If it were me, yeah, park it in bonds and live off the interest on a tropical beach. Spend my days spearfishing and drinking beers with the locals. Have no concerns except how even my tan is (and tbh I don't see myself caring too much about that).
> Also, do you have a better way to spend that money?
Yes, I do.
I am aware of some quite deep scientific results that would have a deep impact (and thus likely bring a lot of business value) if these were applied in practice.
downsize Facebook back to like a couple thousand people max, use the resulting savings to retire and start your own AI instead of doing the whole shadow artist "I'll hire John Carmack/top AI researcher to work for me because deep down I can't believe I'd ever be as good as them and my ego is too afraid to look foolish so I won't even try even if deep down that's what I want more than being a capricious billionaire"?
or am I just projecting my beliefs onto Mark Zuckerberg here?
It might make more sense to think of in terms of expected value. Whilst the probability may be low, the payoff is probably many times the $250M if their startup becomes successful.
It's strange that Zuck didn't just buy options on that guy? (Or did he? Would love to see the terms.)
Zuck's advantage over Sir Isaac (Newton) is that the market for top AI researchers is much more volatile than in South Sea tradeables pre-bubble burst?
Either that or 250M is cheap for cognitive behavior therapy
> What's the likelihood of that?
Sufficiently high that Meta is willing to pay such an amount of money. :-)
Also, do you have a better way to spend that money?
If it were me, yeah, park it in bonds and live off the interest on a tropical beach. Spend my days spearfishing and drinking beers with the locals. Have no concerns except how even my tan is (and tbh I don't see myself caring too much about that).
I'd forget the word shareholder even exists.
14 replies →
> Also, do you have a better way to spend that money?
Yes, I do.
I am aware of some quite deep scientific results that would have a deep impact (and thus likely bring a lot of business value) if these were applied in practice.
There are some problems in the world that Meta could help fixing with that money.
2 replies →
downsize Facebook back to like a couple thousand people max, use the resulting savings to retire and start your own AI instead of doing the whole shadow artist "I'll hire John Carmack/top AI researcher to work for me because deep down I can't believe I'd ever be as good as them and my ego is too afraid to look foolish so I won't even try even if deep down that's what I want more than being a capricious billionaire"?
or am I just projecting my beliefs onto Mark Zuckerberg here?
2 replies →
It might make more sense to think of in terms of expected value. Whilst the probability may be low, the payoff is probably many times the $250M if their startup becomes successful.
You can only one roll in the crapshoot of life though.
It's strange that Zuck didn't just buy options on that guy? (Or did he? Would love to see the terms.)
Zuck's advantage over Sir Isaac (Newton) is that the market for top AI researchers is much more volatile than in South Sea tradeables pre-bubble burst?
Either that or 250M is cheap for cognitive behavior therapy
What matters is whatever he believes the likelihood to be, not what it actually is.
In this AI hype environment? Seems doable to me.