> I like how you clearly used AI to create this comparison. Probably used ChatGPT for it
Great catch! You should consider a career as a detective! I hope this sentence from the beginning of my post didn't make it too easy on your impressive deduction skills:
"If not, maybe we can ask ChatGPT about it (below is ChatGPT's "opinion" on the similarities between Enron and OpenAI):"
Still, it's pretty clear Enron and OpenAI are massively different companies. It's kinda strange that one would compare them at all. OpenAI is not even a public company. Their products have nothing alike. Their business models are nothing alike. One had literal fraud (maybe OpenAI does too but that would be speculation). Even if OpenAI dies, it's still the reason for $100s of billions in capex across the industry. It's still the reason why everyone in tech is talking and working on AI. And the product is real. You can use it. It's not a fancy demo with a mechanical turk behind the scenes.
> Still, it's pretty clear Enron and OpenAI are massively different companies.
They are. But there are enough parallels to me to be wary of them and their competitors. To me the amount of investments and hype doesn't match what's essentially a fancy autocomplete.
Well the biggest difference is most of the big foundation labs (OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI) are private companies, so it's not like you have to go out of your way to not hold any equity. This wasn't the case with Enron which was part of the SP500 and thus included in many passive funds.
You could say there's spillover with Nvidia and the clouds and such, but that still makes this a different case than Enron. It could be like the dotcom bubble, but bubbles != fraud.
Great catch! You should consider a career as a detective! I hope this sentence from the beginning of my post didn't make it too easy on your impressive deduction skills:
"If not, maybe we can ask ChatGPT about it (below is ChatGPT's "opinion" on the similarities between Enron and OpenAI):"