In fact, my chatbot promissed it never hallucinates.

No, that kind of crap is why CEOs act like the poor are greedy bastards. Do not confuse a philosophy for the people most likely to have it.

Capitalism is an economic philosophy, not the state of having capital. If you believe in the philosophy you are a capitalist, regardless of how much money you have. You can be a broke capitalist, you can be a wealthy and be a communist.

Mostly it depends on whether you think people should have the freedom to make money or not. That is the true heart of capitalism. Many wealthy people HATE the idea of poor people getting a fair shot to become wealthy. Some poor people think it is just about luck, not work.

The truth is you need both work and luck. It is quite possible to work hard on the 2nd best new invention and end up broke. It is also very likely to win the lottery and be broke 5 years later (in fact, most do that).

The reason is simple, they have no knowledge or first hand experience of what it does. Most government agencies do FAR more than people realize.

And there is very little waste in honest governments compared to businesses, religion and non-profits. Governments always have budgets too small for their required jobs so they tend to look for people and things to cut. Businesses often make so much money that a bit of waste is ignored. Religion and non-profits decide what to do based on the money available. For these reasons waste tends to pile up in business, religion and non-profits but not in governments that are responsible to their citizens. (Note in corrupt governments, they do not care if they do what they are supposed to do, so this does not apply).

Examples of things people do not know government does:

Department of Energy deals with nuclear bomb materials, so they have lots of armed security with the fancy guns not just pistols.

TSA is not just air travel, it also deals with naval ports and roads. Also hazard material transport.

The Bureau of Reclamation is not just dams and powerplants, they also do canals.

In my experience, CEO's that make millions and have bonuses that are 10x their salary expect people to work 12 hour days, 6 day a week for 5 figure salaries that have no overtime. After all, they do that, so why shouldn't everyone else.

The fact that a CEO says his employees had no work ethic says more about the CEO than it does about the employees.

Work is a trade. I give you work in exchange for money. If you do not think I work hard enough that almost always means you do not pay me enough money.

Anyone that does not understand this trade is not a capitalist. They might be a communist, an oligarch, a fascist, or some other idealogue, but not a capitalist.

That is not a problem the military has. They buy large DRM contracts and spend enough money for the companies to forgo the online requirements.

It does shift jobs around, often requiring new training and sometimes turns good paying jobs into crappy ones.

Why? Because jobs are not a zero sum game. There is not a set amount of work that needs to be done, we keep expanding what we want.

A thousand years ago jobs like Sommelier and Influencer were almost unheard of. That does not mean people did not do those things - selecting wines and promoting products. It just meant no one made a living doing those things.

Jobs are just people doing things that other people want badly enough to pay someone to do. People are lazy. There is ALWAYS something they want someone to do. The money doesn't go away when the billionaire fires the chauffeur and buy an AI driven car, they just decide to spend the money on something else. Maybe he buys more art, or goes on a trip to the moon.

The same thing happens at a smaller scale for poorer people. If I was going to buy x for $100, but if I buy the cheaper $50 chinese knock off, I will still spend the whole $50, I just am likely to also get item y, which I really wanted but could not afford. The same money gets spent, it just goes to more people.

Work will never run out. We will always have something else to spend the money on. The retraining can be annoying but is not a huge issue.

The real danger is of transforming high end jobs into crappy things. Moving from master carpenters to table saw operators to 3d printer coders. The products go from intricate wood pieces to plastic crap and the pay goes down accordingly.

Any media that is really 'uncensorable' by definition fills up with things that are disgusting.

That is, if you can't stop people from saying things you dislike, then you also cannot stop people from posting:

1) Underage Porn.
2) Videos of Murder.
3) Literally satanic speeches.
4) Nasty vile racist comments.
5) Hateful false accusations (pictures of X raping Y - with claims they are not AI generated)

If you can stop this from happening, then you can censor the media. In fact, these are the excuses why people censor stuff.

The 'casino' did not lose. Neither did anyone else.

This is one of those lotteries where if no one wins they roll over the winnings to the next one.

In cases like this, the casino does not lose, but the odds actually go into your favor of playing. That is, when you buy one of each number you are guaranteed of winning.

The people that talk about lotteries being idiot taxes do not seem to understand that this kind of lottery becomes a tax on smart people.

Note there is still risk, if enough others had done the same thing, they would all have lost money.

Instinctively we think of Artificial Intelligence to be Sapient and Sophont - effectively Data from Star Trek and other such artificial life from movies. That is nothing at all like what we have.

What we have is more like the very first multi-cellular life form that developed the first nerve cells. The reason it does so much is not because it is sophisticated but because WE apply our intelligence to it, forming it into powerful tools. It is impressive because it relies on our intelligence, otherwise it is rather simplistic.

Schmidt seems like a fool. His business uses a lot of energy so he claims his technology needs it. That is not logical. His next quote is more inane nonsense (The idea that X is too important to consider Y issues ). Nothing is ever too important to ignore other issues. We build things up by taking previous issues into account, not ignoring them.

