ep103

I'm having a hard time even grappling with how that could be true?

I always assumed that intellectual property was invented in order to protect against a specific use case:

If researching a new product is extremely cost intensive. But once a product is invented, it is easy to reverse engineer how the product works. Then the first firm will need intellectual property to put in the initial cost, otherwise they will not do so, as they know they will not have enough time to recoup their costs in the market before a competitor moves in with a copy-cat product without having to paid the initial costs.

Honestly, this is how all AI should be used, in most non-trivial scenearios

Trump released Iran's frozen assets, in return for them opening the straight and thereby dropping oil prices before the midterm elections.

Reminder, the reason Trump hated the Obama deal was because he construed it as paying Iran not to develop nuclear weapons. Obama was paying Iran with the money from Iran's frozen assets. Trump's deal gives them that money, and has no nuclear agreement.

According to the NY times, its a 60 day ceasefire on all fronts, and a return to pre-war status on issues like the (blockade, tolls, nuclear program, sanctions) starting this coming Friday. Also on Friday, a new round of negotiations will begin to discuss these issues.

So basically, both sides agreed to go back to the pre-war status quo for 60 days while negotiations continue.

Except one thing so far, apparently Trump has agreed to unfreeze Iranian financial assets.

Remember: the reason Trump said Obama's nuclear agreement was terrible was because Obama was "paying the Iranians to not develop nuclear weapons". What Obama did, was pay them out of these frozen assets. Which trump just gave them back for free, and without a nuclear deal.

There are ways to dodge it.

A friend of mine did this for a shady company that turned out to be a 1 person company, that then dodged the fine basically by not paying and disappering. I don't know the details, but apparently something happened legally where the guy popped back up on the radar a decade later, a parking fine or something? And as a result the cops showed up to his house and started taking his stuff, causing him to actually pay the fine. I don't remember the details, but the point is it can apparently get somewhat crazy on a small size level, apparently.

Not legally enforceable, but absolutely something that it would say in order to dissuade you from going to small claims court

yeah, and this has the advantage of both being deterministic, and only updating things that are actually linked as opposed to also accidentally updating naming collisions

Some one should let Douglas Adams know the calculation could have been so much faster if the machine just lied.

I see this sentiment repeated so often, and its so surprising to me that people have this train of thought.

If our society was organized around the needs of workers, and existed to help workers compete at their crafts (somehow), then this would make sense.

But it isn't. Every one of our jobs exists as a contract that was initially offered by an owner of capital, and created in order to make that person more money.

As such, ownership is literally the _only_ job that will never be replaced, because it is the atom from which all the rest of the market's building blocks have been built.

AI could replace every job in the market, and company-owner would be the only job left untouched, because every other job in existence, ultimately, has been created to serve that person, not the other way around.

Counter-point, developers that get used to not caring about function implementation, are going to culturally also not care as much about test implementation, making this proposed ideal impossible.

I have literally never seen a correct google summary. Maybe y'all are searching for different things than i am, but at this point I've started taking the viewpoint that if I don't know why the ai summary is wrong, then i also don't know enough about the topic to trust its summary enough to determine whether the summary is useful.

Maybe.

And then win the contracts to do this and have sufficient bankroll that they can be successfully sued and recover damages if they screw up?

No.

Someone like accenture might eat their lunch though

This is the first thing that occurred to me. The people above suggesting a cobol to python or go update confuse the heck out of me. Why not just convert to vanilla jacascript at that point? Bizarre

Yeah, I've been saying for years that LLMs are a technology that basically unlock three major new technologies:

1. Automatic shaping of online community discussions (social media, bots, etc)

2. Automatic datamining, manipulating and reacting to all digitally communicated conversations (think dropping calls or MITM manipulation of conversations between organizers of a rival poltical party in swing districts proir to an election, etc. CointelPro as a service)

3. Giving users a new UI (speech) with which they can communicate with computer applications

save it from the ai bubble collapse?