There is no bona fide desire to solve the problem by the social media companies which are profiting from our kids. As a parent, I can never find the option to enable parental controls on apps like YouTube (especially on TV). This option is easy enough to implement locally without requiring any accounts or OS-level age support. However, clearly the goal is not to protect the children but to enable mass scale surveillance and profit from it. Even when I manage to enable parental controls by using a dedicated app or account (what nonsense is it that I need to create an account to restrict access!!!) the content being served is dubiously appropriate for the age group, aside from having no value whatsoever other than the intended goal of perpetuating addiction.

You won't be asked, your tax dollars will just be used to bail them out, either directly or through tariffs. Because democracy.

You see we socialize the losses and capitalize the profits. Works great for everyone

I have done this, alias codex --yolo -p . It's very helpful not having to remember every odd command and its parameters. It's a bit more typing but I type faster than invoke and scan through man pages.

Next up, cars with no-tech! Bring them on.

Nailed it.

We always see consumers blamed for choosing price over quality. How about retailers taking the blame for dumbing down or removing product specs? If two items look identical but one costs more than the other how can consumer be blamed for choosing the cheaper ones? Especially in the age of LLMs, it you are building a quality product you need to include a spec sheet of what makes your product better than the competitor. Not dumbed down marketing speak like "lasts longer" but specific details justifying the premium, like "zippers made in Japan" or the stitching density, fabric specifics, etc. Consumers who care can use LLM to understand what it all means and make informed choice. But when the information is hidden consumer will choose the cheapest option.

Every backpack I've ever bought I was able to easily find all the relevant specifications I needed in order to choose a quality a pack. If you're looking at a pack which doesn't provide such specifications then that's an immediate giveaway that it's a low quality pack. It's not difficult, the average person really just does not care to do research. They instead just choose the cheapest one with the advertising that hooked them the best. But the information is there if you want it.

Can OP write another article focusing on the revenue side, how to actually bring in $10K MRR, forget about the tech stack, AI can solve that.

A job in tech will get you $10k MRR.

At least from this blog post, I wouldn't take his advice on MRR. He's optimizing in the wrong places; he'd be better off spending $100 per month on hosting and focusing on MRR than focusing on bringing hosting costs down to 0.2% of revenue. There's a middle ground without K8S where you use your cloud's autoscaling app hosting and a small, replicated DB. He strawmaned the enterprise approach, and he's trading off a lot of toil for uptime.

LinkedIn also violates SPAM regulations on a regular basis. Despite of me having disabled all emails from this service I consistently receive promotional emails. LinkedIn defines a new "type of promotional email" for which it assumes it has implicit consent to send unsolicited emails and proceeds to do so. It then has a fake compliance apparatus by allowing the victim to once again "unsubscribe" from the newly created email subscription which they never consented to on the first place. I really hope there is a class action and these scumbags get fined.

It's terrible. Fake money is fueling the exhaustion of real resources in search of questionable outcomes ("AGI"). Imagine if all of these money were invested in curing cancer.

Let's also imagine an alternative reality where some reasonable percentage of the $2.5T in current year AI spending was instead invested in the "general intelligence" researchers we already have for the same purpose. I think it's a pretty reasonable expectation that 1) they'd probably make more progress and 2) that money would help a lot more people in the process (through jobs and economic activity).

You can imagine all you want, but my understanding is there is no credible evidence that scaling LLMs will result in true AGI.

Obviously there's no "evidence". Why would you even think we need AGI? But I'm happy to hear your reasoning if you were one of the few/only? people who imagined that software that could predict the next word could do what it now is doing.

An already-ageing population living even longer while nobody wants kids anymore?

Am I correctly reading your argument that you are pro cancer for the purposes of demographic balance?

I think his broader point is that life preservation doesn't seem like such a big win if overall quality of life is dropping to the point where people decide to not subject their potential children with the burden of living.

I would say that’s a pretty huge if.

Where has quality of life dropped so much that people want to die slowly at a young age of a horrible and painful disease instead of getting old?

You don't have to imagine, it will hallucinate you a slop with full confidence every time.

I've already seen at least one person who was pretty sure that the preprint paper they co-authored with AI (read: AI wrote for them) was going to cure cancer and make them billions of dollars.

There was only one problem. The paper jumped straight from "this paper will show how our new treatment could cures cancer forever" to "as you can see, these results clearly show that our treatment cures cancer" - with neither any actual results nor any specifics on the treatment. And I don't just mean that the paper didn't go into details; writing the paper was the full extent of their "research".

So QED then, I guess.

Proof by assertion.

AI was used fundamentally for COVID vaccine development. AI is used for research in all modern drugs. It’s a certainty if cancer gets cured AI will have played a fundamental role since it’s already fundamental to precursors.

Curing cancer isn't profitable. But even if someone tries to mix AI and biotech, the result will be a dangerous medical slop.

Imagine if people with inexpensive tools cure cancer. You know, like they used to so far?