I suspect he won't want to get into thorny PR issues, but probably company organization. It's easy to imagine a disorganized startup scaling poorly, and those within it wanting guidance from highly-scaled FB.
It seems you are implying that this sort of arrangement is fundamentally unhealthy for a market focused on accurate price discovery, and I think that's trivially true.
Some investing incentives are aligned with accurate price discovery, some are not (warren buffet vs a pump and dump).
Seems like a minor technical challenge (at least in the case of games)
1. Set up a pseudo-adversary NN trained to recognize context-correct speech based on a small corpus.
2. Craft a GPT-3 prompt to get N 9s of accuracy
3.Retry if the answer fails the test from the other NN
4. Set a cap on retries based on how many 9s your prompt got
5. If cap exceeded, return a context-free or limited context response
As you said, we have a little bubble on guns & ammo in the US right now.
Basic NATO 5.56 - ie, cheap enough for practice or poorly equipped grunts - is probably ~$0.30/round. However, it doesn't specify the caliber or load.
Loads designed for combat and not practice - like armor piercing, barrier penetration, soft target performance, precision, short barrel optimized, etc. - could be ~2-7x more expensive, and more indicative of a serious organizational problem.
Small arms calibers could include .50BMG, which is also a much larger cost & problem.
From a terminal ballistics background, it seems very unlikely that this injury would appear to be a gunshot wound.
Bullets behave very differently according to their mass and velocity, not just their energy. A wound channel for this a particle would likely be very different from any bullet.