bayarearefugee

> Nobody in the scene wants a magic box that solves the puzzle for them.

Largely true for all people who do creatively skilled tasks, and yet AI is still coming for all of us.

The linked nypost article certainly means to imply an illicit affair, both in how things are phrased and the mention of his wife and kids (the existence of which has no bearing on the story other than to remind you they exist while he is hanging out with some other female).

This may be entirely unfair framing of course.

You will own nothing, ever, you'll just pay increasingly absurd rent to different people.

On one hand, I am legitimately happy for them.

On the other hand, I miss being able to afford computers, consoles and other electronic devices that have RAM and/or other forms of storage in them.

On the third hand, I'm not sure the second thing is likely to ever be a thing again in my lifetime unless there is a rather severe economic crash preceding it, which is, you know, also not great.

> Prolly gonna hear it for the next 16

Look at this optimist over here thinking people will still have jobs to lose in 16 years.

Also lasted longer than Anton Yelchin who played Chekov in the reboot movies and who was unfortunately crushed by his own Jeep at only 27 ten years ago

> people will be freed up for currently unimaginable cognitive pursuits.

54% of U.S. adults read below a sixth-grade level.

> The value is purely artistic. Which is its own value, to be fair. But people aren't buying these expensive cards to use them in the game. They just want them for the art (or simply the rarity)

I think its pretty much just entirely based on a current hype cycle, not even really art per se, I mean the cards aren't hand drawn or anything, they are mass produced cardboard.

Eventually the market will implode like the sneaker resale market did and people will move on to the next thing that gets hyped.

> What is the one thing that only you can specify, where your competitive advantage is maximized? Find that thing and pursue it with all your energy!

Or just look around for people who are doing this and then tell the LLM "faster <thing that the other guy did>"

> It doesn't matter if you protect your job (not using AI) if the entire company goes to the bottom of the ocean as a consequence.

The vast majority of entire companies are going to the bottom of the ocean regardless of what individual contributors do.

Once you can replace nearly every job at a company, the company doesn't need to exist. Companies are just collections of experts, if AI replaces all the experts then it replaces the whole company.

So I've adopted the accelerationist mindset of: yes, this is absolutely going to replace my job, but it is going to replace everyone else's job too so fuck it I'll use it and we'll all go down to the bottom of the ocean together.

As part of this deal he agreed to stay in California for 8 years.

So let's keep taxing that wealth year after year.

> Why has the latter captured the media so much more then the former?

Kushner is a boring nerd and Biden is a Chad with a huge dong.

Neat, but doesn't change anything about the fact that even with this protein design headstart nobody is going to pay for the human trials or the cost to produce and distribute the possible antivenom.

In practical terms this is like Claude designing you a new home. Cool, you now have blueprints for a new home. You can print it out and hang it on the wall of your studio apartment.

> > Somehow in the 1970s we got by with 1/2 as many people as we have now - why would a long, slow decline back down to that number be catastrophic?

Because we've built an economic system based on the idea that you must, at all costs, grow. Stable success is insufficient and will be seen as failure.

And then we spent many decades programming people to believe this is the only thing that can possible work.

Nothing natural about this at all, it is just the result of the cult of capitalism.