nonethewiser

I dont think there is any law the scheme breaks. People dont seem to be reading the article though.

The recent development is that there is now news that her team coordinated it. She previously stated under oath that they did not, which is opening up the door for perjury which is of course illegal.

> And the republicans have done this many times.

When have they coordinated getting a second person with the same name on the ballot to confuse voters?

Did you read the NYT article?

The recent development is that the former campaign manager admitted to the scheme. Before that it was strict denial that they coordinated it, including under oath.

Summary: The New York Times reported that Mary Peltola's Democratic campaign for Alaska's Senate seat recruited a candidate with the same name as Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan on the ballot, in a bid to confuse voters.

Or will confidently assert something that 1 person speculated about on Reddit

>How much of this is the current uncertainty over politics in the US?

Would you like to posit a theory? The article says nothing about this, and states entirely different causes. This concern seems rather tangential to recent market activity

The day is coming when we have widespread local inference on super powerful and efficient hardware and people will ask it what time the store closes, get distracted, and then ask it again instead of scrolling up.

>Don't fall for the spin. This is just an added cost they always wanted to add.

Maybe. But they didn't. And they didn't do it everywhere else that didn't pass this regulation.

And why shoulnd't NYC raise the minimum higher? That's $47k per year which is meager for NYC.

>Was Pets.com burning tens of billions of dollars per year? This comparison is not favorable to Anthropic.

You can't just look at burn rate.

Let's compare Anthropic and Pets.com and see who it favors.

Pets.com lost about $8 for every $1 of revenue. They paid $2.24 for every $1 of dog food it sold - dog food you could already buy in the store.

Anthropic lost about $1.70 per $1 in 2025, on a product that didn’t exist a few years ago. There revenue has since grown about 7x.

And my point doesn’t rely on this comparison, which I think so clearly favors Anthropic. Pets.com died, yet internet services are more widespread than ever. People even buy pet food online more than ever. If Anthropic folds, the models and the demand for them don’t go away with it.

I agree eventually but I was talking about within the next couple years.

Right but the philosophy regarding what intelligience is wasn't forced on them.

Arent you disagreeing with yourself? You say these people are just now wrestling with the question of what intelligence is despite it being a longstanding philosophical question. So it clearly wasn’t forced on them.

By that logic financial regulation is philosophy too but that makes the original comparison of financial regulation to philosophy non sensical. You’re shifting the terminology beneath out feet.

Law is downstream of philosophy. Youre forced to deal with conclusions that may be based in philosophy (or they may be arbitrary or self interested). Nobody makes you hold a position on mens rea. In that way you can ignore the philosophy.

>Do you believe that we're in an AI bubble?

I'd prefer to concretely define the term before answering this. It's loaded. I think "bubble" is generally thrown around way too liberally anytime something is goes up a lot.

It's possible that valuations will crash. I think it would be temporary though. I think something like the internet tech stock crash of the early 2000s is possible although I think the fundamentals are much better here. I would wager it wont crash anything like that. I mean, would you liken Anthropic to Pets.com? And keep in mind even with that crash the internet is more ubiquitous now than ever, and the major players then are not necessarily the major ones now. Anthropic and OpenAI can go under.

> What happens if Anthropic and OpenAI go under?

What would the implication of that be though? The AI models arent going away. The tech is still there.