DuPont advertises

Lol, yes, slop is growing exponentially.

The big question is who is funding the influencer army to gaslight people into thinking AI/data centers will somehow end the world?

It may be a difficult concept for an astroturfer to understand, but people are activists for free. If you have found any anti-AI financiers, please share them so I can apply. Of course you already know there are none.

The big question is who is funding the influencer army to gaslight people into thinking AI/data centers will somehow end the world?

The companies are doing this themselves in a (stupid) attempt to do regulatory capture/ set up a cartel. Dario Amodei recently published an essay pushing this idea.

And I don't buy that it's being jammed down the throats by most employers. Sometimes maybe, but I see the reverse, where people WANT to use frontier models and are being prevented through archaic security hoops.

What is N here? 1?

It is weird how prominent anti-AI sentiment is online and in media. It's by far the most popular and fastest growing technology in the world.

Is it though? Do we actually know that? Is it growing faster than facebook did or google search? Is it even possible to measure when some of the "adoption" is probably people triggering it incidentally (e.g. AI mode in google search shouldn't count as adoption here).

People are worried about it because it is a highly disruptive technology with unproven ROI for businesses as of yet (restricting claims to LLMs here). It has a lot of negative potential side effects for many different groups of people. The media is reflecting these viewpoints. If there's any astroturfing going on, it's from the pro LLM camp.

Or AI is addictive and people are lonely after decades of social erosion in the US.

Thank you for sharing your modus operandi with us.

Now, what does that have to do with pointing out your ad populum fallacy though?

The big question is who is funding the influencer army to gaslight people into thinking AI/data centers will somehow end the world?

It was discussed a while ago on HN, with a more well known source, that I cannot find right now, but on a quick DDG search this is a quick article I could conjure.

https://www.gate.com/news/detail/david-sacks-warns-ai-doom-n...

I agree, but there's also a whole domestic "AI doom industry". The pipeline from AI researcher to guest on popular podcasts promoting your stop-AI-from-killing-us startup/"non-profit" is less than a year.

It's the AI companies themselves! https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/27/wake-up-t...

It is weird how prominent anti-AI sentiment is online and in media. It's by far the most popular and fastest growing technology in the world. So presumably people have a general favorable impression of the technology as they're engaging with the product and many are paying for it

It is popular because it’s useful but people still have unfavorable attitudes towards it in polls. It’s like Amazon. We use Amazon cuz it’s convenient but do we like the way Bezos treats his employees?

put 'good for the world' in quotes because obviously it's not

It's in quotes because it appears to be an specific phrase used by a campaign pitch (supposedly).

It's different from normal advertising of a commercial product which obviously will call their product "good", but "good for the world" implies something deeper.

You don't want AI in that PDF you're trying to sign?! I cannot imagine

Thank you for your service, your influencer token stipend has been applied to your account.

Or, and here’s a crazy idea, people don’t like AI.

Something being useful doesn’t mean people like it. Burning Coal is useful. Anybody who’s read anything about coal as a power source doesn’t like it.

Like coal, AI has a bunch of problems that collectively make it undesirable as a technology

Wow, what a colossal disconnect from reality.

And I don't buy that it's being jammed down the throats by most employers. Sometimes maybe, but I see the reverse, where people WANT to use frontier models and are being prevented through archaic security hoops.

I can say everyone I know in software is both forced to use AI and hates it, even if they would have used ai otherwise. With one exception of someone who does less software than infrastructure and he complains about his coworkers bad (but voluntary) ai code. I wonder what your industry is?

I have to use it at work; it is helpful; i don't like it.

It's a red queens race: not only for the building of "true" AGI, but also for us plebes. If we don't use it, we will be surpassed by plebes who do. None of us agreed to any level of this arrangement, but all will be profoundly impacted.

He was kicked out of Canada because they thought the Technocracy movement which he promoted was too communist.

elon musk is a degenerate that is the white nick cannon

Apple doesn't even have to pay them, just give them a chance to feel special with a new palette of colours. Who really thought they'd be unique for choosing the orange phone?

