4 ms·

Basically you are asking $93b yearly at point when the biggest donor US has already slashed the funding and cannot even stop poverty insode it’s own nation. May

Basically you are asking $93b yearly at point when the biggest donor US has already slashed the funding and cannot even stop poverty insode it’s own nation. Maybe you are just trolling or arguing for sports, but you are completely missing the point why hunger and famines happen and why they cannot be solved with throwing money at them. Look at it this way, would Trump end hunger in Mississippi (about 600k people) if, say, Luxemburg would donate USA anout $400m required to end it[1]? Mind you, UN’s Food -programme (together with education, progress of farming technologies etc) has been a huge success and hunger has dropped historically low. I couldn’t find data on how Trump’s cuts have affected the levels, but I doubt it has been a positive change by any regard. Going back to the original allegory, just like cancer, hunger is a vastly complex problem with strong political ties (why have still have we not illegalised cigarettes for instance?) and no gee-wiz tech gadget, even as expensive as LLM model, will solve neither of them. [1] https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/mississippi https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/mississippi

kennywinker 2mo ago
As my first link points out - $93b is less than 1% of annual military spending. I am arguing nothing except that it’s possible if we are willing to spend the money. No AGI is required to come up with a magic solution. It literally just requires spending a lot of money. > Look at it this way, would Trump end hunger in Mississippi (about 600k people) if, say, Luxemburg would donate USA anout $400m required to end it[1]? Probably not. But would trump step in and prevent luxemburg from stocking mississippi’s food banks? Could luxemburg send containers of non-perishable food to community centers in every city in the state?

kennywinker 2mo ago

As my first link points out - $93b is less than 1% of annual military spending. I am arguing nothing except that it’s possible if we are willing to spend the money. No AGI is required to come up with a magic solution. It literally just requires spending a lot of money. > Look at it this way, would Trump end hunger in Mississippi (about 600k people) if, say, Luxemburg would donate USA anout $400m required to end it[1]? Probably not. But would trump step in and prevent luxemburg from stocking mississippi’s food banks? Could luxemburg send containers of non-perishable food to community centers in every city in the state?