mrguyorama
Then they simply starve to death.
The "preppers" are some of the worst too. They'll be shooting people before that week is even done. Meanwhile their absurd "stash" only actually pencils out to about a month of supplies, then they also starve because they never seemed to notice that you have to start farming at some point, and therefore, have to be friendly and supportive with your neighbors instead of shooting them at the first sign of trouble.
The system never has to rebuild. Stable points aren't always at global inflection points. Feudalism can go back to reigning for the rest of human existence.
Anything with electronic fueling will cut fuel during engine overrun. Staying in gear while coasting uses zero fuel. If you pull the clutch, the engine has to fuel enough to idle instead, which is actually a really inefficient fueling regime.
As long as there is money to be made by being the first thing pushed to a consumer's eyes when they want information, search is an adversarial market, doomed to cat and mouse games and failure states.
The early days of PageRank were entirely anomalous because nobody was poisoning the well they were using yet. The second they made doing so financially incentivized, that situation went away and Pagerank and all algorithms like it were doomed to struggle.
Courts once said a black man can't be a citizen.
If you do anything to prevent that, that would be a less free market. By definition.
Free markets have nothing to do with a market having healthy competition and sane behavior. Free markets in fact reward you with doing absurd things that fuck with prices to make your bag.
It is entirely the point of the free market that Micron can decide that selling all memory to only Anthropic is a better distribution of their resources and you can go pound sand if you can't find any memory any more.
So yes, monopolizing all silicon in the world and then demanding you pay them for using it is literally a free market.
Free markets trend torwards monopolies and other market failures without intervention excepting very specific markets that have genuinely mostly fungible products that are easy to sell, which we call commodities, and even those can in fact become failed markets like what once happened with onions.
If you think this can't be a free market because it's in a bad place for you personally, you don't understand market theory.
Free markets are also free to become "distorted" as you say.
They literally wanted to kill northerners for daring to make them equal to black people.
Still do.
The previous strategy North Korea used before Crypto was to make the best quality counterfeit US dollars ever made. That got somewhat countered. So North Korea was actually going to be in a bad place funding wise. Thank goodness everyone gave them trivial access to free money through crypto!
Thanks to Crypto and the Ukraine war, North Korea is doing really well for itself. Which, to be clear, means nuclear tipped ICBMs
The cost of somewhere to live has gone up so much that even people like me, with an absurd amount of cash in the bank account, can't leave work and try to survive because it would be wiped out by 3 years of rent.
How many average laborers in a country with fully socialized medicine can afford a decade of rent off their current savings? How many could do that even if they magically found a way to cut other expenses in half?
I could eliminate my electric bill, my internet bill, my grocery bill, all my bills other than rent, and the money saved per year would pay for an extra month or so of rent. That is the entire problem. No amount of frugality can paper over this systemic problem.
When my mother raised us in poverty, it was necessary to play games with utilities, which ones you cancelled which months, to make ends meet. This was actually worth doing, because skipping the $20 cable payment one month was about 1/10th of the monthly house payment. A year of skipping cable could pay for a month of rent. If I skipped a year of much more expensive cable internet, I could not use that to pay even a single month of rent. There's a lot of dumb money being spent, with my personal pet peeve being cell phones, but if a person "doesn't need" the newest iPhone and went without to be frugal, often they haven't even gotten back a single month's rent. What the fuck is the point of living in serious poverty just so that you can extend your rent runway by less than 10%?
The only people in current society who can actually afford to survive off the wealth they have accumulated are called capital owners and you will find that indeed, they are rarely doing things they don't "want" to do, and no, the time they spend really shouldn't be considered "work" since they sign their own paychecks most of the time.
Running a business is work, but if I get to decide what my business does, I don't get to then insist that my side hobbies that I've started doing under the name of my business are also work.
Our government is run by 80 year olds and their 80 year old rich as fuck friends.
The long term plan is "Be Dead, don't care about anything"
This is a huge reason why you need diversity in any system, here we need diversity of ages, so that young people who have a high investment in a far future can counterbalance old people who have high investment in the now.
If you want long term visions, you have to reward eschewing quick wins, and we openly declared that to not be policy as of the 80s and Reagan.
You can ship people literal trash like ten percent of the time and they will keep coming back.
You can provide someone negative value for decades, and they keep paying you.
I just cannot understand how willing to burn time, effort, and money on stupid purchases the average person is. I know I have poverty brain and used to be really bad at just spending money, but the fact of the matter is that PepsiCo had to increase the price of Doritos to $7 a bag before they saw a decline in purchasing.
Like, there are entire industries devoted to helping people figure out they are subscribed to something they don't use anymore. I don't even look at my bank account anymore but how do you possibly let that happen?
I cannot understand just how consumer brained everyone is.
Cache based side channels were in vogue over a decade ago. It was a point of contention back when people were first switching to AWS because "How can I be sure an attacker running on the same box as my service can't affect me?" is a big question that AWS needed to answer.
The reason that Phase 3 trials are any sort of bottleneck instead of just checking boxes is that drugs that make it to that point are still extremely likely to fail and not be productized. The phase 3 trial is hard, expensive, and slow because it's the only strong filter we have! After phase 3 trials is the only point at which you become confident that this chemical doesn't do crazy unknown things to humans.
This is because the previous trials are not sufficient enough and high fidelity enough analogues of real human biology to be able to prevent that outcome!
Literal living human cells in a petri dish are not sufficient to tell you if a drug will work or not because the entire human system is extremely chaotic and interconnected. Even animals "99%" similar to humans are not similar enough to prevent unpredicted catastrophic outcomes in that full blown human trial.
We do not have enough knowledge anywhere about any of this for an LLM to be useful at all, because we have simply never collected the data necessary to be able to predict outcomes of novel interactions in the full scale system.