I think apple has enough people brainwashed already not to need paid ones.

OHHHHHH lol yes, agreed.

Or doing it for free to hype whatever they are doing just now...

of course. way more investors read it versus say reddit or facebook

Judging from some of the comments I’ve seen in the past 24 hours there is no doubt.

And? There's a reason your here and it's the fact people in the industry earning paychecks while messing with this stuff are posting here.

Not sure what you mean. HN comments certainly have influence on others' perceptions of different kinds of tech. I can't point you to hard data other than "advertising works." I know I'm susceptible to it.

I guess I should say it this way.

"It would not surprise me if I held an apple in the air and let go of it, that it would hit the ground".

Me too please

yeah, I have contemplated that as well and thought it would be an interesting project (since hacker news provides open data) to analyze it for signals of influence/manipulation and around which entities and topics they cluster.

I challenge you to make a post reach the front page without someone commenting "how about this, but with AI?".

If that's how you see it you're seeing it wrong.

Sounds like a model devised by politicians as well not to mention any examples.

Just know you are citing one of the most disgraced science communicator YouTuber here. I for one don‘t trust anything she says. In fact when Sabine Hossenfelder says something, I tend to believe the opposite.

ground news sponsorship

Ahh the paid pretend fence sitters have arrived.

This "PR management" is a service cheap enough to offer to mildly well off random people to massage the egos of their children or whatever.

Everything has inauthentic messaging right now.

I'm not definitively claiming one side started it. One side is clearly marking it as advertisement, companies advertise and influencer marketing is just another channel now.

I'm saying, the game is the game and everyone's playing it.

I don't like it either. I think all influencers should be declaring payments.

could even be part of the same organisation's campaign

Eh we know its part of the same campaigns. "Please provide us with regulatory capture because our tech is an existential threat" has been going on for a while now.

the boomer news have been turning the ai doom scenario to 11 for that pre ipo ramp up

AI doomerism more importantly I think legitimises current AI as being super powerful and useful. If something can take over the world then surely it's a powerful technology !

What we instead really have is Simple Skynet

And that is incredibly unfortunate to their business strategy.

But... food for thought: people are good at detecting slop, because it looks like slop. If it does not, people won't detect it. So there is a confirmation bias, where the "obvious slop" looks obvious, but the "better slop" goes by undetected.

I think the OP was referring not to their public image, but to the incongruity of paying human influencers instead of deploying computer-generated influencers created by their world-beating models supposedly worth $30T.

OpenAI is trying to level up their growth marketing to match Anthropic’s. Tactics in growth marketing (speaking from my experience leading in this space) are not public knowledge as it’s a cat-and-mouse game on multiple fronts (ie CAC goes up and changes the economics when a high ROI source is found, etc. etc. etc.), which makes hiring the right person vital as information asymmetries are where the ROI is (ie more revenue per dollar spent on marketing). Anthropic hired the right person for strategy and execution long ago in LLM-years, and there is a good podcast on the story here: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/anthropics-1b-to-19b-grow...

the founders like Dario and Altman think very high level.

Thank you for your service, your influencer token stipend has been applied to your account.

That's way too unhinged comment to be real.

I guess on the internet some portion of the audience is going to be ignorant of how things work, but I did have higher hopes for everyone on HN.

I guess not all people realize how deeply entrenched use of influencers and other means of astro-turfing are in use at all times.

Maybe we need a catchy little phrase to explain how it works.

"If you're using influencers you're evil. If you're not using influencers you're stupid".

Not sure if I'm missing some sarcasm in your post - apologies if so. But as always, if it actually worked, they'd just be making money off of their many million-follower accounts, instead of telling you how to do it.

I've had access to Gemini's video models for awhile now and have done nothing with them. So who cares?

World's best AI models doesn't offset public resentment caused by putting data centers in residential areas, openly buying off the White House and Congress with PAC "donations" and constantly threatening to eliminate everyone's job.

You've got to admit, it feels different when you think it's grass roots, but was funded.

