Human nature admits a spectrum of outcomes on this, and I'd argue that most humans are not in fact pathologically acquisitive and power obsessed. Most humans value high status, but healthy societies confer high status in ways de-coupled from counterproductive Putinism. The people who attended the fifth Solvay Conference (that famous photo), who ran the Manhattan Project, who put men on the moon (or went) all were fabulously high status for good reasons with incentives that served society rather than parisitizing it. Those people got to be admired and enjoy the privileges of high status without bankrupting the body politic for countless commas.
This Bezos-style hyperaquisition isn't new exactly but it's not the constant norm its currently made out to be: its a sociecal failure mode with clear precedent but by no means a constant and its not at all obvious that it's inevitable.
I’d agree that most humans are not pathological power seekers; however I believe that’s exactly why we end up with successful pathological power seekers.
Like the world is learning with nukes, you cannot rely on the powerful for mercy. You can only rely on the powerful to grasp for more power and the only way to stop them is to yourself be as strong as possible.
If a utopia ever exists, it will only be because of a stalemate arms race (see: no nuclear powers have had an open war). Peaceful utopia is otherwise too easily disrupted by a single asshole with a big stick.
They’re the only AI lab with their own silicon.
Edit: they didn’t say “likely,” they just marveled at the talent + data + TPU + global data centers + not needing external investment.
If I recall correctly, their theory was that google could deliver tokens cheaper than anyone else.