2022-26 is irrelevant for people's retirement savings. They are not or should not be even paying attention to that short-term movement. If the bubble bursts there will be collateral damage that impacts way more than just AI or AI-adjacent companies, and that could have long-term consequences
They do not have a choice of whether to buy in if they are doing the sound strategy of index funds through their 401k, funds which are now inflated by the bubble
Let the VC fuckers starve to death before they use MY retirement fund without my consent because they bribe regulator to include them in protected indexes even if they have not followed the process
Probably aligns with #2. They probably will buy the dip.
3) fuck me if i identify myself with my job, and only my job.
i can assure you that if coding will ever die becuase of AI (it won't.) it doesn't matter because i have a list of other interests and skills i cultivated growing up, and even now. I even have a few i haven't fully explored because a day is only 24 hours, and if i need a job, a competent person will always have work, he can get up to a new task in little time. I have friends always looking for someone with half a brain. Do you have at least half a brain? As a matter of fact, i feel sorry for those that can't see past their day job.
The other poster is right, i took the bait (willingly)
This is absolute nonsense. He is explicitly saying he does not feel threatened by it because he is confident in his own coding skills, and that he does not tie his identity to his work, and you are just making things up saying he actually believes the opposite.
Did the federal government bail out dotcom burst? Why and how do you think the government can bail out an AI burst?
Too fast? So it’s getting too smart too fast to you. But at the same time, they are going to need a bailout to you.
I don’t think they’re tricking anyone at all. Most normal people don’t care. They just use AI when it’s helpful to them. It’s only people who are on HN or X who care.
The dotcom burst wasn't concentrated in a a couple of well-connected companies. The better comparison is the financial crisis, and yes, they did bail them out.
No, it is not getting too smart. Moving too fast means exactly the opposite, they are doing idiotic and destructive things because the models are not as smart as they want us to think
It's clear from reading your posts in this thread you are just trolling and not trying to have good faith discussion
What is the government going to do? Bail out Nvidia, Google, Microsoft, Meta? Why? They're all extremely profitable companies. At worse, they lose a year or two of profits. Who cares.
No, it is not getting too smart. Moving too fast means exactly the opposite, they are doing idiotic and destructive things because the models are not as smart as they want us to think
The ability to do destructive things suggests that AI's capabilities are increasing.
Do you have good faith discussion? You haven't acknowledged anything that is a pro of AI.
We are building more dirty fossil fuel energy to keep up with AI demands. When the solar build out is further along, and the grid is updated, it will be more acceptable to be using so much energy. Spinning up a bunch of new gas powered plants because they want to move too fast is terrible
What is never totally clear with a lot of these releases is the scope of what it's good at. Models that can run with good speed on affordable consumer hardware for coding only is the dream. I am never going to use this for writing, images, or "general knowledge". Coding only
Imagine there is a latin dance club, most want to dance rumba. But a pair who happens to be of other race wants to dance tango. Would sending them to another dance club be racist?
If some behavior associates with race, it doesn't mean that it is caused by race. There are plenty of African or Muslim origin people who assimilate just fine. It's just that a larger proportion than natives, some "other" groups commit more crime or live off of welfare. Race associates with less merit, yes, but doesn't cause it. Cause is merit, not race, hence not racism.
Imagine you're making a pizza, but you're out of pepperoni. Your mother-in-law is allergic to bacon. Now imagine I'm leaving your house and riding my bike into the sunset.
Like I said, if an attribute is statistically associated with another, then one doesn't cause the other. Proportionally larger part of the immigrants produce less value to society and come to consume away what the natives produced, then basis for reducing immigration or "remigration" is merit, not race.
If you are unable to point errors in this line of thought, then making fun of it will unfortunately make your stance look even weaker.
-- Proportionally larger part of the immigrants produce less value to society and come to consume away what the natives produced
This is absolute nonsense in every way, in addition to being racist and xenophobic. You aren't special because you won the lottery of what line you were born inside of. Get over yourself.
Do you think migrants from, say, Mexico to the US or Morocco to Spain, are skilled workers?
Also, unfortunately the lottery is real: while there are productive people who become wealthy mostly due to their own effort, there are many more who are just born into a well off country and benefit from the history before. But the question is, should a country that is well off somehow let everyone in to enjoy these benefits because it is "fair"? I guess your answer is yes, mine is no. I'd say, if you drew the less good lottery ticket then it's up to you to climb the ladder, rather than get into a rich country and start using its social services.
They absolutely are skilled workers, more skilled than you for sure. And they contribute a great deal to the country while not getting the benefits of being citizens, they pay way more taxes than the limited services they use.
And there is no ladder to climb, it is nearly impossible to migrate legally and gain citizenship. One of the many big lies of xenophobic, racist, anti-immigration people is "they should do it the right way, come legally" when for the overwhelming majority of people it simply isn't possible, and the current admin is making it even harder, motivated purely by racism.
Another one of the big lies, one that you are doing here, is wildly overstating the extent to which they "enjoy the benefits". Mexican immigrants are not eligible for most of the services provided to citizens.
Every attempt at quantifying the impact of Mexican immigration to the US is overwhelmingly positive to the country. You have nothing to stand on but racism.
None of the discussions on sending migrants out or being stricter on immigration is about color or race in principle. The issues are that legal processes aren't followed for immigration, or that the other cultures bring a disproportionate amount of new forms of crime.
Since enforcing laws and fighting crime is what states are doing anyway, then doing them more on immigrants achieves that goal more. (The situation is of course also unfortunate for any decent immigrants, as it will be more difficult for them to enter.)
But it's you who for some reason turns the merit argument into a race one. They do conflate, yes, perhaps that is why you can't tell the difference?
You keep saying things that are blatantly false. Immigrants commit fewer crimes. There is no legal process that will allow the vast majority of immigrants to migrate legally.
There is absolutely no merit based argument against the immigrants who are here or trying to come here. It's completely about race no matter how hard you try to deny it. No one is buying this nonsense.
reply