thisisit

It might come as a shock to you then that running government or military or any government service requires “somebody else needs to pay for them”. Let’s get rid of those too. Long live anarchy.

Fact is people who spout this nonsense are simply selfish people with “F you, got mine” mindset. They hide their selfishness in garb and call others socialist.

> They're covered under CICP, which is more stringent and has paid out one person $6 million, and a few hundred grand spread out between some dozen others.

This is trying to play both sides. Appeal to emotion without having a rational thought process. Something bad happening is unfortunate and life changing. Then turning around and saying hundred grand isn’t life changing money for people.

What exactly is your remedy here - should people be not asked to provide proof for the harm and paid 10s of millions for every case? People have been asked proof for lesser things and paid even lesser for much bigger harm.

> My friend who was diagnosed, by multiple doctors in two hospitals with Myocarditis caused by the vaccine has yet to receive any money. It ruined his career.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence of systematic wrongdoing. At least I wouldn’t expect to see on HN but here we are.

> Also, the manufacturers can never be held responsible, because they have legal immunity for the COVID vaccines.

There is remedy against vaccine harm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Injury_Compen...

This was passed in response to claims against DPT vaccine and manufacturers stopping production of the said vaccine. Lawmakers feared loss of herd immunity and passed the law. Now vaccine skeptics say this is not enough and claim inability to sue the company directly as an issue - but what they really want is enforce their minority view on the majority by suing companies and ensuring no one has access to vaccines - tyranny of the minority.

The same person is not going to give you three different answers within span of minutes. Especially when nothing fundamentally has changed. People might or might not update their views depending on their biases.

At least in my company the CFO came back after talking with other CFOs and then used Lovable to build an app. He then mentioned to his immediate team who then picked it and started running with it. It is now one of the yearly goals. The fun part is when it came time to put money where their mouth is they say the company has no funding. So more FOMO.

The bias will come from your prompt. Asking AI - If voting for Reform UK is a good/bad idea? - shows AI where you at and what sycophantic it needs to give. AI is certainly not biased :)

America industries used to play by the same rules. Look up Samuel Slater.

Only images or videos as well?

There are also people who think AI is magic. I have often heard - "we want to use AI to automate processes but we don't have full documentation about the processes, we hope AI can help". Despite being told that no one can create outputs from thin air - every AI topic turns into the same discussion.

Often the solution to create those document to feed into these AI automations? Use AI. Its like ouroboros. Create docs using AI, then summarize and ingest using AI, explained by AI.

Same thing is going to happen with code. Create 1000s of line of code using AI. Then explain it using AI etc.

Ah the whatabboutism strikes again. You talk about X but what about Y?

The sad reality is people have lost the ability to counter the argument and instead counter bias.

Here you instead of countering what was being asserted that this government has knowingly involved in lot of bad faith argument - and there are so many of them - another one is Trump Kennedy center fiasco - trying to muddle the argument with "but LW also does it too" and have no factual argument.

Lets assume LW are the biggest liars in the world and gaslight people. What then? How does it change what is happening here? Just because one party is guilty doesn't mean other is clean.

It is no longer about making good faith claims in court. It is all about RW media dog and pony show. They can make provably false claims in the RW media with - "Do you want China to overtake US in this race?" and still garner support. And even if they lose they can paint the judge as leftist etc. so they have stopped bothering with even trying.

That's the number AI boosters are spreading too "The TAM for AI is all of humanity - this includes every person and every company. So, imagine this huge pile of future revenue." I agree that TAM is likely huge but is SpaceX most suitable to capture that TAM? Unlikely. But for now everyone wants in on the AI hype train and FOMO of losing out one any company in the AI space.

In the long term most markets are duopoly with small competitors. And personally I see OpenAI and Anthropic duking it out rather than SpaceX.

Grok has its own CLI tool called Grok Build: https://x.ai/news/grok-build-cli

There is some misunderstanding of what a crash really is. It doesn't necessarily mean that things get written down to 0 or some arbitrary level because everything has a price at which someone will buy.

Even companies have some value after a crash and you could make a case that at some arbitrary point it was worth $x and since the crash didn't cause the company to crater to below $x it has not "crashed". Even companies filing for bankruptcy have some residual value above what they might have been founded on - it doesn't mean the company hasn't gone bankrupt.

We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten.

Every new generation changing technology is followed by a frenzy of infrastructure build out.

Running up to the dotcom bubble lot of money was spent on building undersea cables and Internet infra because the assumption was that the demand for websites was going to be a straight line if it not exponential. There was an over capacity of expensive infra. Then the market crashed and the same infra went for cheap and laid foundation for Internet as we know today.

Same thing happened during the railroad frenzy in the 1800s.

And same thing is happening today. There is assumption that the pace of AI improvement and demand is going to be straight line if not exponential. So lot of money is being spent on data centres looking at “future”. There is going to be an oversupply of expensive hardware and models because who doesn’t want that sweet AI money.

Sooner or later the market is going to reset because nothing can keep going up forever. It’s only after the reset we are going to see the upsides of AI.