We haven't quantified the human system nearly enough.
You want to fix this? Don't go buy tokens, spend $2 trillion on grad bioscience students quantifying literally every protein and gene and structure and behavior and interaction in the human body. You literally have to brute force this problem.
You can't use "simulators" because there's no data for the sim to be evaluated and verified against in the first place. Our knowledge is too sparse.
LLMs cannot magic new information from limited data. Even magic "Superintelligent" AI wouldn't be able to fix fundamental deficiencies in what we know about the human body. There's this extremely silly and weird belief that it will be able to figure everything out "from first principles" and it's driving me up a wall.
Atom level simulations of anything in our reality are computationally infeasible at scales larger than "One cell", and you should expect that to not change since there's not expected to be a magic machine that can somehow undo computational complexity. Well, there is, in that our reality is that machine, but it's not very amenable to isolation for experimentation.
Fundamentally, there seems to be a serious fault among "AI" boosters of deeply believing the "Great man" theory of reality, that everything just needs a magically "smart" enough person to solve, as if someone clever enough could somehow trick physics itself. It's extremely ignorant of reality. There are problems in the current world that no amount of "intelligence" can solve, because the problem is not constrained by reasoning ability in the first place. A lot of bioscience fits that.
And here is the real problem. Instead of burning gigawatthours of power with GPUs, if Anthropic really wanted to help bioscience, they should just be throwing their $2 trillion at making it possible to live off of studying things like this.
We aren't in a place where a magic "Intelligence" could just look at the data and solve all our problems because we have never funded the collection of that data in the first place
We spent a lot of money on the Human Genome project and got large dividends from it but seemingly never reinvested! There's so many clear and straightforward questions we should be answering in biology that we just aren't, because nobody wants to pay for it.
LLMs aren't the right course here!
Max Planck himself got to watch physics radically change multiple times, through avenues that didn't involve the old guard dying.
The term among lawyers for this is "you can beat the wrap but not the ride"
You can be convicted of resisting arrest, with no underlying crime.
My area had no taxi medallion laws or system.
That's part of the problem. The excuses were always bullshit made up from generalizations of local problems. Uber wasn't needed to "Bust the taxi monopoly" because in most places there was no taxi monopoly, at least, not until Uber showed up and made one.
The excuse was never meant to be actually valid though. It was always just a simple "gotcha" that could be employed as a thought terminating cliche by people who had already made up their mind on which outcome they wanted.
Give me an inverter and single logic gate and I can by myself recreate computing. Give me a silicon wafer and dopants and I no longer know what I am doing. The structure is 3D and also somewhat abstract and I fail to be able to maintain the mental state to understand it.
I don't understand my mental barrier. I get the abstract theory and rough physical concepts, but somehow I can't pull features out of a micrograph like Ken Shirriff can.
The Voters want a Trump King. A government cannot ignore it's own people forever.
If the voters reward corrupt and horrific behavior, and punish law and order behavior, what the hell can you do about that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sox_Scandal
There's a reason why we didn't do things we are currently doing, and it had nothing to do with "technology". We've been here before.
Know that these companies internally have models to predict how profitable you will be as a customer, so that they can best nudge those customers who are likely to be profitable.
This model is identical to if you trained a model explicitly to find problem gamblers. They are purposely building systems to find and exploit problem gamblers.
Because that is what the industry does. It finds and milks addicts. It is impossible for a for profit company to exist in this space and not somehow optimize towards finding and exploiting addicts. It's just more profitable. The people who drop a few hundred on a few hands of blackjack once a year cannot sustain an industry.
Extracting all possible wealth from 20% of the significant fraction of the population that plays has enormous negative consequences for all of society.
The only reason you don't ban gambling outright is that it's just too easy and straightforward to run an underground book, so it's a trivial market for organized crime to own. And that isn't good.
So you should have a state run institution that exists entirely to just barely serve the literal addicts, does absolutely nothing with the "income" (preferably just pays it all out, zero sum), and is rather unattractive to people who haven't gambled before. You make betting as boring as possible.
Those push notifications are tuned to trigger someone who might become a problem gambler. They are actively trying to get you addicted.
"Future weapons" on the Discovery Channel showed it off back in 2007ish.
It's been in development hell that long because it just sucks in a million ways. Water cannons and other tools just do it's job better, and for less contract dollars.
And that's ignoring anything around microwaving your own citizens being fucked.
Take a population, and then remove anyone who is willing to invest more than 60 seconds on a idea, and then sample the "preferences" of that population.
What did you expect to end up with?
Creators who I really like still end up producing trash on shorts because that's what gets traction, because the problem is what is actually liked by someone who wants to just mindlessly scroll 30 seconds at a time is really bad
Where could that possibly end up causing problems?
If your grandma will follow current instructions, she will follow these new instructions including a 24 hour wait.
Your grandma will follow instructions to walk down to walgreens and buy a brand new device if they tell her. The solution has nothing to do with the device and everything to do with you needing to be an adult and figure out how to get your grandma to not follow directions of scammers.
This isn't a tech problem and you cannot solve it with tech.
The American public is stupid and wrong and their perception is not useful here. They will believe the government wastes 50% of every dollar because they have been told that, even though it's just stupidly wrong.
The GAO is actually the only information you provided. They are trustworthy and happy to be critical of every administration, and they don't get enough love for their important work.
I don't know if you realize this, but 3-7% literal fraud is actually a pretty good number for a very complicated system. 15% "waste" where it's hard to even define what "waste" is is also a good number.
Visa and Mastercard accept far higher for a far simpler fraud profile.
Also you said "This guy thinks waste in government is only 15%" and then the only data you provided has to wave many hands to get up to 13-20%. What the hell man?
How do you explain increases in the cost of distribution?