HighResolutionSleep
No bio...
User ID: 172
As a Shareholder-American, it sure would be great for me. Not so sure about others, though.
Eh, I've always been far better at not buying candy than not eating it. YMMV, of course. It costs thirty seconds and is worth a shot.
The damage isn't done by money simply being created or spent. It's done when it's used to Dig Up and Fill Holes Again, or worse, paid to my political enemies to actively undermine my interests. The money is then "backed" by holes dug up and filled again, or hit pieces against Twitter nobodies.
These things probably don't generate as much real wealth as what the private sector would back it with instead, if it was allowed to create the money instead.
Indeed, it's true that if I want the government to lower its deficit spending on Hole Digging and Filling Up Again, then I am also calling for an equivalent reduction of surplus enjoyed by Hole Digging and Filling Up Again companies. The alternative isn't that money never being created, the alternative it is being created through other means. Under our current system it doesn't even have to be the government. The private sector can also spend money into existence.
I'll feel less bad about Social Security if ever convinced the only alternative is UBI For Women and Single Mothers.
In short, I think you're arguing as though women shoulder most of the risks in the current romantic equation. When there's an serious argument that it works the opposite way.
This is simply the best way of putting it. The conversation on these issues is always completely upside down. When it comes to reproduction, women hold virtually all of the power. Holding men more accountable for it will have little effect, save only though indirect splash damage at best.
I don't anticipate that AI has come close to plateau—I do suspect that specifically the strategy of throw data at LLM has began to plateau. I suspect that the initial rush of AI progress is a lot like the days of sticking a straw in the ground and a million gallons of oil under pressure gushing out. Sure, it's never going to be that easy again. We're probably never going to have another "AI summer" like 2022 as before. But I don't think we have to. People have gone on about peak oil for decades, and we've only gotten better at extracting and using it. I suspect people will go on about "peak AI" for just as long.
As far as I can tell, AI is already generally intelligent. It just has a few key weaknesses holding it back and needs a bit more refining before being outright explosively useful. I see absolutely no reason these problems must be intractable. Sure, making the LLM bigger and feeding it more data might not be able to solve these issues—but this strikes me like saying that jumpjack output has peaked and so oil is over. It's not. They just need to find better ways of extracting it. Sure, contemporary techniques developed over five whole years of global experience hasn't been able to do it, but that does nothing to convince me that it's impossible to get AI models to stay focused and remember fine details. History has shown that when you're dealing with a resource as rich and versatile as oil, economies can and will continue to find ever more sophisticated ways of extracting and utilizing it, keeping its value proposition well over break-even. I suspect that general intelligence on tap as cheap as electricity will prove to be at least as deeply and robustly valuable.
I do suspect that AI hype circa 2025 is a bubble, in the same way that the internet circa 1999 was a bubble. The dot-com bubble burst; the internet was not a passing fad that fizzled away. The vision of it that popularly existed in the late 90s died; the technology underneath it kept going and revolutionized human society anyway. With AI there is both too much hype and too much FUD.
Now there's talk about going back to the defacto open borders of Biden's times.
Is there any evidence that this wouldn't just happen anyway?
I've been incredibly bearish on "civil war" rhetoric since it began, but this proposition would be a fantastic way to pluck the dumbest possible outcome out of the haystack of nothing ever happening.
If the Supreme Court did this, Trump would no longer have any incentive to do anything other than march his most loyal thugs into the courtroom, dome all nine on public television, declare himself Emperor of the United States, and simply let the chips fall where they may. Would he do this? I'm not sure, but you never know how someone is gonna behave when they have been truly cornered until it happens.
Is this a risk worth taking to give an illegal immigrant two flights back home instead of one?
The same 90 seconds I need to be able to say "I'm a fucking citizen, please stop these thugs." Garcia didn't get his
You have been lied to. Garcia did, in fact, get the opportunity to prove he was allowed to be here twice.
This is highly fact pattern specific.
Sure, which is why the example you've provided is completely irrelevant to the case at hand. Sure, if a cop went and pulled me over and shot me in the head because he thought he was Judge Dredd, that would be a pretty hideous denial of due process.
But if that cop brought me in front of a court that deemed me guilty two times, and a third wound up putting a temporary stay on my arrest to a particular jail that never made it to the cop before I was put there, that's a completely different category of error.
Every indication is that every effort was made to give this man due process, and that a procedural shortcoming prevented the third opinion from preventing the deportation.
If the cops pick me up and toss me in jail because they have a warrant for my arrest they didn't know was cancelled, my due process rights are not being violated. I am a victim of a procedural deficiency. To say that my right to due process has been violated would be incorrect.
When you combine this with the sensational rhetoric of "this could happen to anyone" etc, this incorrectness becomes undeniably malicious. It is a lie.
People are telling this lie because they want to paint the image of the Trump administration as an unhinged and tyrannical force. People getting the wrong idea when hearing these lies is a feature, not a bug.
Exactly what due process do people think was missed?
They don't. They are simply lying. Yes, it is my belief that to say Garcia was "denied due process" is a lie.
I spent the first few days or so believing that the Trump administration had simply picked up someone off the street who looked brown enough to be an illegal immigrant and sent them off to El Salvamo without so much as a leaf of paperwork. No due process. No oversight.
