Well clearly not everyone is saying it's a bubble (you maybe?) so I don't know where that leaves us. Also, IIRC there are massive lawsuits underway so there's definitely people doing s.th. about it
Sure but the Forest point stands, whatever you can hide from the Forest becomes something that slows it down and allows you some, even if only brief, moat?
There’s a deeply flawed hidden assumption here, which is that the individual in question is the only possible source for the relevant information that the AI can harvest. In the real world that absurdly rare, original thought is rare because we’re in the mix with billions of others.
Scientists who hold back publishing breakthroughs have not guaranteed that they will be the sole discoverer, just that someone else will inevitably be credited when they reach the same conclusions.
the untold billions don't matter -- the AI can sift through those. social media already exists to do that, and LLMs have the luxury of often having the chaff separate from the wheat ahead of time.
science is not inevitable, and there is no telling people will reach the same conclusions in a reasonable time frame.
Let’s say it costs $10K/month/person so $120K/yr/person. Probably a big overestimate but gotta include healthcare and help people with long term stability.
That’s 120,000 x 1,000,000 = 120,000,000,000 or $120 billion USD.
Idk what the Nth order effects would be but yea I think what you’re saying tracks in the numbers
You cannot just throw money at a problem like homelessness in order to fix it. That is such an incredibly reductive viewpoint. It's akin to saying 9 mothers can birth a child in a month - oh look, we solved the population decline crisis! Someone go tell Japan!
Could you imagine Cuba with the per capita GDP of Florida?
Geopolitical and sovereignty awkwardness aside (big aside I know)…. it’s obvious Cuba, and especially the average Cuban, would benefit immensely from the island becoming a US state, no?
In an alternate universe, instead of the Castro 1959 takeover, a pro-US faction took over and requested annexation, and was accepted, since 1950s Americans all would have thought it was cool to have another cool tropical island paradise state. The Hawaii of the east coast!
If anyone thinks Cuba is better off in any metric now than they would have been in that alternate reality, I’d love to hear why.
> If anyone thinks Cuba is better off in any metric now than they would have been in that alternate reality, I’d love to hear why.
I mean, pre-Castro Cuba was basically a playground for the US rich. Like, the whole revolution was about kicking those people out.
Personally, I think that's morally justified, but I don't agree that what the US has done to them since then is morally justified. Obviously people differ on their opinions of this stuff, but collective punishment (which is what the US embargoes are) is generally regarded as a war crime.
> Obviously people differ on their opinions of this stuff, but collective punishment (which is what the US embargoes are) is generally regarded as a war crime
The definitions really keep mutating on the left don’t they. Economic sanctions are a “war crime,” “silence is violence,” etc.
> 2019, the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute adopted an amendment to the definition of war crimes applicable in NIAC detailed in article 8(2)(e). The new article (8(2)(e)(xix) prohibits the intentional use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including the deliberate prevention of relief.
Fuel for cooking food and providing heat is necessary for survival; deliberate prevention of this aid from reaching Cuba is a war crime.
> The definitions really keep mutating on the left don’t they. Economic sanctions are a “war crime,” “silence is violence,” etc.
You may have me confused with someone else, as I have never said anything about silence is violence.
Economic sanctions are definitely a method of waging war. The loss falls mostly on the ordinary people of the country, and as such are collective punishment and war crimes.
Now, is it better than bombing the people back to the Stone Age? Definitely in the short-term, but one look at what happened to Iraq after ten years of sanctions (everyone who could left) and the impact this had on post 2003 reconstruction would seem to suggest that it's the difference between acute and chronic illnesses.
reply