The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
If you're not going to get a promotion unless you murder your boss, you are better off changing companies. Obviously there's no equivalent of that in the analogy... so you're not getting that promotion (or having that next child)
I don't find early-term abortion tantamount to murder, so the analogy really doesn't convince me.
Which people? There's a lot of groups mentioned there. The least valuable are probably "people who see themselves as future founders" (yeah, yeah, ideas are a dime a dozen)... and the people who have that rage. Who I don't think are actually SV founders and VCs; while some are traditional business types, and a few even have multi-generational money, most are noveau-riche just like the "code monkeys" they're paying. They may not like paying them, but that's pretty much for financial reasons. There are definitely those who hate that gauche technical people get paid big, but it's not that group.
A Down syndrome child is such a massive sink of resources that it DOES (if not absolutely preclude) make it much more difficult to have another child afterwards.
As for the "rich tapestry"... an afternoon being subject to torture is a richer tapestry of experience than taking a nap, but all things considered, I'd take the nap every time.
Not a matter of edginess at all. Land is rivalrous, but it's not a limiting factor for any of your examples. Even if (theoretically) we needed to restart the Superconducting Supercollider project for fusion, land wouldn't be an issue; heck, you could build data centers on top inside the ring. Power is rivalrous but not fixed; both Alphabet and Microsoft have literally had nuclear plants started or restarted for data center power.
Your claim implicitly depends on a fixed set of resources that are already 100% utilized, and neither condition is true.
Money is fungible. To a first approximation, if a trillion dollars is going into trying to build data centers (and failing, in many respects) that's a enormous chunk of resources that isn't going into fusion research, hiring, fixing bridges, what have you - things that could directly and meaningfully improve people's lives.
No, production is not zero-sum and in any case money is not the limit of these things. God could come down from Heaven and declare a halt to data center development, and we would not get one step closer to fusion (might actually slow things down), and not one more bridge would be fixed (possibly fewer, in that the data center people might need a bridge fixed).
As the wokesters and anti-wokesters like to say (in different contexts), God doesn't owe you his presence.
This is a few thousand dollars worth of OpenAI tokens to create ads with pictures of farms and forests and lakes with text which says "No data center is worth losing a single inch of this" or similar.
Hillary certainly wanted to be the watcher and controller rather than the other way around, but I think she's not at all unique in that -- it's a property of most politicians. Some people prefer the feel of the handle, others the sting of the lash.
Those who read murder mysteries know that one of the advantages of suffocation (from the killer's point of view) is it leaves no external injuries.
Major indices are changing their rules so that these new stocks are included nearly immediately
Dow Jones (for the S&P 500) actually decided against this just this week. Some of the other indexes, like the Nasdaq 100, did change, but it seems unlikely most new AI companies will be able to get in anyway; they're doing it for SpaceX.
You're talking about actual dating, I'm talking about hiring escorts.
Something was done, in some places; it goes by the name of "gentrification".
Yes, they did, because the UCC makes consignment contracts not real.
They were used for a lot of things, those among them. But their basic operation was a matrix multiply followed by a LUT, a lot more restricted than GPUs.
That's too late; they had to know of the consignment agreement when they made the loan, or when the consignment agreement was made, for actual knowledge to matter.
The problem, as usual, is bad-faith people. People who game the H-1B system... but more importantly, officials who don't stop it. Or immigration judges who rubber-stamp asylum claims. Points systems would be gamed by such people also, as Tanista suggests occurred in Canada. In the presence of such shameless bad faith, no pragmatic solution is possible. For example, if I were a good-faith pro-immigration person, and I wanted to win over good-faith anti-immigration people, I certainly would not object to the ending of a temporary asylum program with "temporary" in its very name, when the reason it was instituted is no longer in place; it would prove bad faith and would make it hard to get such temporary programs authorized in the future, assuming the anti-side was still around. Yet that's what happens. So it's all irreconcilable conflict theory, war to the knife.
But it wouldn't be allowed to spread like that.
It was largely not true in the housing crash associated with the GFC; many of the half-finished exurbs ended up simply being destroyed (before or after being scavenged for parts). And the risk-aversion it generated, along with allowing the anti-growthers to take political control, depresses housing to this day. I would not expect an AI crash to do this.
Most of it is basically GPUs with a lot of memory, and good for any massively parallel problem. Google's TPUs are more specialized, but I wouldn't be surprised if they could use them for something else.
Not really seeing it. The AI boom could fail, but I wouldn't expect a 2008-tier crash from it. The datacenters which were built will still be there and still be useful for 'conventional' computing. So more like the dot-com bust which left a bunch of dark fiber which became the foundations for a new boom.
People hate finance bros, sure. But they don't think it's unreasonable for them to have money; those who have this "wealth by profession" idea never think it's wrong for finance people to have money. It's often blue collar people (for an old example of this attitude there was an episode of Frasier where the title character was upset that his plumber had "the big Mercedes"), professional sports players, surgeons, or tech people.
And of course I knew BC was a finance bro too.
By law the IRS is not allowed to refer you to other law enforcement agencies based on your tax return. I'm sure they do anyway at least sometimes, though, but going after whores probably isn't worth it to them.
The people who don't normally riot, rioted on January 6. They were stopped, arrested, given long prison terms, fired from jobs and disqualified from public office, no flashpoint.
Civil disobedience is about violating an obviously unjust law and willingly accepting the punishment
That trick only worked once. Now the penalties are so high that unless the government is already on your side, you simply get buried under the jail if you try this. All modern civil disobedience is either counterproductive or theatrical.
- Prev
- Next

Marc Andressen was the first person to come to mind when I wrote my response to the OP. The guy was born to middle-class parents in Iowa and raised in Wisconsin. He was himself a computer programmer. He's not the kind of elitist described. (Also you can't throw him off a cliff because the man is huge.)
More options
Context Copy link