thisgoesnowhere

> But regulation can be a prison where you can pay to be free.

As opposed to no regulation where you can't? I don't understand this sentiment at all.

I guess you are the former?

What incentive is there to own a negative income asset unless you are lying and you actually are net positive. Unless of course you are the latter and you are claiming that someone should bail you out?

"I'm completely underwater on this asset but if I sell I lose money" yeah that's how that works it's called an investment you can win or lose.

Then sell?

I don't cry about the money I lost investing in startups I just keep investing. Why are you crying about the money you are losing like you are supposed to be absolutely guaranteed to make money?

The reason you aren't selling is because you are lying or you believe the government should bail you out of your bad decisions.

Same reason as in real life over time everyone will be a renter.

We subsidize landlords and as a result they have effectively unlimited capital to throw at additional properties meaning the price perpetually goes up and they have more assets to loan against to buy more properties.

Then we allow them to take a depreciation value off their taxes on a asset that is appreciating in value.

It's truly insane.

Restaurants solve the problem of lack of time not absence of food.

Most people drink most people aren't horrible parents. You are working at the extremes.

And yeah some extremes are bad.

I wasn't referring to this article.

I mean there is absolutely no reason to think that AI (broadly) and blockchain are going to follow similar trajectories.

I agree that every company becoming an "AI company" is not in the cards. However, I think there is going to be a slow ramp where every startup just throws a few annoying problems at a LLM instead of hiring ML people.

And kinda like the internet it's just a tool that you use when appropriate, but the things where it's appropriate will continue to expand.

He's not just out of touch he's actively pushing pretty horrific shit like the abolition of the state. He also agrees with Balaji about everything and therefore should not be trusted.

Crony capitalism is such an intellectual cop-out.

The people who say this garbage would never let any other ideology weasel its way out of the effects of their system in practice, but for some bizarre reason, the giga brains at Reason are allowed to get a pass and say that this is not true capitalism.

The type of capture by regulation outlined in the article is the direct result of a political landscape that prioritizes corporate power over government power. There is nothing "crony" about it; it's just capitalism.

P.S. This is not pro or anti-capitalist; it's anti-shitty argument.

This is engagement farming.

You write a bot that is able to look for similar content from the past and copy paste the top comments and replies. THis has been happening since the beginning of time. I remember seeing this on college humor.

This is a super easy non expensive way to get an account with a ton of karma.

This is a completely out of reach solution for most people.

Yeah also the non compete stuff is absolutely fantastic even if it only affects those with middle class income.

Shits happening again and I'm here for it. Constant gridlock in passing laws is terrible.

The team I work on processes 5B+ tokens a month (and growing) and I'm the EM overseeing that.

Here are my take aways

1. There are way too many premature abstractions. Langchain, as one of may examples, might be useful in the future but at the end of the day prompts are just a API call and it's easier to write standard code that treats LLM calls as a flaky API call rather than as a special thing.

2. Hallucinations are definitely a big problem. Summarizing is pretty rock solid in my testing, but reasoning is really hard. Action models, where you ask the llm to take in a user input and try to get the llm to decide what to do next, is just really hard, specifically it's hard to get the llm to understand the context and get it to say when it's not sure.

That said, it's still a gamechanger that I can do it at all.

3. I am a bit more hyped than the author that this is a game changer, but like them, I don't think it's going to be the end of the world. There are some jobs that are going to be heavily impacted and I think we are going to have a rough few years of bots astroturfing platforms. But all in all I think it's more of a force multiplier rather than a breakthrough like the internet.

IMHO it's similar to what happened to DevOps in the 2000s, you just don't need a big special team to help you deploy anymore, you hire a few specialists and mostly buy off the shelf solutions. Similarly, certain ML tasks are now easy to implement even for dumb dumb web devs like me.