> The reason those two adopted doom marketing in the first place was because we're so used to CEOs making exclusively positive, dangerously optimistic claims ab

> The reason those two adopted doom marketing in the first place was because we're so used to CEOs making exclusively positive, dangerously optimistic claims about the future. By making a rare exception to that, they got a media bump (even though whether the tools benefit humanity is a separate question to whether they're powerful/profitable). Unlike you, I don't doubt that they believe the message of doom, risk to humanity. They're also not alone, there's a meaningful set of influential people who also think along those lines and are public about it.