Its not only RAM. I have seen people who are vibe coding their app and instead of choosing Vercel as default they are learning about dedicated server hosting, docker etc and moving to providers like Hetzner. This is why whenever someone says - with AI everyone is going to write their own SaaS, I am always like - and what happens to hosting? Even Vercel might increase their costs if that comes to pass.

The whole thing is theatre.

Anthropic gets into argument with US government over model usage -> Release a model calling it too advanced for safe use -> release the model to public knowing well that this admin has thinnest of skins and will do something

Regulatory capture in roundabout way. Now it is going to take crying wolf over other companies/countries developing “Mythos grade model” to kick off action especially in next two years of this admin.

Companies will keep improving models because AI is not yet fully there. But it is incredibly naive to think governments were ever going to allow state of the art technology to be released to public or do things this publicly. Every company wants to show off and get publicly restricted because it shows off their strength.

I can only say well played Anthropic.

If you scroll through any personal finance forum every year someone will discover the forum and excitedly share their customised budget tracking sheet they built from scratch and it works exactly as they wanted to. How many do you think even get 1 upvote?

Everyone building a software will just mean people can produce code which others might not really care for and might even be particularly be mean. That’s how the Internet works unfortunately.

The current logic seem to be confusing two things. One AI as a technology and wisdom of the crowd using AI. One might ground breaking tech and improve over time while the other might not move the needle at all.

> What matters is that it's personalized, free, and isn't an invasive surveillance/advertisement platform

This sounds like an utopian dream. The surveillance is baked into this AI built to create the software. It will be built into the platform used to host and run the software. Why wouldn't AWS want that sweet sweet data to train their models. How many people can really self host? You seem to be overestimating average people's ability to learn how to self host.

Its like saying "we have vaccine related information at our finger tips so there are no longer going to be vaccine skeptics". Existence of information doesn't necessarily lead to application of such information.

The other thing which I feel these kinds of utopian dreams miss is that if something is commoditized and you can't really tell the difference between software A and B - because of AI, there is more incentive for companies to form cliques and raise prices while still delivering commoditized terrible software.

I understand that salaries might have been stagnant and with wages not keeping with inflation it doesn't seem to make sense to continue working.

The stock market often aligns with inflation. After all if the companies growth is not beating inflation what exactly is the point really? But that also comes at the expense of not paying people their due worth and incrementing below inflation rate.

But past returns do not guarantee future results. Stock markets ebbs and flows. It will take a blip, not even a crash, to impact those retirement accounts.

IMO this is a risky idea especially if there are jobs available.

Google can be reasonably expected to not push pirated content to top if someone is searching for the “big hit music download” because they might be held liable for helping people with illegal downloads. But they shouldn’t be liable for misleading people? Being sued for billions of dollars by corporations vs millions by common folks is the difference

One can hope it helps Claude to figure out how to solve their buggy payment system - otherwise how do I pay for these credits.

What is the federal budget for military vs education? Which one increases and which one decreases most of the time?

Remind me who is at the forefront of cutting funding to government programs.

The people voting for these administration are the ones cutting government spending and lower taxes and then say “pay more”. With what dollars exactly?

The broader concern seems to be “outsiders taking our jobs/raising house prices/voting in elections” etc etc. Anything perceived to be done by “outsiders” is an issue.

Americans/British saying this about non-white immigrants. Switzerland about Europeans. India saying it about Bangladeshi migrants.

It’s like people dislike others who are worse off them.

Next up Tesla and SpaceX are going to merge and that will another round of synergies where Tesla and Vision AI (in FSD) and xAI.

I have at both ends of this problem.

Documenting but people not reading and still asking question. I have tried some what successfully asking them if they have read the document. Because sometimes people are unaware it exists. There are those who insist on answer and these are people who I give delayed response.

On the hand I have seen people who say stuff like why don't you read the code. These people are now using AI to write documents.

Market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent by Keynes says everything about what happened here.

But to say there’s a “grudge” seems to ignore another market fact “past results are not indicative of future results”. He might be right this time around for all you know. Is there anything you disagree apart from saying he is a Musk hater? Otherwise this comment is just unhelpful.

War insurance rates for shipping has also gone up: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/29/business/strait-hormuz-sh...

Here's another train of thought because you don't seem to understand how incentives or even lawyering works.

> then what's stopping all those people you fired from starting new law companies, where AI also does most of the work, and competing with you for the same market?

Your thinking is similar to the someone saying you can use LLMs to "research" stock market edges. The rub lies in knowing what research to do and what inputs to provide.

Big law firms are not big because they create similar outputs and that can be done using AI. They are "big" because they have connections and also know how to create better outputs.

Still to your point:

> I foresee a wave of entrepreneurship coming. AI will empower more people to provide useful services directly to other people, with less middlemen and menial work, and more direct problem solving.

If this was true then what you are saying is every thing is going to be commoditized due to AI. There is no quality difference.

That will drive prices down in the short term and in the long term people will form cliques like "Forum for AI enabled lawyers" or something similar to OECD and drive prices up. Thereby delivering even lesser value for increased cost. Enshittification at its finest. Not exactly the utopia you seem to be picturing.