"End of all value" is pretty clearly referring to the extinction of the human species, not mere "AI alignment failure". The context is talking about x-risk.

> The new CEO of OpenAI said he’d rather Nazi’s take over the world forever than risk AI alignment failure

That's pretty much in line with Sam's public statements on AI risk (Sam, taking those statements as honest which may not be warranted, apparently also thinks the benefits of aligned AI are good enough to drive ahead anyway, and that wide commercial access with the limited guardrails OpenAI has provided users and even moreso Microsoft is somehow beneficial to that goal or at least low enough risk of producing the bad outcome, to be warranted, but that doesn't change that he is publicly on record as a strong believer in misaligned AI risks.)

He gotta be insane? I guess what he is trying to say is that those who want to selfhost open AIs are worse than Nazis? E.g. Llama? What is up with these people and pushing for corporate overlord only AIs.

The OpenAI folks seem to be hallucinating to rationalize why the "Open" is rather closed.

Organizations can't pretend to believe nonsense. They will end up believing it.

He's trying to say that AI-non-alignment would be a greater threat to humanity than having Nazis take over the world. It's perfectly clear.

Which means self-hosted AIs is worse than Nazis kicking in your door, since any self-hosted AI can be modified by a non big-tech aligned user.

He is dehumanizing programmers that can stop their sole reign on the AI throne, by labeling them as Nazis. Especially FOSS AI which by definition can't be "aligned" to his interests.

I'm not reading that at all