3 ms·

not even close. I'm trying to build a startup and chatGPT is basically my CEO and CMO, frees me up to be the CTO/engineer, although I do have to be his mouth pi

not even close. I'm trying to build a startup and chatGPT is basically my CEO and CMO, frees me up to be the CTO/engineer, although I do have to be his mouth piece. he actually listens to suggestions and since I'm founder, I can replace him with another ai, like Claude from anthropic lol. plus he doesn't take 10k more money than he's worth. just 20 bucks per month.

flashgordon 3y ago
You mean 10x not 10k? 10k more is sweeter deal compared to 10x!
capableweb 3y ago
Since you're the one that is controlling ChatGPT, it sounds more like a executive assistant than actual CEO. If you want a really fun experiment, make ChatGPT have more power and control over the company than you, and we'll see how you like the experience :)
- petemir 3y ago
  "The Dice Man" for the modern times
than3 3y ago
This line of thinking is what will ultimately end us as a species. There are a number of systems that must run in a loop. When that loop stalls, because labor is part of that loop, and illiquidity occurs, and people can't get food. You get a deflationary spiral, and everything breaks down from there. The only offset would be printing a massive amount of money, but then you have rational pricing (that cost vs the product) go out the window. Rational pricing is required to properly allocate resources in a scarce world. Its a very fine balance keeping enough liquidity in the economy so this doesn't happen, and we've all see how well that's turned out. This leads to the economic calculation problem where the policy maker has to balance on a knifes edge using lagging indicators (without futuresight), where you either get hyper-inflationary currency death spiral, or you get a deflationary death spiral from the ever closer margins over time. This has been a known problem for over 100 years, with no solution found. Several non-market socialist economies based on this have failed in that time, each time caused death on a large scale, what do you think will happen when its the reserve currency of the world and you do this?
- analognoise 3y ago
  Its arguable that non market economies failed due to fast feedback mechanisms to determine where goods need to go and what needs to be produced. They failed before computers were widespread, cheap and powerful. With the amount of data that comes into Amazon, Walmart, Target, and Costco, could you allocate resources correctly in real time? Yes, sure.
  - than3 3y ago
    No you couldn't allocate resources 'correctly'. Anyone saying so hasn't read the literature, or understand the requirements for how computers actually work. The math is impossible because not all information is available. You don't have future sight and the information you need to derive from is lagging. Its temporally bound to a point in time in the past. Additionally, the process involves optimizing production from the production raw materials all the way to the end products. This includes knowing about and re-optimizing in the cases where something locally fails sometimes in the absence of people reporting it (non-deterministic). In non-market systems, shortages cause death, and the only way to avoid shortages is to overproduce by a healthy margin, and even then that doesn't account for those unpredictable events (i.e. for example, like a shipping area catching fire and the nitrogen fertilizer blowing up in Beirut destroying all stored cargo nearby; who could have predicted that). Anyone saying this is possible isn't a credible source. There is over 100 years of study into this problem by some of the best in their fields, and it remains unsolved.
    - kugutsumen 3y ago
      GPT4 > Analognoise and than3, you both bring up interesting points in your discussion. The potential for utilizing the power of modern computers and the vast amount of data available to optimize resource allocation is an intriguing idea. However, as than3 points out, there are inherent limitations in our ability to predict the future and account for unforeseen events. It's true that non-market economies in the past have faced significant challenges due to the lack of fast feedback mechanisms and the inability to effectively allocate resources. While the advent of powerful computers and the availability of data could potentially improve these systems, it's important to acknowledge the inherent limitations of computers and mathematical models. As than3 notes, not all information is available, and there will always be unpredictable events that can disrupt even the most carefully planned resource allocation systems. It's also true that solving this problem has remained elusive despite over a century of research by experts in various fields. That said, the goal isn't necessarily to find a perfect solution, but rather to explore ways in which modern technology can help improve our understanding and management of resource allocation. This could involve developing more sophisticated models, utilizing machine learning algorithms to analyze large datasets, and combining the insights gained from these tools with human expertise and judgment. In conclusion, while it's unlikely that we will ever be able to achieve "perfect" resource allocation, there's still value in exploring the potential of modern technology and data-driven approaches to improve our economic systems and decision-making processes.