Furthermore we do not know if "The AI race" is important at ALL, so far it is has helpful but not evolutionary important. Not like the combustion engine, computers, cellphones, etc. Yes it is powerful and helping business do things cheaper. But it hasn't added anything truly new to the world yet.

The assumption that new tech will solve new old problems is also a bad idea.

Also, China is not our real competition for AI. They have money and want to be our competitor but cannot truly compete. The real centers for AI research are:

Canada, France, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New York State and California.

Honestly, California has more money and more brains on this issue than anyone else. The real story is California vs everyone else.

Some idiot thinks a crypto currency is going to be less eratic than ANY countries currency.

Lets ignore that foolishness. The US debt is not high. One of the problems with big numbers is people do not instinctively know if they are 'high' or 'low'.

If I were to tell you that a shoe had 5 billion atoms in it - would you think that is a big shoe or a small shoe? You do not know because you do not know how many atoms are in any shoe.

36 trillion sounds like a big debt. You have nothing to compare it to. The proper comparison is to the GDP.

In the 709s the US debt to GDP ratio was in the 30s. It was less than 40% of the GDP. We made in 5 months than our national debt was. Currently (2024) it is around 120%. That is, it it takes about 15 months to earn back our debt. 120% is on the high side. Canada has 108%, France has 111%, UK is about 97.6%

The problem countries have ratios like Venezuela 146%, Sudan 256%, Japan 255%.

Basically anything below 140% is high but not yet problematic.

Do we need to be concerned? Absolutely. Whether you like D. Trump or not, he has admitted it will be a rough time in the near future. I would expect the Debt to go up significantly at least until the President (whoever it might be) no longer seeks to scare other countries into obeying him. That is going to take at least another 6 months, and quite possibly till 2029.

The problem is, crypto should suffer just as much as the US economy. If only because much of the crypto gain was driven by the same people in the stock market.

First, let me state that more viable organs for transplants will definitely save lives. I speak from experience, as I underwent a kidney transplant about 5 years ago. Their are long waiting lists, and if could give out organs to all that need them, we could probably expand the lists and save cancer patients by cutting deeper.

Second, there are multiple ways to solve this problem. Certain less reputable countries solve it via prisoners. Others solve it via cash payments. But these less reputable solutions are not the only ones.

Some countries solve the problem not with money or unethical laws, but instead with social engineering. Spain is the world leader in organ transplants. They do so not with criminals and not with money. Instead they have an 82% consent record. That means that 82% of families asked to donate organs do so.

Others countries do it by switching from an opt-in (you agree to donate), to an opt-out (where if you do not want to donate after death you must sign an opt-out preventing donation). Though truthfully this does not result in a huge difference unless the culture also changes.

But even without attempting to change the culture / laws, there are good reasons to create these organs for the purpose of transplantation. New tech does not just solve the existing problems, it also creates new demand for problems we did not know existed.

For example, there are things called domino transplants, where an organ donor gives a healthy organ to someone in desperate need while simultaneously getting a less healthy organ themselves from a deceased donor. This lets someone that is borderline donor candidate give to someone that is a borderline recipient candidate, where normally the doctor would say it is too risky for either of them.

If we have an excess of cheap organs, then we could significantly lower the requirements before we transplant. It would be nice for people with failing organs that also have hepatitis to get an organ transplant and hope to cure the hepatitis, rather than waiting to cure the disease before they transplant.

If hospitals had organs ready to go, stored in the hospital, then when someone is in an accident, they could both fix the accident damage and give them a new organ in one surgery, rather than patching them up and waiting for them to make it to the top of the organ list.

Here is a link to Allie Brosh's Pain chart. It is far superior to anything done by a neural scientist.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F02%2Fboyfriend-doesnt-have-ebola-probably.html

To misquote 'This is Spinal Tap', Not only does it go to 11, it goes all the way to TWELVE.

The pictures are a far better representation of what it actually feels.

And finally, Ms. Allie Brosh knows what she is talking about, she has real experience and the mind to make something of it.

A large part of it is going to be scut work and personalization.

That is, AI shows me TV shows it thinks I like, I ignore 9 of them, and watch 1, which increases their revenue by 1 show.

I also watch one my friend suggested, and another I saw advertised.

I watched 3 shows, 1 of them suggested by AI. By their math, AI increased the number of shows I watched by 50%, a double digit increase in tv shows.

How to tell when someone is not telling the truth:

They talk about OTHER people's political views. THEY are not....
Etc.

You are not an expert in X group even if you belong to it. To be an expert in a group you need to study it nationwide, not hang out with a tiny subset that you think is representative.

NY Democrats are not California Democrats are not Illinois Democrats. White Democrats are not Black Democrats, not to mention other races, religions, etc.

The political party platforms are different than the actual agendas of the politicians which differ from the desires of their members

In my lifetime I have seen the GOP agenda go from Conservative to Conservative/Nationalist to Rural/Nationalist to Corporate/Racist. All with barely a change to their party platforms and until the last change to minimal effect on their membership.