Definitely. The AI bubble is going to burst, the tech companies are going to demand a bailout, and they're going to get it.
And, if you thought the Obama bailout of the banks after the 2007/2008 financial crisis was bad, keep in mind, that bailout was done by competent people, many of whom actually took their role as public servants seriously. The AI bubble bailout will be handled by Don Jr. and Big Balls.
It does have a business model, but that doesn't mean it's going to survive the bubble bursting.
Like, sure, this is selling shovels to gold prospectors. But, they're also accepting loans from the prospectors and giving them shovels in the expectation of being paid back later. Plus they're switching everything they do to shovel selling, and ignoring all previous businesses. I hope everybody with nVidia stock is slowly selling it off while it's at a sky high valuation, because it's going to make a dinosaur-killing crater when the AI bubble pops.
I also struggle with the idea of being proud of my country. I'm pleased when it does something good, but I really have no influence over it, so whether it does good or bad things is not something that reflects me.
I've also heard this argument in the context of copyright. Copyright is not necessary for creativity to happen. Artists are going to art whether or not they get paid for it. The difference is that we, as a society, want artists to be able to live well while dedicating themselves to making art.
The problem with copyright is that it has been weaponized by moneyed interests in a way that often means we get less art, rather than more.
Fan art is incredibly common, and before copyright it was one of the main sources of all art. Almost all the tales of King Arthur are basically fan art. People would take the King Arthur setting and characters and tell their own stories involving those characters. But, in the modern world, copyright law gives companies a way to stop people from telling fan-art stories. As Cory Doctorow has said, at this point adding more copyright protection is basically like giving a bullied kid more lunch money. It's just going to be passed on to the bullies.
So, now we have a situation where copyright is a pretty shitty tool to help artists because it has mostly been turned into a weapon for corporations to use against artists. Meanwhile, we have "AI" that essentially ignores or bypasses copyright to create "derivative" works that look or sound like the works of certain artists, but where they don't even get the meagre pennies they get under the old copyright system.
I think we've really been at a "burn it all down and start over" phase for a while now, when it comes to how to encourage artists to create art.
If a war kicked off, you wouldn't want to be in Canada. Canada would lose within days. Then it would become a guerrilla war. 100% chance if that happened that Trump would institute collective punishment, killing 1000 Canadians for every American killed by guerrillas.
The most helpful think Americans could do is stay in the US and fight from within. In fact, why wait for the Canada phase to start? Why not actually do something now?
Yeah, exactly. If you have a cognitive test and everything is as expected, they're not going to schedule another one just for fun. And, while you could have a second one to show that things are improving... improving from what? What cognitive impairment was there where he was expected to show improvement? There's no way to spin having multiple cognitive tests as a good thing, regardless of how he performed on them.
I have incredibly low expectations for Trump, but virtually every day he somehow still astonishes me with his idiocy.
But, what's a lot more disturbing is that nobody in this administration is trying to keep him out of the spotlight.
It was awful that when Biden's team realized he was losing his mental faculties, they kept it under wraps and tried to act like everything was normal. But, at least they realized that he wasn't normal, and that the world wouldn't have confidence if the US president was in visible cognitive decline. Normally when an elder gets dementia, you take away the car keys. But here they're letting Trump drive, and they're sitting in the car with him as he drives down the sidewalk, and they're grinning, acting like everything is normal.
The only slight hint of normality here is that he's apparently taken a lot of cognitive exams lately. That's not normal, so someone must be convincing him that it's necessary, and actually managing to get him to repeatedly take that test. Maybe it actually will reach a point where he fails the cognitive test badly enough that they take away the keys. Then again, with MAGA if he orders the US to nuke Greenland, there's a pretty decent chance they'll do it rather than risk what could happen if they question his orders.
I find it telling that you don't think India would have figured out some of the issues without the British's "help" is pretty classic colonialist thinking.
Sometimes things are invented multiple times. But, typically it's hundreds of years between their invention. I find it telling that you somehow think that India, which was hundreds of years behind in technology, would have magically discovered that technology on their own without contact with more technologically advanced civilizations.
And why do you keep going on about that one factor?
Because it's widely seen as one of the most important changes in human history.
Constant internal wars are part of a nation figuring it out
Ah, ok. Figuring it out is good if it's your own people killing you. It's only bad if the person has white skin.
Inventor spends their own time and money to build a prototype
Inventor shows the product off to the world.
If it truly is a world changing invention, step 4 is "world is amazed, inventor can't keep up with demand". There are also frequent cases where the world goes "meh, not for me". Now occasionally those are when an invention is ahead of its time, and years or decades later the inventor is vindicated. The other case is when the invention really isn't good, and there simply isn't and will never be demand for it.
Somehow, the AI bubble is built with people ignoring the feedback from people that keep saying "meh, not for me", and the various "inventors" burning more and more of their money trying to change people's minds. Has that ever worked?
Capitalism says that the market won't reward people making those things, and the companies might fail as a result.
But, we're no longer in a capitalist world. We're in a corporatist world where it's closer to technolfeudalism where it doesn't really matter how bad your idea is, because you aren't out to make a profit, instead you're out to extract rent.
This is the thing I hope people learn about LLMs, it's all hallucinations.
When an LLM has excellent data from multiple sources to answer your question, it is likely to give a correct answer. But, that answer is still a hallucination. It's dreaming up a sequence of words that is likely to follow the previous words. It's more likely go give an "incorrect" hallucination when the data is contradictory or vague. But, the process is identical. It's just trying to dream up a likely series of words.
You can have a single person in charge without them having the title "CEO".
Making your title CEO is also basically accepting a lot of the cultural baggage that comes with the term.