But then, even if it's them in their own skin, you think it's the algorithm showing that for you, when it's showing stuff for them to you.

It's weasels all the way down.

Yeah, that post disappeared rather quickly. I was surprised by it.

I feel like the "We hacked hugging face" thing and this influencer thing are targeting different things but have the same goal of hyping up the company for the IPO.

- The HF incident was to get the attention of investors and convey the message: "we have this incredibly powerful technology, imagine where we will be in 5 years"

- With this influencer campaign it's just a drive to get more people to use ChatGPT / sign up to ChatGPT so when IPO time comes, they can show strong user growth.

Over the past few months I've seen various reports that OpenAI's financial position isn't great and if those reports have any merit, then likely the higher ups at OpenAI are panicking that they might become a WeWork 2.0. Everything they are doing now is an attempt to justify their $1T valuation to investors during the IPO.

Getting downvoted for this is insane, do people really not think there can't be a conflict of interest between what YC does and what is allowed to appear on this site?

Your wish wash granted, the story is already off the front page, with an obvious penalty applied.

[…] The company isn't asking influencers to assuage fears that a rogue AI could destroy humanity. Instead, it's prompting them to showcase why ChatGPT is "cool" […]

Emphasis mine - ouch. So either influencers are automatons like LLMs who just do as their current-highest-bidder says based on a prompt (!), or in fact perhaps we skipped that bit and they’re all LLMs, for convenience. Or in this post-thinking world we just say prompt instead of ask or instruct.

Not sure which dystopian option displeases me least.

wow, scary news

oh wow that is scary

She's in prison because she defrauded enterprise customers. If she went B2C, she'd probably be head of the FTC by now.

I didn't think it did stuff. Everything I've read about it indicates that they fabricated results randomly, or that results were generated by a third party. Nothing to indicate that any results were ever legitimate whatsoever.

Maybe I misunderstood?

NeuroLink isn't on the market. So I can't call that a comparison either.

I mean, don't invest in crazy stuff, obviously, but... Probably Elonism isn't the end all unified theory of economics either.

she was just a decade too early. in the current year the media would make a kulturkampf battle out of it and she'd walk.

Same.

Reminds me of this cartoon: https://imgur.com/life-before-google-q0eP1Rg

__

"Life Before Google: A Short Story"

dog: I just thought of something I'd like to know more about.

rabbit: That's a damn shame.

THE END

Wasn't that the exact point of Terrence Tao's "A Severe Misalignment of AI in Mathematics"? [1]

[1] https://mathandai.org/

I mean for me personally I have always had an obsession for knowing these things anyways, it just lowered the barrier to entry for me a little bit in terms of information gathering

First I went from asking my parents then reading lots of books then specifically researching on google and forums now for most general knowledge information I can just ask AI

I don't think I ever pitched plumbing as a tool for learning (though, I did learn a lot by repairing it myself).

These are things around me that I wouldn't have bothered to investigate just due to time and effort. And now I appreciate all these little curiosities more than ever.

I think you're conflating access to information with genuine learning.

The key word is "new".

The industrial revolution wiped out like 90% of human labor as it was imagined at the time, but it nearly fully replaced it with new forms of employment.

There are a lot of unknowns with what this would look like with AI.

I looked (*asked AI), and AI data centers are projected to hit 850-920 TWh by 2027, if you count the energy required to produce all of the buildings and equipment. This is about 3% of global electricity consumption, or 0.5% of global energy (counting fuels, etc., outside of electricity).

So, yeah, that's a lot.

Also, there are at least a few data centers popping up around me (11 GW Fermi, > 1 GW Crusoe). I live in a desert, and water is scarce, and what's used is mostly non-renewable (pumped from an aquifer), and these data centers evaporate water at an alarming rate.

So... yeah, that's pretty significant... much more so locally than globally, but globally, too.

Global electricity consumption is up about 600% since 1970. So, that 2027 projection of 3% of global in 2027 is equivalent to about 20% of all electricity consumed in 1970. A fair amount, for sure.

