Just connect everything folks, we'll proactively read everything, all the time, and you'll be a 10x human, trust us friends, just connect everything...
0 - https://www.tumblr.com/elodieunderglass/186312312148/luritto...
Non data driven living is 1x
Therefore data driven beings will outcompete
Same reasoning shows that 3.10 is better than 3.1
Very rich people buy life from other peoples to manage their information to have more of their life to do other things. Not so rich people can now increasingly employ AI for next to nothing to lengthen their net life and that's actually amazing.
What makes me suspicious: Is there a certain number on their balance sheets at which the system turns sour, when the trap snaps? Because the numbers all seem absurdly large already and keep increasing. Am I to believe that it will all come down after the next trillion or 10? I mean, it's not unthinkable of course, I just don't know why. Even from the most cynical view: Why would they want to crash a system where everything is going great for them?
So I do wonder: Are large amounts of wealth in the hands of a few per se a real world problem for us or is our notion of what the number means, what it does to or for us, simply off?
the problem is that western civilisation is so far up their asses with capitalism that they think that some corporation cares about them (users).
What I am asking to interview this viewpoint is: Why will it be a problem when a company reaches a certain size? If they have no other goal than making money, are the biggest assholes of all time, and make money through customers, unless you can actually simply extort customers (monopolies), they will continue to want to do stuff that makes customers want to give them more money. Why would that fail as soon as the company goes from 1 trillion to 2 trillion?
I completely agree: The amount of money that corps wield feels obscene. I am just looking for a clear explanation of what the necessary failure mode is at a certain size, because that is something that we generally just assume. Unequal distribution is the problem and it's always doom, but that clashes with ever improving living standards on any metric I think is interesting.
So I think it's a fair question how and when the collapse is going to happen, to understand if that was even a reasonable assumption to begin with. I have my doubts.
How can the world continue to function this way if fewer of us have so much wealth that the rest of us effectively have no say in how the world works?
Our society is so cooked, man. We don’t even realize how over it is, and even people genuinely trying to understand are not able to.
Now you would be really a weirdo to not have one since enough people gave in for small convenience to make it basically mandatory.
Eg if i search for a site, it can link it to what i was working on at the time, the github branch i was on, areas of files i was working on, etcetc.
Sounds sexy to me, but obviously such a massive breach of trust/security that it would require fullly local execution. Hell it's such a security risk that i debate if it's even worth it at all, since if you store this you now have a honeypot which tracks everything you do, say, search for, etc.
With great power.. i guess.