porkshoe

They do. It used to be called Global Priority, and now it's called Global Business.

https://starlink.com/support/article/d9ed4fe0-b3a6-123c-57db...

Why are you sure it's regulation related, rather than profit-driven?

And I suppose their loved ones should then kill you, to save society from another killer...

And I suppose your loved ones should then kill their loved ones...

And so it goes..

Why would you feel for him?

He's an overconfident dipshit who made a few large, successful bets that made heaps of money; but he didn't practice any sort of risk management with his portfolio, and kind of did the opposite.

And despite that failure, he made immense personal wealth and will definitely have the opportunity to run more money in the future.

I'd love to fail as badly as he did.

American laws don't apply to billionaires or corporations.

Fucking wow...

If AI was bought primarily or exclusively by the state you might have a point, but it's primarily bought by corporations. Reuters reporting of Anthropic's S-1 put governmental revenue _below_ 1%.

You're detached from reality, and you've adopted an ideology to such a degree that you're no longer capable of seeing the world as it is.

You're no different than a weird fringe religious cult member, really.

What are you even talking about?

This is, very literally, capitalism at work. It's the CEO of a massively valuable company jawboning his self-interest.

These massively valuable companies are the ones who want you to "own nothing and to be happy". That's the core tenet of the rental/"sharing" economy.

This might sound like a joke, but your comment sounds LLM generated, and I'm going to assume it's all LLM output.

Free public transport solves many issues and is a great policy.

The notion that transit agencies need to be funded via fares is nonsense to begin with, but it looks even wackier when one looks at how roads are funded.

this site has always welcomed posters who are incredibly shitty and rude, so long as most of the shit is kept as _subtext_. Then they can pretend they were polite, even though they weren't.

HungryHobbit's response is just making that clear... he's actively defending what was objectively a shitty and unnecessarily snarky and confrontational post, because it adhere's to the HN norms of being smug, superior, dismissive, and dickish... but in a way that is just indirect enough that these maladjusted fucking nerds can pretend that they're polite and professional.

You'll enjoy the site more if you walk in expecting that everyone you're talking to is a smug little asshole who needs to get punched in the fucking face.

America should not be fighting Israel's wars.

It's detrimental to America and the cause of peace on numerous dimensions.

Exactly. I had incorrectly assumed that people would use context to make the correct inference, but it looks like prewett ran out of tokens, and failed to parse it.

The US only represents about 3% of China's GDP. If the US economy declined 10 or 20%, it'd be basically just noise to them.

How would that represent victory?

Iran's leadership was replaced with more extreme leadership and America has spent countless billions.

Nothing is better.

Only a hyperpartisan brain could refer to that as any sort of victory.

> I hope it is just a part of a secret plan to persuade everyone that peace and trade is more profitable than war

It's never 4d chess. it's just a guy desperately trying to get diesel prices to temporarily decline _without_ having to admit that he's a fucking idiot for having dragged America into Israel's war on Iran.

And even then, it's only because of the mid-terms. The GOP does not give a single solitary fuck about the sorts of people who notice and are hurt by gas prices. The GOP despises American workers.

American police have a tendency to use their unions to hold their cities hostage, not to simply lobby for better pay/conditions for their officers.

Part of this is refusing to ever accept accountability for their actions, either individually or collectively.

Welfare is fine if it's going to the richest man in the world.

It's only bad when it's going to the poor.

there are a few weird nerds who want that; but _most_ of America's ultra-rich aren't part of the network state bitcoin whatever nonsense, and would be better served by helping America thrive.

In no small part because oligarchs have spent the last 40 years shaping public perception, allowing increased concentration of media, etc.

This is probably the most short-sighted aspect of America's oligarchs decision to support the modern GOP. They just keep increasing the incentive for other countries to reduce business with America.

It's not one or two things, either. It's an endless parade of decisions, nearly all of which reward de-coupling from America.

Both of their customers are going to be rightfully outraged.

There's a world of difference between 'video to the cloud' and 'video to the cloud where it is aggregated so that anybody with access to one specific system can do a broad search against all of the cameras'

AI is creating a huge portion of it's value through labor replacement.

Right now it's replacing "recent college graduates", which makes sense, because they're the least differentiated white collar workers. However it's advancing quickly, and it will (quite obviously) eat more and more white collar jobs.

> It's also a godsend of economic growth.

Fuck no. There is unprecedented Capex that is propping up the economy, as companies are rushing to create capacity that they intend to use to destroy jobs. So yes, those datacenter buildouts and chip purchases and power infrastructure buildouts are creating economic activity... all with the hope that someday companies will be able to fire a huge percentage of workers.

You wrote it as though the gains were from productivity, which they really aren't... but even if they were (and that is likely to happen at some point), it would only be beneficial to actual people if that also results in greater distributions to labor. But a technology like this disfavors labor, so we can anticipate aggregation toward capital, and a slower velocity of money overall.

> Voters don't care so much that there are billionaires as that living standards haven't kept up with the rate at which they're being minted.

I suspect that voters will, at some point, care quite deeply that a lot of awful people got INSANELY rich by destroying tens of millions of lives, and making the K shaped economy have a much smaller segment of winners

The policies you suggest could help... but we have an administration (all three branches) that oppose anything of the sort. They're much more likely to simply try to deploy AI to further oppress the people whose careers they destroyed, than to try to create soft-landings or fair outcomes.

The party most supportive of mass AI deployment is a party that despises the poor, and would happily simply lock them up. This... is not a good mix.

I hope that your optimism turns out to be warranted, but I think you're a fucking idiot, defending reckless bullshit that is executed as part of the biggest heist in modern history.

Voters might feel differently once they wake up and realize that it's 5% of GDP because of the anticipation that so many voters will be thrown out of work.

I mean, I have a V8, an Ar-15, and plenty of steak. Those are all great things.

But setting aside your open mockery of America: you made a claim that was unsupported by the facts you cited. And you are so pathetically scared, that despite living in an INCREDIBLY low crime era, you are still willing to destroy freedom, without evidence and without even considering alternatives.

You're conflating "any camera" with cameras that are attached to a centralized data aggregation system.

Do you have any evidence that the massive centralized aggregation has had a real reduction in crime versus cameras that are locally controlled?

or are you just spewing poorly thought out horseshit in defense of the destruction of our liberty?

(though even this is through the borderline insane, and staunchly anti-american lens that a reduction in property crime definitively warrants the destruction of privacy and liberty)

Some bots are trying to influence conversations on some topic, and they comment on neutral topics to build up karma or whatever.

Also, some people are weirdos.

The rules are this way because the billionaire class has ensured that the government made the rules this way.

It is valid to be frustrated _both_ with the billionaires for bribing the government into having these rules _and_ the government for doing it.

It is borderline insanity to admonish people for criticizing the powerful entities who are the reason the loopholes exist.

So your concern is that the marketing of a child marriage ban shows the p95 outcome, not the p50?

Weird.