>> A recurring theme presented, however, is that LLM's are somehow not controlled by the corporations which expose them as a service. The presenter made certain to identify three interested actors (governments, corporations, "regular people") and how LLM offerings are not controlled by governments. This is a bit disingenuous.

> I don't think that's what he said, he was identifying the first customers and uses.

The portion of the presentation I am referencing starts at or near 12:50[0]. Here is what was said:

  I wrote about this one particular property that strikes me
  as very different this time around.  It's that LLM's like
  flip they flip the direction of technology diffusion that
  is usually present in technology.

  So for example with electricity, cryptography, computing,
  flight, internet, GPS, lots of new transformative that have
  not been around.

  Typically it is the government and corporations that are
  the first users because it's new expensive etc. and it only
  later diffuses to consumer.  But I feel like LLM's are kind
  of like flipped around.

  So maybe with early computers it was all about ballistics
  and military use, but with LLM's it's all about how do you
  boil an egg or something like that.  This is certainly like
  a lot of my use.  And so it's really fascinating to me that
  we have a new magical computer it's like helping me boil an
  egg.

  It's not helping the government do something really crazy
  like some military ballistics or some special technology.

Note the identification of historic government interest in computing along with a flippant "regular person" scenario in the context of "technology diffusion."

You are right in that the presenter identified "first customers", but this is mentioned in passing when viewed in context. Perhaps I should not have characterized this as "a recurring theme." Instead, a better categorization might be:

  The presenter minimized the control corporations have by
  keeping focus on governmental topics and trivial customer
  use-cases.

0 - https://youtu.be/LCEmiRjPEtQ?t=770

Yeah that's explicitly about first customers and first uses, not about who controls it.

I don't see how it minimizes the control corporations have to note this. Especially since he's quite clear about how everything is currently centralized / time share model, and obviously hopeful we can enter an era that's more analogous to the PC era, even explicitly telling the audience maybe some of them will work on making that happen.

I took away from this a different message than what I think you did. I respect your perspective of same and that we respectfully disagree.