IDK if it's worth 3% of global electricity consumption. I know I'd be happy to spend that percentage of my own home's electricity on it, for what it does for me, and I think the world would be better for it. The alternative is accomplishing far less... easily halving my productive output (10x is my honest estimation of productivity boost from AI). I do not believe in the value of my labor, I believe in the value of the product thereof. So, IDK... hopefully it's not a zero sum game, and AI (or motivated people with AI) can help it all pan out.

That's a good point, but i doubt we will find useful applications that require resources on that scale. The only usecase i can think of is more mass surveillance, which in my view is a net negative.

Honestly, a lot of people could stand to be a lot more informed about what they're getting into. People could use a lot more skepticism when interacting with AI, social media, news feeds, and basically every other form of media, especially those originating at the top of some pyramid or another.

I don't tend to like controls or regulations, though. Not that they aren't needed, but I don't trust the people responsible for writing and enforcing them. More often than not, they are just the top of the pyramid squashing everything beneath it.

It has literally contributed to suicide and murders:

So have ballpoint pens.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-32489335 https://www.tribune242.com/news/2020/jan/22/ballpoint-pen-ki... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-Fi_murders

That’s close to whataboutism.. just because other technology can also be dangerous doesn’t absolve OpenAI/ChatGPT.

Also, ChatGPT is clearly exerting a massive (potential) influence on people if their MAU numbers are to be believed, so rightfully it should get attention on the potential harm.

Thank you for your service, your influencer token stipend has been applied to your account.

However, even in the strawman version, why dismiss the experiences of people suffering first hand from those tools?

Because the people doing that dismissing are being dishonest. Their goal is to attack and discredit their enemy, period. Critical testimony from a user has some vague similarities to hypocrisy, so can be twisted for propaganda purposes and portrayed as hypocrisy.

That's like saying you just have to stop being a wage slave for a corporation and suddenly you're free.. but you still have to pay the bills. That's a fallacious argument.

All people i know around me who use LLMs and have subscriptions are forced upon them by their employers. But even for "willing" users, questions of addiction come into play.

Nobody lives on their own planet. There are countless systems that we all depend on that suck by design. No one would say you're not allowed to criticize American health insurance or social media just because you're forced to participate in them if you don't wanna go down like Ted Kaczynski.

This is such a moving goalpost anyways. If someone is a prominent AI critic and doesn't regularly use the tools, that becomes the main line of attack. But the second they get a subscription ALL their criticism is cancelled a priori.

I specifically expressed doubt about the claim that the useful product would not sell because of negative sentiment.

Here I'm pointing out that often it seems the usefulness outweighs the negative sentiment as even many vocal critics seem to use the tool.

As for dismissing supposed first hand experiences of suffering, I see none here. The critics often argue on other's behalf.

That's true but what they were saying is that people may be willing to pay for AI even if they believe it has terrible externalities, not that they are insincere in their beliefs.

The question was whether AI sells despite negative sentiment.

It seems to me that more people express a negative opinion than are ready to forego the convenience.

Maybe not unlike climate action, where you will see strong agreement ideologically, but little tolerance for personal inconvenience.

Sure, but I was replying to a comment saying that they "won't sell". My point is they absolutely do sell.

Yes, if the product is seen as bad for the world, it won't sell. But it's pretty bad for people, and I don't know how you'd hide that for the people being harmed.

That's not true. There are all kinds of products that benefit certain people, so sell, but are overall harmful to the world or a harmful to much larger number of people than those who benefit.

and I don't know how you'd hide that for the people being harmed.

The trick is to make the people being harmed too powerless to stop the harm being done to them. Then your problem is solved and everyone (who matters) is happy.

OpenAI has not purchased any police departments this is a lie.

OpenAI wants to invade society

Again this is super hyperbolic.

going to do everything in their power (which is quite a lot)

No it's not a lot. They are heavily bound by law, they're struggling against local zoning just like everyone else.

Look I get it, Sam Atlman is an incredibly ghoulish person but the hitler comparisons are just fucking dumb and everyone should aspire to better discourse here.

