solveit

39 ms·

451.
by solveit 5y ago
Kinda hard to have a discussion if you don't at least tell us which documentary (better: cite the paper that the documentary presumably cited).
452.
by solveit 5y ago
You're right, but the greater point stands. Seoul has a higher population density than Delhi and Bangalore. The problem with India isn't that it's overpopulated, it's that it's poor (and therefore can't affor
453.
by solveit 5y ago
This argument has no bearing on whether the system is working as designed. I mean, yes, we should change the design, but nobody was claiming that the design was fine.
454.
by solveit 5y ago
I think this attributes overly precise motives to people who have none. It may be accurate for the HN crowd (although I doubt it), but in general, people assigning percentages to their beliefs are performing cargo-cult numeracy rather than
455.
by solveit 5y ago
Fission was discovered only in December 1938. The science was established almost simultaneously as the bomb was being built.
456.
by solveit 5y ago
If you think that their advice on the other stuff is good, then consider the possibility that they are smart, reasonable people who came to a different conclusion on AGI. And then consider whether their fears may have merit.
457.
by solveit 5y ago
1 is correct. Most times, the conversation has little to do with its purported subject. Instead, it's a long-winded ritual affirming friendship.
458.
by solveit 6y ago
It will easily take an investment from viable to unviable, and be especially hard on companies expected to produce long term, stable profits. To illustrate, a company that's guaranteed to make 1mm in profits in perpetuity will be worth
459.
by solveit 6y ago
> I don't have the data to back this up Then you're not going to be very convincing. Especially when you're being compared to the EAs.
460.
by solveit 6y ago
And EA isn't against this kind of thing, but political activism often tends not to be low-hanging because people are very invested in political activism. If you can set up an organization that can consistently identify low-hanging, hig
461.
by solveit 6y ago
No, the burden of proof lies on the person claiming that something is "obvious". And nitpicking the numbers is incredibly important if said nitpick happens to span orders of magnitude.
462.
by solveit 6y ago
Investors in the aggregate are not stupid, and if you disagree, you can make yourself a fortune and prove yourself right.
463.
by solveit 6y ago
Assuming a 6% wealth tax (as Elizabeth Warren proposed) and a founder(s) owning 50% of the company, the yearly tax would be 3% of the company's valuation, which might be, say, 30% of their most recent funding round. So that would be so
464.
by solveit 6y ago
These kinds of pieces never seem to mention that taxing unrealized gains will take control of the companies away from the founders. Love Musk or hate him, pretty sure nobody thinks Tesla is viable without Musk at the helm.
465.
by solveit 6y ago
All that the valuation suggests is that Coinbase is a company with 1 bn in revenue last year, and 1.8 bn just last quarter. By virtue of upsides being unbounded while downsides are bounded by the money you invest, the downside case really d
466.
by solveit 6y ago
> institutions have been able to acquire billions of dollars worth of crypto OTC without moving markets. This is misleading. The markets definitely move, they just don't show a massive spike in the charts.
467.
by solveit 6y ago
Obviously both of those possibilities are priced in. Investors aren't stupid, Gamestop notwithstanding.
468.
by solveit 6y ago
It's not. But it doesn't have to be sustainable to justify the current valuation. Indeed if it were sustainable, Coinbase would be worth many many times what it is now.
469.
by solveit 6y ago
> I never understood that Thanos reasoning, clearly he underestimates exponential growth. This is a common thread in discussions of overpopulation. One particularly egregious example I've seen is where people object to immortality[1
470.
by solveit 6y ago
> Money goes in, with the promise that you will get more money out at the end. Who promises?
471.
by solveit 6y ago
> I don't know how else to function on the internet. On the contrary, I don't see how you do function on the Internet.
472.
by solveit 6y ago
If you could painlessly kill half the world's population while also rewriting any memories and traces of the past so that they never existed, would you consider this a morally neutral action?
473.
by solveit 6y ago
> they have a Protestant zealotry associated with their money To be clear, you are comparing the mindset of new money to the pious protestants who held overwhelming sway over US society for almost two centuries? Just who do you think the
474.
by solveit 6y ago
Increasing income inequality does not necessarily imply that. In fact, the US poverty rate has been more or less stable for the past 50 years[1]. And the worldwide poverty rate is dropping like a stone. [1] To be clear, I very much view thi
475.
by solveit 6y ago
Could you elaborate? This is interesting.
476.
by solveit 6y ago
Not OP, but it is not clear that people should have the right to risk infection. The problem isn't that the person could get sick (which is something an adult should be able to make an informed decision on), but that having an infectio
477.
by solveit 6y ago
How does the other entity get out of taxes? If the answer is offshore tax havens, I agree that they're a problem, but domestic tax policy isn't the greatest lever for fixing this. But in general, just moving your money around does
478.
by solveit 6y ago
Uh, in that case we'll have to disagree. I think corporations in general do a better job of spending money than the government, but I don't have hard evidence for that view.
479.
by solveit 6y ago
> Always the answer is: they didn't make profit because they reinvested or otherwise spent the money. This is the desired outcome and we should not touch this.
480.
by solveit 6y ago
> You could easily argue Sure. But it still just hurts your main argument.

More ›