[palata]

The problem I see is that in our society, CEOs are chosen for their ability to convince that they can increase productivity. Not for their ability to improve the life of people.

Just like the paperclip AI issue, CEOs are optimising for arbitrary metrics, and they are really good at that (because we select them precisely for that).

So obviously, as soon as you start wondering about how competent a CEO is at talking about life, you're in for a treat. He obviously has no idea about life. He is just a successful paperclip production machine.

What scares me is that we select those people for their ability to convince that they will generate money, in the hope that they will actually do that, and then we value their opinion about completely unrelated topics.

You may as well ask a curling professional athlete what they think about the problem of AI and energy. Not that they necessarily will say something as dumb as Altman of course, but you wouldn't behave as if they were experts in the field of... you know... the impact of energy on humanity and life in general.