crostlybostly

Yes some people think racist policies are okay if they help minorities and women.

I think his point was that at least now you are free to buy expensive ram and comoete with the AI companies if you value having your own. In a planned economy maybe you don’t even get that option.

Uber / gig economy seems to be the biggest difference

Uhh Goldman Sachs came to my campus in 2010 and said they were only there to interview women and minorities. That is systemic racism.

Ranting about “Black people cant be racist” is a great way to get most people to ignore everything you say after.

Everyone can be racist. No one wants to debate pedantic redefined terms that liberal arts professors came up with so they could sell books.

Its all connected. Everything you buy comes down to how labor or capital is deployed. No one wants to pick your carrot or deliver it or work in a retail store if they can make more money shining shoes, building yachts, building mansions, etc. for a billionaire.

But the bigger flaw in your logic is that investment is a good things. We want investment in plants, warehouses, technology, pharma. That is what wealthy people do with their excess money is speculate and invest in these new things that will serve everyday people.

If you give that money away the people who recieve it are not going to invest it. They are going to blow it on trivial things and consumption.

But you can still ignore / n use AI though

My point is that slop is not an AI problem. Instagram, blog recipes, 207 marvel sequals, countless photos of the same famous tourist spots. Humans were spreading slop like crazy well before AI. It is just now they can make it even easier. Its a human issue, not an AI issue.

Before AI there were millions of stupid blog posts with roughly the same recipes with minor deviations. It was literally human made slop.

At least AI can give me a concise recipe without ads or making me scroll through some story about a brisk day in october.

Trigger unnecessary consumption will increase prices. Its basic supply and demand… econ 101 stuff.

I’m all for the right to slut it up! I just don’t think taxpayers should have to subsidize others bad decisions!

It isn’t only afforded to the wealthy. But lets be honest - the US is one of the easiest places in the world to make a living. If someone is unable to make it work here, they are probably making bad choices. Taxpayers should not have to subsidize bad choices.

I just mean making bad choices should not mean you suddenly get to live in your ideal house funded by taxpayers.

Having two kids on a low income is a bad choice.

She should not be punished. But she also should not be rewarded.

Huh?

So when society says a business owner's assets are worth more than $1B they start losing control of the business they built and other people get to tell them how to run their business? That destroys a lot IMO

Do you think it is wise to have two kids on one income when you can barely make rent? Are we going to hold the mother accountable at all or is society to blame for that situation?

How does it keep growing if it isn't invested in productive assets?

Yes he is valuable because he makes a product people want. That is how life works. If you want him to be poor, convince people to buy something other than luxury brands.

I personally would rather have next day delivery and not waste my time shopping and driving from store to store.

What jobs do you think it creates? You really want all our labor pandering to billionaires? Why would anyone give attention to middle class if the billionaires were forced to spend all their money? How expensive would your life get if the billionaire class redirected all of their wealth toward frivolous consumption.

Yes she needs a house, and can rent one from 1000s of different rental owners willing to provide her that service.

What's the issue?

These assets DO offer services to them. The whole point of these assets is to make products that have value to other Americans. If the assets / owners don't do that then their net worth decreases and disappers.

Putting it in the "hands of society" is crazy talk. Government / elected officials are awful at allocating capital, negotiating labor, holding people accountable.

A contrarian view:

- Most of that wealth is tied up in assets offering services for americans (servers / warehouses). It would be much worse if the rich decided to spend all of that on consumption rather than keep reinvesting it in assets. - Even the LHS of that chart Americans are some of the wealthiest in the world. A lot of the middle class from many other countries would love to be on the LHS of that chart. - No one is expected to build wealth on a 40 hour minimum wage job. It is the bare minimum and most people get paid more. - Americans don't want wealth. Our spending habits are abysmal. I suspect if you gave every American $500K the chart would revert back to this in like 12 months

Carpenters uses trig and pythagorean theorem all the time, but I don’t think they care if it was human or robot that told them the math formulas they need to build a roof.

Yeah my 2006 core 2 duo running linux was more productive than any corporate Windows laptop I have ever used.

This is due to 20 versions of enterprise spyware running in the background + Windows being garbage.

Impressive, but probably based on depreciation servers over 5 years. But is that realistic? I wonder how many people are still using 5 year old servers in their AI training or inference.

Every could lead to your demise… ever walk under a tree? cross a street? get in a car?

It’s just a risk / reward question. The upside is worth the risk imo. And frankly in the infinite universe it is inevitable that we encounter super intelligence at some point if we live long enough. We may as well try to hone it.

But generally speaking it is easier to verify a proof is accurate that it is to find the proof. So not sure this holds.

I suppose their is some complexity limit where something is so complex we can’t even validate it. But frankly would love to reach that point. I’d view that as a good thing

Personally I won’t bother playing any game or console that can’t be emulated these days.

The whole experience just feels so enshitifies from the days when I could just put in a cartridge and boot into a fame in seconds with no internet, updates to manage, accounts to worry about, etc.

On one hand it is hard to fathom not being the most intelligent thing around.

On the other hand, if we are going to survive as a species for a long time it probably depends on us learning how to not be the most intelligent thing around.

Even if it leads to our demise, I don’t think willfully holding ourselves back is the way forward

In the name of profit is so misleading though. The reality is most people don't values a doorman enough to pay for one, and costs are now lower for everyone than they would be if doorman were around.

Doesn’t Anna Archive offer torrent backups anyway? Or is that not the full library.

I don’t see that at all obvious.

Businesses are competing like crazy to make algorithms that are in high demand. AI could theoretically let people and create new things that they would never be able to otherwise.

It is entitled to thing that people wanting GPUs and new PCs for gaming and hobbies is a more valid use. And if someone values it, all they have to do is pay the market price.