It should be noted that the author doesn't shy away from that, and that his argument is convincing. He notes that while he is in the AI field, the actual cutting edge of AI development is done by a far smaller group of companies and researchers than the broader AI industry which includes his company.
Was there something specific in the article you found unconvincing, or that directly counters an experience you've had with AI?
I'm not making a statement on his arguments (well I dont agree with it, but that was not in my post).
I posted that because I consider blogging a fringe form of journalism, and basic journalism ethics require clear disclosure of conflict of interests.
His entire blog is very self serving. Which doesn't mean his opinion is wrong, but potentially not "cold" or impartial. More like a sales pitch probably. He is also very trasparent about his business but the article is posted here without that context, and I think it's important to point it out given the era of sensationalized and fake news we live in.
Was there something specific in the article you found unconvincing, or that directly counters an experience you've had with AI?