crostlybostly

Yes some people think racist policies are okay if they help minorities and women.

I think his point was that at least now you are free to buy expensive ram and comoete with the AI companies if you value having your own. In a planned economy maybe you don’t even get that option.

Uber / gig economy seems to be the biggest difference

Uhh Goldman Sachs came to my campus in 2010 and said they were only there to interview women and minorities. That is systemic racism.

Ranting about “Black people cant be racist” is a great way to get most people to ignore everything you say after.

Everyone can be racist. No one wants to debate pedantic redefined terms that liberal arts professors came up with so they could sell books.

Its all connected. Everything you buy comes down to how labor or capital is deployed. No one wants to pick your carrot or deliver it or work in a retail store if they can make more money shining shoes, building yachts, building mansions, etc. for a billionaire.

But the bigger flaw in your logic is that investment is a good things. We want investment in plants, warehouses, technology, pharma. That is what wealthy people do with their excess money is speculate and invest in these new things that will serve everyday people.

If you give that money away the people who recieve it are not going to invest it. They are going to blow it on trivial things and consumption.

But you can still ignore / n use AI though

My point is that slop is not an AI problem. Instagram, blog recipes, 207 marvel sequals, countless photos of the same famous tourist spots. Humans were spreading slop like crazy well before AI. It is just now they can make it even easier. Its a human issue, not an AI issue.

Before AI there were millions of stupid blog posts with roughly the same recipes with minor deviations. It was literally human made slop.

At least AI can give me a concise recipe without ads or making me scroll through some story about a brisk day in october.

Trigger unnecessary consumption will increase prices. Its basic supply and demand… econ 101 stuff.

I’m all for the right to slut it up! I just don’t think taxpayers should have to subsidize others bad decisions!

It isn’t only afforded to the wealthy. But lets be honest - the US is one of the easiest places in the world to make a living. If someone is unable to make it work here, they are probably making bad choices. Taxpayers should not have to subsidize bad choices.

I just mean making bad choices should not mean you suddenly get to live in your ideal house funded by taxpayers.

Having two kids on a low income is a bad choice.

She should not be punished. But she also should not be rewarded.

Huh?

So when society says a business owner's assets are worth more than $1B they start losing control of the business they built and other people get to tell them how to run their business? That destroys a lot IMO

Do you think it is wise to have two kids on one income when you can barely make rent? Are we going to hold the mother accountable at all or is society to blame for that situation?