cheonn638

> theyre food delivery robots, thats not a gun that a drink dispenser!"

You underestimate how many top AI scientists are perfectly okay with building autonomous weapons systems and are not ashamed of it.

Me, and 99% of HN readers, will gladly pull the trigger to release a missile from a drone if we are paid even just US$1,000,000/year.

Now note that many L7+ at OpenAI are making $10 million+ per year.

> every change starts with a few people, and then it grows

your opinion is defense contracts are bad

my opinion is defense contracts are good

who is correct? probably me since 99.9% of Googlers won’t leave over this

> If I'm paying $200+ a month I should be able to saturate Google with requests

Says who? You?

The customer? Who always wants a lower price?

> If this surveillance bothers you, show up!!

Bothers me, but not enough to drive to city hall

Doesn’t even bother me enough to send an email quite frankly

>All it takes is a tiny drone with a stick attached, and at the end of that stick is a tiny sponge soaked with tempera paint. Drone goes 'boop' on the camera lens, and the entire system is disabled until an expensive technician drives out with a ladder and cleans the lens at non-trivial expense

Americans don’t care enough

Too busy enjoying S&P500 near 7,000 and US$84,000/year median household income

> That great commons that are the multi trillion dollar corporations that could buy multiple countries?

Exactly which countries could they buy?

Let me guess: you haven’t actually asked gemini

> Shouldn’t we have an international body of some sort at this point?

Says who?

Europe? The blue Navi in the movie Avatar?

> Epstein files.

Nobody cares

>Investing 1 or 2% of global GDP to increase wealth gap 50% more

What’s your definition of wealth gap?

Is it how you feel when you see the name of a billionaire?

> Yeah but my 401(k) tax statement paperwork doesn't make me feel like a pirate.

solo 401(k) is for you

> Why not in gold while we're at it?

Crypto more hype-able

Unclear if it wants 媽媽 / 妈妈 as:

- māmā (incorrect) - māma (correct)

> Will one real/valuable company (SpaceX) be enough to save all the other grift company (X, xAI, Tesla) valuations?

unstoppable force (spacex) meets immovable wall (twitter, xAI, tesla)

> Why would you pollute SpaceX’s valuation by coupling it with a toxic asset like xAi?

SpaceX IPO will save the current xAI/Twitter bag holders