That’s true in this case, but we have to look at the long term. Even now, the US pays about $1 trillion per year just on interest on the debt. That is a huge chunk of the budget going towards something completely unproductive. As the debt increases, the share of interest payments will go higher unless interest rates are reduced but that will only kick the can down the road if the budget is not fixed to stimulate more productive activity.

As we continue down this road, there will come a time when there is little to no confidence that the US can pay back its debt and the US would be unable to sell its debt unless they significantly increase interest rates to entice investors. When that time comes, the US will have to print an even greater amount of money just to keep up with payments because so much of the budget is going towards unproductive activity that does not generate meaningful additional revenue. With confidence reducing in the US’s ability to pay back debts, that also means reduced confidence in the US dollar itself, making it worth less.

You’re right that the amount of US dollars issued is not enough to cause inflation on its own, but in this case it is a symptom of the problem of bad allocation.

Runaway inflation is also harmful to welfare in the long run.

Removed by mod

Yay cats!

These politicians are either gigantic morons or malicious pieces of shit. Probably both.

Bush created ICE (plus the surveillance state apparatus we’re stuck with today), invaded Iraq, had a stupid border fence, and had surging oil prices towards the end of his term along with the greatest financial crisis since the great depression. Trump is merely following the same script, financial crisis pending.

I’m doing my part!

If people know you’re a liar, lying more won’t help you.

This clock is too confusing, can I have terror alert colors instead?

Building your business on AI is like building on quicksand.

It’s easy to provide a good place to live when you’ve got tons of wealth. Just because the US treats some people well to score political points, doesn’t mean it’s a better place to live overall. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, you can see how the US acts when there’s no competition. Wealth inequality soars, civil rights get rolled back, social services get cut, and the cost of living goes crazy, including the cost of schooling that was supposed to put us ahead. It’s why the US screams endlessly about how dangerous China is, because they don’t want competition that would require them to provide some benefits for their peasants so they can continue thinking the US is “the greatest country in the world”.

The US was actively trying to get whatever talent they could out of the USSR. It’s called brain drain, and it’s an effective way to prevent rival countries from growing.

It’s not human intelligence, it’s human knowledge, and LLMs are running fancy autocomplete on prompts using that vast sum of knowledge.

There is no assumption, genius.

Then you go on to describe everything in terms of the election system we have in place specifically set up to trap you within these two seemingly (but not actually) different choices. If the system is specifically set up this way, then what makes you think the people who control the system will let us make any meaningful change? It’s clear they have overarching goals and they manage to make progress towards these goals regardless of which party gets in.

You mean like how both parties support the genocide of Palestinians? You mean like how the Iran war enjoys bipartisan support even if they sometimes hold meaningless votes to show opposition that doesn’t translate to meaningful action against it (and they only hold those votes when they know it won’t do anything)? Maybe you get fooled by the political theater, but not everyone is as impressed by the rattle shaking.

It wasn’t the voting that made the change, “but go off”.

The least bad option, if you assume we only have two options, also supports genocide. Maybe the stupid one is the one who plays along with this stupid game. You’re not going to break out of the game by playing within its rules, especially when the rules change any time a potential exploit is found. Slow torture with breaks is still torture.

One problem and…

Still, it required humans to apply the finishing touches.

“The raw output of ChatGPT’s proof was actually quite poor. So it required an expert to kind of sift through and actually understand what it was trying to say,” Jared Lichtman, a mathematician at Stanford University whose doctoral thesis centered on one Erdős’s conjectures, told SciAm.

I’ve got news for you: if you support genocide then you’re already a fascist.

The trolley problem is used to pretend harm reduction works, but if you extend the image, you’ll find all the ones tied on the bottom rail will be moved to the top rail, just spaced out so that one side can pretend they’re slightly better, even though they’ll end up killing the same people anyway. If you think it’s acceptable to let “the good guys” carry out a genocide, then you’ll find anything acceptable. Keep sacrificing one group after the other as you justify your harm reduction scheme.

“First they came for[…]” I’ll let you figure out the rest.