peter422

The deal is for $65/share but Instacart is trading at $57. Why? Shouldn’t it be a lot closer to 65?

It is completely possible this is a legitimate issue, but the current administration has been so corrupt about everything else it is impossible to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Even if the claim is valid I’m sure the enforcement is targeted.

You think they’d go after palintir or spacex for the same issues?

That’s what they get for not donating enough to MAGA Inc

For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law

FWIW I don't think this is true. Intention matter a lot in US law. If you could prove the AI did something bad entirely on its own and you had nothing to do with it and had no reasonable belief it was possible, I think you'd be alright.

People are not charged with hacking when their unsecured box is taken over by a botnet and does bad stuff.

I’m sure we could come up with a better system than paying extreme amounts of money to detain in terrible conditions non-violent people who were following the rules that were previously given to them.

The vast majority of sitting Democratic senators voted against funding for Israel this year.

The DSCC funding is a drop in the bucket of the overall funding in these races, and they have their own goals which may or may not be aligned with the party as a whole.

If your single issue is Israel funding (which it probably shouldn’t be but that is your choice), the Democratic Party and presidents did far more to reign in Israel’s behavior than republicans.

I created a new account recently and the default homepage was all videos that were either (a) AI slop (b) sexual imagery (c) AI slop sexual imagery.

Really not what Twitter used to be about.

It is possible he's done a good job at the micro level, but at the macro level the platform is a cesspool.

In theory I think the stock should be going up because his tenure has found Google getting left behind.

Fake it until you make it, baby!

A year ago AI wrote roughly 0% of my code and now it writes roughly 100%.

Which is to say any AI study from a year ago is fairly out of date with the speed of advancement.

Sacks has said so many obviously false things in reference to government actions (Jan 6th, Ukraine, etc) that there is no reason to trust anything he says.

If the Trump administration wants him to say something, he says it. Maybe what he is saying is true, maybe it isn’t. There is no way to know.

The story they are telling is exactly the same whether it was true or they were just shaking down Anthropic for no reason.

Anthropic just needs to donate millions of dollars to a “MAGA Inc” like Greg Brockman did and they’ll get regulated properly from now on.

It’s a perfectly good system for government regulation.

I agree. I’m a social person but I also like my purely functional conversations with LLMs, and I have a lot of them going at once!

Doesn’t replace conversations with other people but at the same time I feel no tax talking to the LLMs.

Also for all the people saying Amazon's part in this couldn't be fabricated, remember that Amazon is a "friend of the administration". During Andy Jassy's tenure, they paid $75MM (wildly outbidding everybody else) for a Melania documentary that grossed ~16MM, a move publicly defended by Jeff Bezos. Any neutral observer could see this was a wild overpay, and after the fact, a terrible business move. But that is not what Amazon said or continues to say. This was just a bribe with more steps to it.

When the government comes out and says this is due to something Amazon pointed out, even if that is a complete lie, they know that Amazon won't say anything publicly about it. Amazon wants to maintain their "friend of the administration" status that they paid a lot of money to get.

It is frustrating for all of us to have to think about our government like this, but if you just look at the reality of what is happening it is very difficult to trust not only anything the government is saying, but also anything companies aligned with the government are saying.