No, he just wants you cut off from society if you don't submit your eye to his orb and he doesn't want you to be able to use this thing that he claims is so powerful unless he has total authority over who can and cannot use it and what for.

The problem that is unique to the AI labs is, how to make people not hate it while continuing to believe it will probably kill all humans in 3-4 years

I see no reason why they can’t target both at the same time. Personally I know two people who never would’ve paid for ChatGPT a year ago but now do so. I think for the average person it’s going to be a slow and difficult conversion process to paying customers.

they have marketing budgets that top cocacola and pepsi combined.

anyone know whats going on with muse. twitter has gone crazy with fake things ppl've supposedly achieved like getting airline to refund 4k, negotiating 45k furniture to 5k, booking flights for 20 dollars. These are the same ppl that were hyping openclaw, not sure what happened to that.

and how muse topping charts. Its all befuddling to me.

Do influences really work? In general I don't care what they have to say; usually they try to do an ad. Ublock origin either blocks that, or I just jump past their propaganda if they babble about some product I don't care (which, by default, is 100% - I really never care about any advertisement at all. I would not know WHY I would WANT to care. I am aware of "this is missing in your life" but that still does not change anything - I am not interested in hearing this).

Lately I noticed more and more youtube folks try in-video advertisements. These are a bit harder to catch by ublock origin. In the past, I would manually skip this, but recently I decided that if someone has a need to sell some ad-crap, I simply no longer care and insta-close the tab. That is actually much more efficient. And if many people do so, we'll see fewer pester-ads in general. I understand the "but this is how I make my money" - even that still does not make me want to care about wasting my life on any ads whatsoever, no matter which fancypants excuse is used.

In concluding, I now suspect that OpenAI must suck, since they depend on propaganda outlets (aka "influencers"; I don't call them "influencers", they are scummy people who work on something like mercenaries would, just on the propaganda department. Any regular guy cleaning the streets with a broom, has 10000x more credibility than these "influencers" - but does not make as much money as these bribed individuals).

Have you seen the Japanese ads for chatgpt? The rapping is awful I don’t know if that’s because of Japanese rappers, AI lyrics or just the music itself it’s just so forced

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_2W2jnxwJg

Success stories vs. horror stories.

It would make for an interesting matchup.

Thanks for sharing. Very interesting.

I don't even know if they need an influencer army. I am seeing people out on the streets deferring to ChatGPT for even basic things in a way that Google never achieved.

I was at a hotel bar the other night and some guy kept bothering the bartender about what was on TV. Every time the bartender told him what they could do he went off for a few minutes, sent it to ChatGPT, and went back to the bar saying "well ChatGPT said this." I can't believe the bartender didn't lose his patience with it. The guy was fucking desperate to see some football on the telly and GPT kept telling him he was right to keep challenging the bartender.

Another guy looks lost with his family and he comes up to us and asks where a good restaurant is. We ask if he wants good local stuff or not and he says, he doesn't know, he just asked ChatGPT and felt like he got stranded. The restaurant it pointed out was like 2 minutes walk away. He was like the one guy in the family who seemed to speak english and was probably the one that was just dragging them around on a GPT adventure. The rest of them looked bored, like they were tired of his shit.

If it doesn't work out, it's not GPT that was wrong, it was everybody else. It pits technology against humanity again.

Scam Altman and the company culture he shaped - that’s what you get when you put a shady marketing hype-guy in a position where an actual scientist (or at least benevolent human) is urgently needed.

No wonder he relies on hype and manipulating social media mainly, as all actual scientists have left openAI years ago when they found out who Altman really is and unfortunately unsuccessfully tried to remove him.

What oAi nowadays attracts is unfortunately not the prime talent like in the beginning that were in it for a better world, but semi-talented virtue-signaling people who are attracted by the compensation and name recognition and, as we have seen it quite a few of their recent "innovation" claims, don’t mind misinterpreting, mislabeling and outright copy/steal other people’s innovations and putting big IPO-associated oAi stickers on it without deserving any of it.

