The answer of course is nothing. But it's worth it to read the article to get to this gem of a final sentence.
"Larry Summers, a former treasury secretary, has said that so long as the state steps in, there is no reason to worry that svb will harm other parts of the financial system. Lots of people will be hoping that it does, and that he is right. fS"
Nevermind that no one outside of the "tech" company crowd cares what Larry Summers thinks, the sentence is cringingly ambiguous. What does "it" refer to: (a) the state stepping in or (b) SVB harming other parts of the financial system. Did ChatGPT produce this article.
Not only is there no need to worry about SVB harming other parts of the financial system, there is no need to read "articles" like this one. The amount of useful information is negligible.