I was lied to, and the lies had their intended effect of planting a false understanding of the facts into my mind. "This could happen to any citizen!" Please.
I'm most disappointed in myself. After eight years of this shit I still haven't learned to assume every negative thing I hear about Trump is an outright lie until I see it with my own eyes.
My memory of this is that the general feeling was that, yeah, things are really bad right now because of the financial crisis, but things will recover and go back to normal. Then they never did.
As someone who has gotten a first-hand glimpse into certain hiring pipelines, I'm not at all convinced this is the case. Resume stuffing and spamming seems to be a serious issue, one that has even managed to waste some of my non-HR time, and while I didn't get to see what it was like before, it's difficult to imagine that GPT et al hasn't made it worse. I think hiring agents are turning to AI bots for a reason.
I can buy that things have gotten worse faster for job seekers, but I think that ultimately only delays the inevitable. Like any market, while the buyer and seller have a large adversarial component to their relationship, it's ultimate a cooperative exercise because they both want the deal to close. If one party is so disadvantaged that they begin to drop out, both parties lose.
But sure, that doesn't mean that whatever new equilibrium asserts itself has to be a good one. Perhaps the endgame really is AI agents screeching at each other, producing a barely functional market with a large, profiteering new middle man. Maybe that reality is already here, and I'm an old man who needs to get with the times.
I've considered feeding Claude an omnibus resume with all reasonably delineated units of experience on it, and asking to to pare that down for individual listings. But I'm honestly afraid that might be too honest for today's meta, and I'm nowhere near desperate enough for new employment for change that radical.
I suppose that things could get worse than I could (or would want to) imagine before they get better, but at some point things get so pathological that they outright stop working. There are a lot of very powerful parties that have a strong interest in things actually working (both employers and employees alike) and I don't see a whole lot of strong beneficiaries of dysfunction that could resist such motion. It's just that the two major parties who have an interest in the system working well have a typically adversarial relationship, and the problem hasn't yet gotten big enough for them to set aside their differences.
But eventually it will.
If it was mine, I deleted it because on second read I didn't feel like it added a whole lot to the conversation and was essentially navel-gazing. Here it was, just in case:
Need a quick vibe check on this. I don't know if I was reverse Born in Le Wrong Generation, but I feel like the world has always been like this. Or, rather, this is the only world I have ever known. But I'm saying this as someone who came of age in the late 2000s, and am what would be probably considered an oldhead by most youth.
Was I ahead of the awfulness curve? Or does intergenerational understanding really take decades to percolate upward?
It's funny, as I make this post I got an e-mail response from a job application telling me in automated corpospeak that, yes, my resume is being reviewed by an AI bot and yes, I will be ghosted if she doesn't like it.
I applied to this job not because I really need it, but because I am essentially a perfect fit that checks 14/15 boxes on their Preferred Qualifications wish list. Funny to think their unicorn candidate might not even get a screening call because they are too lazy to review resumes.
Or maybe it isn't that. Maybe they won't reach me because they are flooded with resumes that look just like mine, not because there are so many people like me out there, but because so many are using their own AI bot to generate the perfect resume for every job in a 100 mile radius and aren't particularly concerned if they're full of lies.
What a horrifying tragedy of the commons. While it's always been horrible, I'll agree that things have clearly gotten worse. Somethings gotta give. Regulation, or something. In the meantime, maybe this is a good indicator that it's time to abandon any remaining vestige of K-selected application strategy, no matter how promising the outlook.
Well, given that the US has never seemed to have any luck imposing its will over its "vassals", it isn't clear to me that the American empire is or ever was.
If nobody is holding up their end of the agreement, what exactly is the problem? If Europe doesn't want to help the US with its egg shortage, what's the big deal if the US doesn't want to help Europe with their artillery shortage?
What's there to be upset about when everyone's abandoning an unspoken agreement that seemingly never existed to begin with? What exactly is being abandoned and why should I care?
Worse, they often don't even disappear. Sometimes that job keeps getting re-posted every week for another year.
You ring the doorbell and absolutely nothing happens. Nobody answers. The door just continues floating there.
It's not obvious to me that the European states are, or to my knowledge ever were, interested in behaving like good vassals to the American empire.
My mental model of 'vassalage in all but name' is the Warsaw pact. If the USSR asked one of its satellites for eggs, then my understanding is that you'd damn well better have sent them some eggs.
I also can't imagine that the Soviet empire would have tolerated its vassals becoming any shade of friendly with capitalist states.
I would love for women's sexual and reproductive decisions to be none of my business. Unfortunately, I live in a civilization that insists quite forcefully that they are.
It's against my direct interest but I'm curious what a 20% red day would look like in the age of tiktok
we've a good half a generation that's never experienced a major downturn
- Prev
- Next
I'm not completely opposed to telling brown legal immigrants and citizens in illegal immigration hotbeds (kind enough to label themselves "sanctuary cities") that they really ought to start carrying their papers, provided that the state of exception doesn't last too long.
My bet, though, continues to be on nothing ever happening. The browning of America will continue apace, and the Trump deportation spree barely a blip in the grand scheme of things.
More options
Context Copy link