3 ms·

I rreally dislike how big corp figured out that the can sell stuff to each other without actually moving some good. Looking at you, Nvidia... I have a feeling t

I rreally dislike how big corp figured out that the can sell stuff to each other without actually moving some good. Looking at you, Nvidia... I have a feeling that the ordinary people will again pay for that.

fooqux 4mo ago
This sounds exactly like the kind of thing that will be outlawed in thirty years after tracing back the root cause of the second great depression.
- dgellow 4mo ago
  That would require regulators to actually pay attention, something they haven’t done actively since a long, long time
  - dawnerd 4mo ago
    First step would be to prevent the regulators from profiting to begin with.
    - WarOnPrivacy 4mo ago
      In my experience, if we don't (meaningfully) root out corruption and ineptitude, we will continue to be governed+leveraged by one/both.
      - boppo1 4mo ago
        Can't root it out, it's part of the system. Sortition is the best we can hope for now.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
- dyauspitr 4mo ago
  Outlaw what? Prevent companies from selling goods and services to each other?
  - snypher 4mo ago
    I think SpaceX should be valued on rockets n space n stuff, not how many magical calculator dollars they bring in. Surely Google can "make compute go" for $1b/month. Nice way to avoid holding the bag, maybe?
    - trollbridge 4mo ago
      The market seems to value both rockets and magical calculators.
    - dyauspitr 4mo ago
      I mean, we all understand that this is some sort of circular financial play, but at the end of the day Google is paying SpaceX $1 billion for compute. This is no different from AWS or Azure.
  - mihaic 4mo ago
    Yes, if it's done with an intent to defraud the general population, which could be the case here. Effects and intent really matter when deciding actions.
    - spwa4 4mo ago
      Except the regulators first outlawed what is generally considered to have caused the great depression (savings banks allowed to invest, which translates to very, very rich people being allowed to take massive risks with poor people's money) ... then re-legalized it. So not only are the regulators not going to allow things that cause another great depression, they're allowing the things that caused the first great depression too. They must want a rerun. (Because if you don't allow this you're effectively demanding the extremely rich make good investments to stay rich ... and not even France, otherwise pretty socialist, dares to go that far)
  - 4mo ago
- anukin 4mo ago
  Why was it not outlawed post dotcom crash? This was exactly the thing that led to the dotcom crash.
  - MrGilbert 4mo ago
    Maybe there wasn't enough damage, either economical, financial or societal?
  - ikiris 4mo ago
    It all was many years ago after the great depression, and similar. Then people kept voting in republicans who's life mission is to gut the SEC and all related regulation keeping them from doing things like this.
- elcritch 4mo ago
  Perhaps but the AI drone based WW3 might put nvidia in the black before that.

fooqux 4mo ago

This sounds exactly like the kind of thing that will be outlawed in thirty years after tracing back the root cause of the second great depression.

dgellow 4mo ago
That would require regulators to actually pay attention, something they haven’t done actively since a long, long time
- dawnerd 4mo ago
  First step would be to prevent the regulators from profiting to begin with.
  - WarOnPrivacy 4mo ago
    In my experience, if we don't (meaningfully) root out corruption and ineptitude, we will continue to be governed+leveraged by one/both.
    - boppo1 4mo ago
      Can't root it out, it's part of the system. Sortition is the best we can hope for now.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
dyauspitr 4mo ago
Outlaw what? Prevent companies from selling goods and services to each other?
- snypher 4mo ago
  I think SpaceX should be valued on rockets n space n stuff, not how many magical calculator dollars they bring in. Surely Google can "make compute go" for $1b/month. Nice way to avoid holding the bag, maybe?
  - trollbridge 4mo ago
    The market seems to value both rockets and magical calculators.
  - dyauspitr 4mo ago
    I mean, we all understand that this is some sort of circular financial play, but at the end of the day Google is paying SpaceX $1 billion for compute. This is no different from AWS or Azure.
- mihaic 4mo ago
  Yes, if it's done with an intent to defraud the general population, which could be the case here. Effects and intent really matter when deciding actions.
  - spwa4 4mo ago
    Except the regulators first outlawed what is generally considered to have caused the great depression (savings banks allowed to invest, which translates to very, very rich people being allowed to take massive risks with poor people's money) ... then re-legalized it. So not only are the regulators not going to allow things that cause another great depression, they're allowing the things that caused the first great depression too. They must want a rerun. (Because if you don't allow this you're effectively demanding the extremely rich make good investments to stay rich ... and not even France, otherwise pretty socialist, dares to go that far)
- 4mo ago
anukin 4mo ago
Why was it not outlawed post dotcom crash? This was exactly the thing that led to the dotcom crash.
- MrGilbert 4mo ago
  Maybe there wasn't enough damage, either economical, financial or societal?
- ikiris 4mo ago
  It all was many years ago after the great depression, and similar. Then people kept voting in republicans who's life mission is to gut the SEC and all related regulation keeping them from doing things like this.
elcritch 4mo ago
Perhaps but the AI drone based WW3 might put nvidia in the black before that.