YC is wrong about LLMs for chip design

YC doesn't care whether it "makes sense" to use an LLM to design chips. They're as technically incompetent as any other VC, and their only interest is to pump out dogshit startups in the hopes it gets acquired. Gary Tan doesn't care about "making better chips": he cares about finding a sucker to buy out a shitty, hype-based company for a few billion. An old school investment bank would be perfect.

YC is technically incompetent and isn't about making the world better. Every single one of their words is a lie and hides the real intent: make money.

First, VCs don't get paid when "dogshit startups" get acquired, they get paid when they have true outlier successes. It's the only way to reliably make money in the VC business.

Second, want to give any examples of "shitty, hype-based compan[ies]" (I assume you mean companies with no real revenue traction) getting bought out for "a few billion".

Third, investment banks facilitate sales of assets, they don't buy them themselves.

Maybe sit out the conversation if you don't even know the basics of how VC, startups, or banking work?

> First, VCs don't get paid when "dogshit startups" get acquired

https://www.reuters.com/article/business/peloton-raises-12-b...

not how i would word it, but yeah, any VC today is going to pump AI knowing it's the wrong tool, so the more complex they make the application space the easier it is to find the proverbial sucker.

That’s an article about Peloton’s IPO.