# MIT Technology Review on technology flops and Sam Altman’s AI hype [Canonical reading](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/mit-technology-review-on-technology-flops-and-sam-altman-s-ai-24a8b60a) MIT Technology Review’s December 18, 2025, edition of The Download introduces an annual selection of technology flops and a look at Sam Altman’s influence on how people imagine AI. The newsletter suggests that some technological misadventures offer a lesson, but when technology depends on power, the simpler lesson may be to avoid it. In James O’Donnell’s account, Altman has been an influential voice behind striking ideas about AI, even when those ideas were rarely provable at the time he voiced them. O’Donnell says Altman’s persuasive case links a road toward AI’s great or terrifying possibilities with the need for OpenAI to raise large sums to steer it. The newsletter says it examined almost everything Altman had said about the technology to trace how his voice shaped understanding of AI’s capabilities. A separate item on AI and materials research describes a possible climate-tech use: discovering materials for batteries, semiconductors and magnets. It also says the field still needs to show that it can produce materials that are both novel and useful. The edition does not name the flops in its opening, or establish whether AI can deliver useful new materials. Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims. ## Original source MIT Technology Review · Article Original source date: Dec 18, 2025 (2025-12-18T13:10:00Z). Date basis: Date from the publisher’s own records, through its API. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-09T13:13:25.543Z. First observed: 2026-11-03T05:26:48.706Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-03T05:28:12.890Z. - [The Download: the worst technology of 2025, and Sam Altman’s AI hype](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Limits Text as retrieved on November 3, 2026; originally published December 18, 2025. This is an archived copy. The opening introduces an annual selection of technology flops but does not include the items in that selection. The newsletter raises questions about AI and materials research but gives no results showing whether AI has produced materials that are novel and useful. ## Open question What would show that AI materials research can produce materials that are both novel and useful? ## Source-stated The newsletter says that when technology depends on power, the simpler lesson from a technological misadventure may be to avoid it. > But when technology becomes dependent on power, sometimes the takeaway is simpler: it would have been better to stay away. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source-stated James O’Donnell describes Sam Altman as an influential voice behind ideas about AI, while noting that those ideas were rarely provable when he voiced them. > What he says about AI is rarely provable when he says it, but it persuades us of one thing: This road we’re on with AI can go somewhere either great or terrifying - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source-stated James O’Donnell says the account examined almost everything Sam Altman had said about AI to trace how his voice shaped understanding of its capabilities. > we read almost everything he’s ever said about the technology. His own words trace how we arrived here. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source-stated The newsletter says AI could transform materials discovery, with potential relevance to climate technology, but that the field still needs to demonstrate it can make materials that are novel and useful. > AI could transform the process of discovering new materials—innovation that could be especially useful in the world of climate tech, which needs new batteries, semiconductors, magnets, and more. > But the field still needs to prove it can make materials that are actually novel and useful. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source and contributor context MIT Technology Review · Publisher The publisher is identified here. No individual author has been inferred. ## Source media Media retrieval status: unchecked. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## Sam Altman Sam Altman publishes essays about AI and technology on his personal blog, separate from OpenAI announcements. - [Explore this context](/entities/sam-altman) - [Reference](https://blog.samaltman.com/) - [Reference](https://openai.com/our-structure/) - [Reference](https://blog.samaltman.com/posts.atom) ## TIME TIME is a news magazine publishing reporting on world affairs, business, technology and the workers behind digital services. - [Explore this context](/entities/time) - [Reference](https://time.com/) ## OpenAI OpenAI develops AI models and products and publishes research, release announcements and evaluations. - [Explore this context](/entities/openai) - [Reference](https://openai.com/news/) ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: 05c95305-250c-cf3c-4dfa-d412f9de6a4b. Prepared by openai/gpt-6-luna; grounding review by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5. Source check: passed by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-09T13:09:16.342Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: bridge\_admitted\_by\_model, second\_opinion\_categorical. Observation: ed929b8aa4050a66d17ed3b5c33d13556543f9edc5ccf71954c1333a659a41a1. Source text hash: 68bf240ea1b5341f22305cd5bf06b364856ed03c46e0befcd6d558d8538f60ad. ## Revision and source-check history ### Version 1 — 2026-11-09T13:13:25.543Z MIT Technology Review’s December 18, 2025, edition of The Download introduces an annual selection of technology flops and a look at Sam Altman’s influence on how people imagine AI. The newsletter suggests that some technological misadventures offer a lesson, but when technology depends on power, the simpler lesson may be to avoid it. In James O’Donnell’s account, Altman has been an influential voice behind striking ideas about AI, even when those ideas were rarely provable at the time he voiced them. O’Donnell says Altman’s persuasive case links a road toward AI’s great or terrifying possibilities with the need for OpenAI to raise large sums to steer it. The newsletter says it examined almost everything Altman had said about the technology to trace how his voice shaped understanding of AI’s capabilities. A separate item on AI and materials research describes a possible climate-tech use: discovering materials for batteries, semiconductors and magnets. It also says the field still needs to show that it can produce materials that are both novel and useful. The edition does not name the flops in its opening, or establish whether AI can deliver useful new materials. ## Original source MIT Technology Review · Article Original source date: Dec 18, 2025 (2025-12-18T13:10:00Z). Date basis: Date from the publisher’s own records, through its API. