I mean, not as anything like a corporation. If they have to protect themselves with force, they’re a state or warlord, and will end up solving the same problems the same way.

Meaning no shareholders and no contracts, but on the other hand violent internal coups and endemic corruption (in the narrow sense of taking organisation money for yourself).

Edit: Funny story about this - a lot of big corporate guys don’t seem to get the distinction. They go and buy a bunker in New Zealand and think that will do them, but if you talk to the guards in charge of the bunker, they’ll say their plan when the apocalypse happens is to just kill their boss and move in themselves. Because there’s no state to stop them, and they’re better at violence than Mark Zuckerberg or whatever.