SideQuark

Well, there are tons of other things newly proven any LLMs, as well as lots of other things once termed creative and the domain of humans only, that LLMs and other models have surpassed the "creative" humans, that all you have to do is find one to realize that humans are not the only creative force on earth.

Something like the forest and trees applies here.

Did CNN or MSNBC lose a billion dollar lawsuit for knowingly promoting false stories while, and I quote from the Fox case, calling their own viewers “stupid, stupid, stupid” for believing their content? Did CNN or MSNBC shareholders sue them due to the damage caused by promoting false stories on purpose?

Maybe there is some demonstrable difference to size and scale of willful dishonestly among outlets.

They don’t.

US share of disposable income spent on food has cut in half since 1960.

Transistors doubled for so long, but pretty much no other technology has come close, so it’s not like going to improve for very long, which is far more common. Transistors only did it due to a quirk in physics, that of electrons being long lasting, super tiny, and fairly controllable. We’re out of such particles to make another set of leaps.

For data bound things, there’s also fundamental laws of information theory, far stronger than physics theories, since they’re theorems about math. And LLMs can only compress knowledge so far, and we’re about at it now.

If Google communicates to Schumer, then do you think Schumer would then sit down and write the policy, knowing very little about it?

In reality, many companies would get Schumer attention on crypto, and other regulators, the companies would use their expertise to craft sensible policy, politicians would work with that, run it by lots of other groups and politicians, and if it passed enough tests along the way, it might come up as a bill.

It’s not like Google, or any company, likely can just put in ludicrous things, and use wizard powers to make laws. If a company breaks trust, they will lose the ability to get ears. If politicians, or parties lose trust, they get unelected. So, in order to have sane laws regarding any complex topic requires huge specialist inputs, and those specialists became expert by working in that field.

There’s simply not a pool of such people sitting around unassociated waiting to write laws to specifications of random internet people.

Yes, absolutely. Simply check. They’ve spent far over a billion over the past decade directly to politicians, PACs, etc. The teachers union is the largest union in the US, and I think even the world.

Simply google the question, plenty of sources.

I can no data even close to your 50x claim. The most toll intensive states ($ of toll per mile driven) don’t even break even on annual maintenance costs, much less initial outlay for the roads. The gap is covered in other state and federal programs.

So, care to cite the states where the tollways paid for the road costs by 50x?

People don’t randomly sell, so treating all dates as a uniform random variable makes no sense to complain about.

Not understanding how investing works doesn’t make everyone else behave under your misunderstandings.

They invest because they’re smarter than cherry picking outliers to base behavior on, like you are. They have empirically done well as a group over standard timeframes.

If you’re claiming the merger that created Enron is the sole or majority of its fraud 16 years later, then explain the vast majority of other mergers that weren’t fraud.

Or are you claiming anything that was a merger ends like Enron?

Income at all levels of labor has vastly increased over 80 years, more so than likely any country on earth, and certainly for any population this large, so something in your choice of words doesn't match reality.

None of those were the result of mergers.

Fighting for free roads is a sure way to have crap or no roads to a lot of places. If you (or any consumer) gets value from there bring roads, then you should pay some for that value. It’s not subsidizing the super rich - sounds like you want others to subsidize you.

> Consumers shouldn't pay anything at all for roads.

If consumers get value from roads they should pay. Consumer road damage is certainly measurable, since plenty of roads disallow heavy trucks.

It’s silly to claim because one can see a billboard that the billboard would subsidize the value a consumer derives from roads. Putting up a billboard didn’t cause consumer utility of having a road to become zero. And private property owners are generally free to put up plenty of things, billboards included, without this odd request they subsidize others that look onto their property.