I want to see an LLM create an entirely novel genre of music that synthesizes influences from many different other genres and then spreads that genre to other musicians. None of this insulated crap. Actual cultural spread of novel ideas.
Currently the law requires substantially more testing (and lost product) for raw milk sales. It is hard for be to believe that pasteurization is a significant cost such that the choice is based on cost rather than a product goal.
Banning birth control and reversing efforts to enable women's equality in the work force are big ones. But we also see it in policies like the Trump Accounts and various proposals to pay people who have larger families. And you can see it but up against immigration policy too, where people who hate immigrants seek to replace the economic benefits of immigration with policies that promote a larger white population in the next generation.
You can't be as deeply involved in your kids' lives if you've got 8 of them. There is a reason why every large family has sibling-parents.
Visible elements of pronatalism are largely focused on assigning a particular family role to women and trying to increase the supply of a particular kind of desirable baby (often white, but sometimes focused on IQ selection and other eugenic elements).
I only know one family with >=8 kids (they have 10) and not that well so I can't really comment on them. I know many with 4-6 kids though. It's true that in most cases the women have a traditional family role (not always though, I know one couple where the wife is a very successful cardiologist and the husband is an athletic trainer). Parental involvement is usually higher in these families than among the 2-3 children, 2 professional parent families I know, mostly because one parent is either not working or working in a reduced capacity.
The eugenics part doesn't match my experience at all. I've never seen any evidence that people who are having large families are motivated by that.
When Garry remakes the world into a collection of fiefdoms run by CEO kings, an AI version of dang will be responsible for deciding everybody's "curious conversation."
Better to have Garry spend his time writing code than using his wealth to attack the very concept of liberal democracy or screech about college students on his blog.
I mean, couldn't Garry spend his time evangelizing YC as providing opportunity to talent that would not otherwise have access to said opportunity instead of either of those? It seems to me like that would be a better use of his time to achieve YC's objectives of funding somewhat competent, highly obsessive, morally flexible founders to create YC portfolio companies others are desperate to invest in at future higher valuations or to acquire. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the purpose of YC though.
He could. But he's also being using his wealth and influence to advocate for the destruction of liberal democracy alongside that activity, so I think it would be a net positive for him to fall into an AI psychosis such that he no longer has time to sabotage society.
More critical in my mind is investigating the "inevitably start to differ" option.
If two pieces of code use the same functionality by coincidence but could possibly evolve differently then don't refactor. Don't even refactor if this happens three, four, or five times. Because even if the code may be identical today the features are not actually identical.
But if you have two uses of code that actually semantically identical and will assuredly evolve together then go ahead and refactor to remove duplication.
reply