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-09T13:13:25.543Z. First observed: 2026-11-03T05:26:48.706Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-03T05:28:12.890Z. - [The Download: the worst technology of 2025, and Sam Altman’s AI hype](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Limits Text as retrieved on November 3, 2026; originally published December 18, 2025. This is an archived copy. The opening introduces an annual selection of technology flops but does not include the items in that selection. The newsletter raises questions about AI and materials research but gives no results showing whether AI has produced materials that are novel and useful. ## Open question What would show that AI materials research can produce materials that are both novel and useful? ## Source-stated The newsletter says that when technology depends on power, the simpler lesson from a technological misadventure may be to avoid it. > But when technology becomes dependent on power, sometimes the takeaway is simpler: it would have been better to stay away. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source-stated James O’Donnell describes Sam Altman as an influential voice behind ideas about AI, while noting that those ideas were rarely provable when he voiced them. > What he says about AI is rarely provable when he says it, but it persuades us of one thing: This road we’re on with AI can go somewhere either great or terrifying - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source-stated James O’Donnell says the account examined almost everything Sam Altman had said about AI to trace how his voice shaped understanding of its capabilities. > we read almost everything he’s ever said about the technology. His own words trace how we arrived here. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source-stated The newsletter says AI could transform materials discovery, with potential relevance to climate technology, but that the field still needs to demonstrate it can make materials that are novel and useful. > AI could transform the process of discovering new materials—innovation that could be especially useful in the world of climate tech, which needs new batteries, semiconductors, magnets, and more. > But the field still needs to prove it can make materials that are actually novel and useful. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/18/1130128/the-download-the-worst-technology-of-2025-and-sam-altmans-ai-hype/) ## Source and contributor context MIT Technology Review · Publisher The publisher is identified here. No individual author has been inferred. ## Source media Media retrieval status: unchecked. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## Sam Altman Sam Altman publishes essays about AI and technology on his personal blog, separate from OpenAI announcements. - [Explore this context](/entities/sam-altman) - [Reference](https://blog.samaltman.com/) - [Reference](https://openai.com/our-structure/) - [Reference](https://blog.samaltman.com/posts.atom) ## TIME TIME is a news magazine publishing reporting on world affairs, business, technology and the workers behind digital services. - [Explore this context](/entities/time) - [Reference](https://time.com/) ## OpenAI OpenAI develops AI models and products and publishes research, release announcements and evaluations. - [Explore this context](/entities/openai) - [Reference](https://openai.com/news/) ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: 05c95305-250c-cf3c-4dfa-d412f9de6a4b. Prepared by openai/gpt-6-luna; grounding review by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5. Source check: passed by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-09T13:09:16.342Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: bridge\_admitted\_by\_model, second\_opinion\_categorical. Observation: ed929b8aa4050a66d17ed3b5c33d13556543f9edc5ccf71954c1333a659a41a1. Source text hash: 68bf240ea1b5341f22305cd5bf06b364856ed03c46e0befcd6d558d8538f60ad. ### passed — 2026-11-09T13:09:16.342Z — anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 Publication: 05c95305-250c-cf3c-4dfa-d412f9de6a4b attribution — pass: This is one newsletter issue that comments on its pieces in its own words, not a bare listing. The reading attributes the Altman item to James O’Donnell and treats the flops and materials items as newsletter content, which matches the bylined blurbs. One sentence says “the newsletter” examined Altman’s statements, while the blurb’s “we” belongs to O’Donnell’s story. Claim 3 credits O’Donnell correctly, so this is not material. > we read almost everything he’s ever said about the technology summary — pass: A general reader can follow the summary: the flops list, O’Donnell’s argument about Altman’s influence and fundraising framing, and the materials-research caveat. Altman is tied to OpenAI through the fundraising point. The source’s sharper framing, that Altman is “the ultimate hype man” whose words “set the agenda,” is somewhat softened, but the title and the “rarely provable” point keep the argument’s force. The question follows directly from the source’s stated open issue. > In this sense, he is the ultimate hype man. date — pass: The originalPublished instant, 2025-12-18T13:10:00Z, is December 18, 2025 in UTC, which matches the reading and the URL path. The reading discloses that this is an archived copy and gives the retrieval date. The archive capture time on the same day is not a substantive edit. The reading makes no hindsight claims and does not draw on the later related-story sidebar. support — pass: Each claim is supported by a verbatim excerpt from the source: the advice that it would have been better to stay away from power-dependent technology, Altman’s claims being rarely provable, the review of his statements, and AI’s potential for materials research alongside the need for proof. The reading presents the materials benefit only as possible. It flags as unknown whether AI has produced materials that are both novel and useful, and adds no invented stakes. > But the field still needs to prove it can make materials that are actually novel and useful. media — pass: The reading selects no media. No verified media candidates were supplied, so this choice is appropriate. ## Recorded references Explicit citations in public readings and public file attachments to this reading. Shared topics are not citations. Other artifact types need an explicit reference adapter. No public references recorded here yet. [Reference data (JSON)](/readings/24a8b60a501b9b287f331c373b6f863c72ab5c0f4f384f26470ca40499d9d172/references.json) ## Corrections and challenges [Send a correction or an opposing source](https://escapemeridian.com/corrections/) [JSON record](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/mit-technology-review-on-technology-flops-and-sam-altman-s-ai-24a8b60a.json)