> Absolutely. The whole point of a city is to reject all that.
I didn’t realize cities were made with a point to reject entropy and weren’t mostly organic congregations of people for economic reasons
9,848 karma · joined August 13, 2015
I didn’t realize cities were made with a point to reject entropy and weren’t mostly organic congregations of people for economic reasons
And that’s before unraveling whatever the OP of this comment chain meant by Muslims and Christians are only fighting because of colonizers when Islam and Christianity were colonial ideologies in the first place with there emphasis on converting all of humanity.
People have agency.
Can’t imagine it’d be too much work to hook up and LLMs output to one.
You understand what I mean by blatant right? Like this shit you linked didn’t have advertisements.
I dismiss Nick Shirley because he crows about corruption that was already being prosecuted as somehow being novel and the few bits I’ve listened to from him honestly made me think he might be a bit slow.
I dismiss DOGE because it accomplished next to nothing, if anything, lied about its accomplishments, and helped Musk get rid of shit that was against his private goals. DOGE was also corruption. Saying all they did was “… look for is proof of fraud” is factually incorrect.
You’re pointing at failed projects that may or may not have corruption(I’d like to see the receipts and from a mouth other than nick shirley) compared to explicit, I’m taking this money.
Or the IRS deal, or 1000 other in the air open corruption
> But your competitors can pay them more anyway, because they have not spend their money on training.
No, they spent their time without even having a partially trained employee and just having empty positions. If they are still outcompeting you, access to labor wasn’t your problem.
You can structure a contract so that the company has the right to fire for performance still. It’s how moving bonuses are normally done with a “you’ll work here for X year/s or return the bonus”
Everytime it’s come up people always argue that if you train the employee they’ll just leave for more money once they’re skilled.
Somehow just paying them the market rate so they stay, or even making a (shudders) contract with the employee to stay for X number of years in exchange for the training costs is never an option.
They’d rather have the position stay empty or outsource outside the country even if that has associated issues with shipping costs or quality control.
Before any of their defenders(and I’m including e/acc and most of TESCREAL in this criticism) come at me about how much introspection they do and how they constantly try to question their theories or be LessWrong you’ll have to explain things like prediction markets, Bankman-Fried, or the litany of other warped ideas coming out of this group that are causing harm to society.
When you have shit like will the government attack X nation by 9:00 pm on Friday, it takes very little for the insiders with levers to decide if the event in question is going to happen, to make the event happen.
It’s beyond even regular corporate insider trading which was usually predicated on secret information, not the literal ability to decide if an event occurs.
You add up all the claimed activities and then realize it’s more hours than are in a day so someone’s lying.
I don’t see how this author can claim that these papers didn’t “…suddenly materialize from a magical “chatbot” in 2026” when it’s obvious that 1-2 people are not producing 258 papers that are tens of pages each in 9 months with any sort of academic rigor.
It may go further back than that but I don’t have experience before the 2010s
There is no way to remove the incentive for people with the ability to alter the events being bet on. Insider trading is generally considered a bad thing for the stock market because of the non symmetrical information for everyone trading but all of sudden in the past few years a cohort of people(rationalists) have found it virtuous
It’s a mix of people with social anxiety and people who have FOMO and agree to three different events on the same day.
The more polite ones in that second group have done things like shown up in tuxes for a casual party and dipped 10 minutes later for some other event.
No talking to the various people in this category has done anything so they just get treated as nice to haves of they show up and we wait 0 seconds for them for anything scheduled.
> That's insane.
You meet a lot of weird people in software
My household hosts a lot and we’ve come to expect a full on 50% flake rate, down to multiple instances of people getting to our street and deciding to stop at the restaurant at the end for food and go home instead of arriving.
It means if we invite less than 5 people there are occasions where literally no one shows up. It’s also difficult to plan for when the odds go in the other direction like one news year party where we invited 30 people, expected ~15 and had 29 show up.
That is not the promise of AI. The promise of AI is that it can automate knowledge work.
Nothing about these models or the productivity they can bring is related to benefiting others. That would only come about from political control that forces the benefits to a large swath of people.
As it stands AI looks like it’s going to decimate the middle class even further as white collar work gets obliterated and the owners of the AI companies hoover everything up.
I use duckduckgo, mostly by habit at this point, and if i fail to find anything i go to claude and ask it.
Im getting closer and closer to just defaulting to the AI model search every day. Especially when I want to find something that I can list off 5+ semi accurate details about but cant remember the name of.
I never stated that they would. That’s an opinion you manifested from thin air because I stated that I don’t think AI is going to lead to a social safety net on its own.
I think things are generally going to get worse for the average person with AI as all the benefits accumulate at the top.
Assuming the rise of AI and the fall of democracy doesn’t have a default mode of social safety nets, and we’re seeing leadership increasingly divorced from the will of the people already.
For reference on TESCREAL
How does capacity not apply in space? You can’t just boost a gpu into orbit and it’ll start running. It needs to be hooked into power and cooling infrastructure still and that will always be limited by how much infrastructure you have up there.
Youve laid out an idealistic view of how the world will work. You have not laid out how the transition between the current world where wealth is being concentrated somehow turns into UBI.
Even this sentence
> I personally don't think CEOs and politicians will end up being any more immune than junior programmers.
Implies that you think the capitalists who own these systems are going to be in charge since CEOs work for their boards and politicians largely follow their donors.
Again, lay out exactly how you think we move from our current system to UBI via AI technology.
>but I don't think it'll work out that way.
Is not you laying out how you think it will work, but a dogmatic religious belief with no evidence or logic behind it.
edit: Im sorry, I glossed over this sentence.
> Democracy at the nation-state level is pretty much toast anyway...
Are you a rationalist, e/acc, or someone related to TESCREAL, or especially anything touching on Curtis Yarvin? If so no need to answer, I think you guys are in a cult with the modern equivalent of Dianetics, so we are never going to see eye to eye.