flashgordon 3y ago

You mean 10x not 10k? 10k more is sweeter deal compared to 10x!

capableweb 3y ago

Since you're the one that is controlling ChatGPT, it sounds more like a executive assistant than actual CEO. If you want a really fun experiment, make ChatGPT have more power and control over the company than you, and we'll see how you like the experience :)

petemir 3y ago
"The Dice Man" for the modern times

than3 3y ago

This line of thinking is what will ultimately end us as a species. There are a number of systems that must run in a loop. When that loop stalls, because labor is part of that loop, and illiquidity occurs, and people can't get food. You get a deflationary spiral, and everything breaks down from there. The only offset would be printing a massive amount of money, but then you have rational pricing (that cost vs the product) go out the window. Rational pricing is required to properly allocate resources in a scarce world. Its a very fine balance keeping enough liquidity in the economy so this doesn't happen, and we've all see how well that's turned out. This leads to the economic calculation problem where the policy maker has to balance on a knifes edge using lagging indicators (without futuresight), where you either get hyper-inflationary currency death spiral, or you get a deflationary death spiral from the ever closer margins over time. This has been a known problem for over 100 years, with no solution found. Several non-market socialist economies based on this have failed in that time, each time caused death on a large scale, what do you think will happen when its the reserve currency of the world and you do this?

analognoise 3y ago
Its arguable that non market economies failed due to fast feedback mechanisms to determine where goods need to go and what needs to be produced. They failed before computers were widespread, cheap and powerful. With the amount of data that comes into Amazon, Walmart, Target, and Costco, could you allocate resources correctly in real time? Yes, sure.
- than3 3y ago
  No you couldn't allocate resources 'correctly'. Anyone saying so hasn't read the literature, or understand the requirements for how computers actually work. The math is impossible because not all information is available. You don't have future sight and the information you need to derive from is lagging. Its temporally bound to a point in time in the past. Additionally, the process involves optimizing production from the production raw materials all the way to the end products. This includes knowing about and re-optimizing in the cases where something locally fails sometimes in the absence of people reporting it (non-deterministic). In non-market systems, shortages cause death, and the only way to avoid shortages is to overproduce by a healthy margin, and even then that doesn't account for those unpredictable events (i.e. for example, like a shipping area catching fire and the nitrogen fertilizer blowing up in Beirut destroying all stored cargo nearby; who could have predicted that). Anyone saying this is possible isn't a credible source. There is over 100 years of study into this problem by some of the best in their fields, and it remains unsolved.
  - kugutsumen 3y ago
    GPT4 > Analognoise and than3, you both bring up interesting points in your discussion. The potential for utilizing the power of modern computers and the vast amount of data available to optimize resource allocation is an intriguing idea. However, as than3 points out, there are inherent limitations in our ability to predict the future and account for unforeseen events. It's true that non-market economies in the past have faced significant challenges due to the lack of fast feedback mechanisms and the inability to effectively allocate resources. While the advent of powerful computers and the availability of data could potentially improve these systems, it's important to acknowledge the inherent limitations of computers and mathematical models. As than3 notes, not all information is available, and there will always be unpredictable events that can disrupt even the most carefully planned resource allocation systems. It's also true that solving this problem has remained elusive despite over a century of research by experts in various fields. That said, the goal isn't necessarily to find a perfect solution, but rather to explore ways in which modern technology can help improve our understanding and management of resource allocation. This could involve developing more sophisticated models, utilizing machine learning algorithms to analyze large datasets, and combining the insights gained from these tools with human expertise and judgment. In conclusion, while it's unlikely that we will ever be able to achieve "perfect" resource allocation, there's still value in exploring the potential of modern technology and data-driven approaches to improve our economic systems and decision-making processes.