danny_codes

4 ms·

31.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
We let the university model degrade, and now this author is pontificating about how the university model isn't working. Yes. Because we let it degrade.
32.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Does collusion require privacy? You can collude in public if you want.
33.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
I mean I'm talking about a specific policy proposal, for which people have done the analysis. Piketty has several books on the subject you can read. The tax structure is simply designed to make taxes progressive for all income groups,
34.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Or reform your legal system? I mean it's clearly not working very well, time for a change.
35.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Bro is delusional. The only reason there aren't 45 LLM competitors is compute costs. Once costs fall the tech will commoditize. It is interesting that a role like "Head of Strategic Futures" both exists and attracts insane pe
36.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Or rather, unsurprising response. Obviously everyone is going to cheer when what's his face gets killed. I mean how many 100,000s of people can your company murder before you get off'd by one of the survivors.
37.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
> In most rich countries, the % of income people pay already goes up with income. Right. But rich people don't have income, so they don't pay any taxes. Our tax code is not progressive at the top. It is progressive for income
38.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Piketty's tax goes into effect only for wealth greater than a certain amount. The goal is to target people who are paying insufficient income tax, because they are so wealthy they can avoid having taxable income. So we'd start the
39.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
I mean that's the entire point of structuring your taxes so they are unavoidable. Piketty's proposal of a 2% wealth tax floor on wealth over $100M is a great way to solve that problem. I'm not sure why thousands of middle cla
40.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Nobody knows what the Laffer curve is. Maybe we should be raising taxes. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make
41.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
I don't know if you remember, but Elon recently spent over $200M getting his chosen guy elected. He then went on to waste over $100B tax dollars trying to "cut fraud", retiring in disgrace after achieving nothign. The impact
42.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Regulatory capture by business interests seems like something you'd solve via government, ironically.
43.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Nobody is suggesting that raising the effective tax rate for the richest people will magically fix all our problems. However, we are saying that making the tax code progressive is better than what we're doing now. I think we can all ag
44.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Piketty's 2% tax floor on wealth (for those with over $10M/$100M in wealth) is an excellent way to fix this. Basically the idea is to just accept the fact that the super wealthy will find the loopholes, so instead remove the looph
45.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Just look at growth rates before Reagan/Thatcher in the US/UK and after. If you take the 30 years before and the 30 years after, you'll see growth actually decreased. Obviously this is correlation, but it's somewhat damn
46.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
I'm reading Piketty's book now and it's not isolated to the US. Once you hit a certain wealth in most OECD countries, you just stop paying taxes. All that is required is to not take any income, which is easily done. So the to
47.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Well if we did that we'd only save 40,000 lives and ~$1T in transit costs a year. Such savings and improvements in quality of life are unthinkable in the US! \s
48.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Are you including corporate spending and government spending, or just private spending? Because private spending for the 1% is largely irrelevant in this context.
49.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
It seems unlikely there will be a billion Americans. Population growth is 0.3% and will likely decline further as native FTR declines.
50.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Who cares? Distillation is in the same class of theft as Anthropic stealing their data in the first place. By all means, Anthropic can try to prevent distillation. It'll be like holding back a storm surge with a single bag of sand. At
51.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
I suspect FOSS will converge/create a best-in-class harness within the next 6 months or so. As will most (all?) software, the FOSS stuff somehow always ends up being way better than the closed source stuff.
52.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Negligence is criminally prosecutable.
53.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
It's worse than an honor system, because humans are constrained by social forces to some extent, whereas we don't know what AI is or how it will behave
54.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but the code I get from LLMs would not be considered acceptable to merge before we collectively stopped having standards. People are committing 900 line functions with sprinkled return statements and it
55.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Ridiculous. If investors wish to set their money on fire investing in over-valued companies, they are welcome to do so. Protectionism to preserve ROI is a dumb policy. Just look at the US car industry. We're building dinosaurs. On this
56.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Hilariously bad take. Open weight models can be retrained of fine-tuned, that's the entire point. The idea that the "Chinese government controls your intelligence" is laughable in the case of open weight models. Once the weig
57.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Dealing drugs is highly profitable
58.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Data centers are depreciating assets. I'd class it more like a fancy car than a house.
59.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
The difference is that people building atomic weapons knew what they were building. OpenAI/Anthropic have no idea how emergent intelligence works. They're just running in the dark towards the cliff. Leaving it in their hands is th
60.
by danny_codes 2mo ago
Why?

More ›