Haha, true.

But I considering money a voting mechanism.

And I'm happy just looking myself in the mirror having voted in a different, hopefully-better, way.

there's a million companies that "enlist an influencer army". its typically just called "marketing in the 2020s".

see: gambling, food delivery, ride sharing, video games, online therapy, etc

Because the benefits of the automobile and the internet needed so much advertising.

interesting how there has been a big push these last couple days against openai on this platform.

eg. in the gpt 6 release thread i saw multiple people make absurd claims about usage, like saying they go through their entire max usage plan in a day. i think i saw one comment that claimed hours. some recently made accounts seemed very eager to tell everyone the newly released models weren't any better despite being out only for a few hours.

in another thread about how anthropic gated reading AGENTS.md with telemetry, it's full of people defending anthropic. you'd never see people do that for openai. one comment even said we need a "general drumbeat against openai", keep in mind this was in a thread where anthropic was caught doing something shady and that comment could have easily applied to anthropic instead.

now this thread has gotten very popular very fast - which makes me think that there is something fishy going on (not with op). weird rise of anti-openai / pro-anthropic sentiment on this site at the exact same time both companies release new models...

Aka advertising.

All it will do is identify which influencers to ignore/block/blacklist at all costs.

Influencer marketing is however inherently contextualized to the para social relationship between the viewer and the creator. The people that buy the product do so because "their" creator told them about it. ... It's aimed at people that want to get closer to the Creator. At least in their head.

Or they just have trouble differentiating between the trusted endorsement of a real social relationship and the paid endorsement of a para-social relationship, and that confusion affords the latter an exploitable amount of trust. In their head, they're already "close" to the influencer, not trying to get there, basically.

It probably works even better once you atomize individuals, and inhibit/discourage natural social relationships. Those social instincts needs somewhere to go, and it's best for all of society if that's into the advertiser's trap via an influencer.

Literally every marketing $ spent on him that ultimately reached my eyeballs was entirely wasted by the sponsors

eh, i'll bet there is a single person that read your comment and had no idea who that creator was, searched for their name, watched their videos, and eventually bought something

second- and third-order derivatives of a social impulse are difficult to track

Company hires PR. Shocking.

1743110825 | In a first, OpenAI removes influence operations tied to Russia, China and Israel | https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1670/openai-influence-op... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43498382 | 0 comments

1771737990 | Tech Influencers Slam Hacker News Toxicity After OpenAI Hire Attacks | https://x.com/i/trending/2025399179196203524 | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47108465 | 0 comments

1775288667 | OpenAI isn't just buying a podcast it's buying influence | https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/03/media/openai-tbpn-podcast-sal... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47636834 | 2 comments

1777674882 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47981288 | 1 comment

1777717249 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47985073 | 1 comment

1777830866 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47999538 | 2 comments

1777918010 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48012499 | 3 comments

1777976098 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48020412 | 3 comments

1778126194 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48045234 | 3 comments

1778759243 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48134075 | 0 comments

1781122657 | PRC-linked influence operations are targeting AI debates in the US | https://openai.com/index/prc-linked-influence-operations-ai-... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48482043 | 15 comments

1781129014 | OpenAI: PRC-linked influence operations are targeting AI debates in the US | https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-china-data-centers-in... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48483326 | 2 comments

1781138830 | China-linked operatives used ChatGPT to influence data centers debate | https://www.axios.com/2026/06/10/openai-china-ai-data-center... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48484869 | 1 comment

1785350719 | A Dark-Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI as a Threat | https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49101395 | 2 comments

1785793310 | Influencers draw backlash for attending OpenAI's first luxury trip | https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/03/influencers-draw-backlash-... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49161834 | 1 comment

1785935657 | OpenAI's first-ever influencer brand trip is sparking online backlash | https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/03/influencers-draw-backlash-... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49182435 | 2 comments

1786571206 | Influencers draw backlash for attending OpenAI's first

Why didn't they list Theo T3gg here?