Gary Marcus

Rank 15 of 47

Score 76

@TheStalwart 1. Nobody is actually going to win this race by more than a few months.
2. Winning the race by a few months is not existential. (US got a GPT-5 level model first and so what?)
3. Many companies are working on similar tech and don’t need bailouts. i’d OpenAI fails, Google can

11/6/2025, 9:38:10 PM

In reply to:

Joe Weisenthal

@TheStalwart

What is the case against bailouts if winning the AI race against China is existential?

I'm not actually making this argument or have this view necessarily. But public money/backstops/bailouts seem like the natural endpoint of how AI is discussed at these levels.

David Sacks

@DavidSacks

There will be no federal bailout for AI. The U.S. has at least 5 major frontier model companies. If one fails, others will take its place.

The statement engages in a public discourse about the implications of AI development and the necessity of government bailouts in the context of international competition, particularly with China. It challenges the notion that winning the AI race is existential and suggests that the market has sufficient players to absorb any failures without government intervention.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not use harmful language and maintains a neutral tone, focusing on the argument rather than individuals. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement promotes understanding by providing a perspective that questions the necessity of bailouts, encouraging a broader view of the AI industry's resilience. [+1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in constructive dialogue by addressing the argument presented and providing a counterpoint without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]
Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
The statement upholds free speech principles by responsibly contributing to the debate on public policy regarding AI and government intervention. [+1]