruoming Pang’s deal is the largest ( though falsely claimed in this thread to be a $200 million signing bonus), but the vast majority is in stock and long-term incentives. His actual signing bonus, while likely very large, has not been disclosed and is almost certainly far less than the total $200 million. I've chased down info on 9 other poached employees, but does it really matter? These are incredibly high paying jobs despite the misinformation on bonuses. They're not Eugenes, Terminal. They're proven heavy hitters. Zuck has carefully sniped his ASI team.

I just want to emphasize what Harry said in the two quotes above. Let's use the official thread. There. is. so. much. happening.

ETA I don’t care one way or the other how many AI threads exist, but it’s disheartening that people immediately gravitate towards the investment value.

You are by far one of the best posters/assets on here. I hope I'm taking those comments the wrong way as I found it quite insulting. Nothing was "immediate" on my end, whatsoever. In fact, I waited for this to come to a hilt and simply thought separating it, finally, might be prudent. We are facing something unlike anything humans have ever dealt with.

Like it or not, it's all happening and at light speed. As such, different topics about the issue at hand is not far-fetched in the least. We're all well aware of what directing retirement investments into big tech did this last 3 decades, are we not? For untolds and the differences it made, is mind-blowing. This isn't the industrial revolution. Are the super wealthy going to stop?

I digress but the world today is what it is. I don't like it. But we also can't change it. And I don't think an explanation is necessary on that front.


Look, going up against this wrecking ball is all up to whomever, and good luck being content where you're at. I truly mean that, and to you specifically Term. You clearly deserve all you have and more, imo. But if the **** hits the fan for those that don't have the means when it does so, ignoring the aspects of this can end up devastating. Or worse. So helping them not get slaughtered by navigating a capitalistic society that does not have their best interests as a whole, is a discussion and possible solution(s), or help at a minimum, worth having.

To put it bluntly, for those that can profit off the inevitable, which is not necessarily meant to be some big, bad thing, is a conversation worth having. The moral aspects of such could be a thread all to itself, but back to AI "opportunities" here.

I mean, our healthcare system is a total joke, and that's just scratching the surface. As sad as just that is, and god, very much so, but if it isn't every man for themselves these days, I don't know what is. So do I feel bad suggesting a topic to the braintrust here on where we are headed and how one might be able to profit on it? Nope. Especially not the next time I watch a family friend voluntarily (legally) take their own life, partially due (IMO) to the fact she was running out of funds.

Sorry about the sidetrack, but "investment value" early on would have helped that family, for sure.

None of us chose this rat's nest, but it's where we're at. So I for one, am excited for @shuke to start us up the AI investment thread.

Fair critique, and I’m sorry for the affront.

I understand why you took it personally, but I wasn’t trying to single you out. I know capitalizing on the next “big” thing is nothing new.

It’s just in this case, that very sentiment is probably why appropriate guardrails won’t be put in place, to limit the existential threat AI poses. That’s not for people like us to decide, however.