meaning that there is no creating a killer monopoly on AI
Absolutely, they have this idea that the market will be controlled by a few winners of a race. When the reality is that the threshold for entering will keep declining, and all the chips they’ve bought will be obsolete soon.
These Nvidia based data centers are extremely expensive to build and will probably never be profitable.
thinking AI is like Facebook or Amazon or Windows–monopoly
Absolutely true, there is no critical mass for AI, if an AI works, it will work just as well with fewer users, again making it way easier to enter the market when the technology becomes cheaper. And that is true even without decentralized AI becoming dominant.
But the fact that we are able to have this conversation as non-experts (?) and nobody is really able to counter these arguments tells me that something is fundamentally wrong with the way everything is structured.
My idea is that ultimately we’re looking at the last stage of societal collapse into kleptocracy. There is no social will to stand between rich people making money and social harm, so the wealthy will cannibalize all of us until we have a revolution.
You can look at it more closely. I think it was an Adam Conover guest that quoted Hobbes on a tyrants, but included the part people leave out–that it is the tyrant who determines what is good and what is bad.
I think definitely part of of this (which you’ll hear Zitron bitch about constantly) is the total and complete failure of the business press, which is wholly captured by business. There is no feedback mechanism to stop people from making money unethically.
My wife made this exact observation after having seen Ed Zitron interviewed several times. No one contradicts him!
quoted Hobbes on a tyrants, but included the part people leave out–that it is the tyrant who determines what is good and what is bad.
I don’t get that part? Clearly if it’s a tyrant, the people have decided he is bad. The tyrant doesn’t get to decide his own reputation. So that makes absolutely zero sense to me. If he is good, he is a King or ruler or called something other than tyrant.
Your follow up with the press following the industry blindly, is more akin to what we call a “folke forfører” a person that somehow is seducing the people, so they lose their ability to judge.
I think Hobbes would say the only difference between a tyrant and a good king is perception, which can be gamed, and the true power of a tyrant (counter Cersei Lannister) is to define what is good and bad.
I mention it because making money and supporting people who make money seems to be “good” in this current society, and people arguing for limiting the wealth and power of a few are “bad.” That is how the anti-communist blacklist worked. You didn´t need to legislate these people out of working in hollywood, you just labelled them as bad and let society do the rest. It’s a much more efficient mechanism of control.
More trivial example: I tried shit-talking Taylor Swift at a social function and it was a huge mistake. Taylor Swift has effectively PR´d herself into being a good, relatable person, even though she is a horribly hollow shell of a human being.
(Speaking of internalizing mechanisms of control, “Burn Out Society” is pretty fantastic).
What’s the translation of folkforer literally? In english we have brown-noser, ass-kisser, boot-licker; I’ve added ball-fondler and throat-holster. In Spanish there is the chupamedias, or sock sucker, and French has le fayot, which literally translates to “bean” so I don´t know how the hell is going on there.
I don’t want to be confidently ignorant; I’m willing to hear other sides; but I’m also not willing to be buried under a bunch of information that obscures the truth. So, yeah, if your company has a $1 trillion valuation and you are actually still burning through $70 billion dollars a year and 70% of your revenue is vendors you are loaning you money… i mean, come on.
I think Hobbes would say the only difference between a tyrant and a good king is perception,
Then I disagree with him very much, that’s a viewpoint that good and bad is arbitrary, which is almost always in conjunction with it being absolute and from god. According to religious people secular morals are arbitrary, when in fact they are decided on our best knowledge about not doing harm. And the morals of religious people are absolute no matter how insane, like cutting the foreskin of an infant is considered a good thing.
What’s the translation of folkforer literally?
“Folkeforfører” If you don’t have ø you can write it as “oe”. And the translation is literally seducer of people. Where people means the people of for instance a country. Hitler is considered a folkeforfører.
Absolutely, they have this idea that the market will be controlled by a few winners of a race. When the reality is that the threshold for entering will keep declining, and all the chips they’ve bought will be obsolete soon.
These Nvidia based data centers are extremely expensive to build and will probably never be profitable.
Absolutely true, there is no critical mass for AI, if an AI works, it will work just as well with fewer users, again making it way easier to enter the market when the technology becomes cheaper. And that is true even without decentralized AI becoming dominant.
But the fact that we are able to have this conversation as non-experts (?) and nobody is really able to counter these arguments tells me that something is fundamentally wrong with the way everything is structured.
My idea is that ultimately we’re looking at the last stage of societal collapse into kleptocracy. There is no social will to stand between rich people making money and social harm, so the wealthy will cannibalize all of us until we have a revolution.
You can look at it more closely. I think it was an Adam Conover guest that quoted Hobbes on a tyrants, but included the part people leave out–that it is the tyrant who determines what is good and what is bad.
I think definitely part of of this (which you’ll hear Zitron bitch about constantly) is the total and complete failure of the business press, which is wholly captured by business. There is no feedback mechanism to stop people from making money unethically.
My wife made this exact observation after having seen Ed Zitron interviewed several times. No one contradicts him!
I don’t get that part? Clearly if it’s a tyrant, the people have decided he is bad. The tyrant doesn’t get to decide his own reputation. So that makes absolutely zero sense to me. If he is good, he is a King or ruler or called something other than tyrant.
Your follow up with the press following the industry blindly, is more akin to what we call a “folke forfører” a person that somehow is seducing the people, so they lose their ability to judge.
I think Hobbes would say the only difference between a tyrant and a good king is perception, which can be gamed, and the true power of a tyrant (counter Cersei Lannister) is to define what is good and bad.
I mention it because making money and supporting people who make money seems to be “good” in this current society, and people arguing for limiting the wealth and power of a few are “bad.” That is how the anti-communist blacklist worked. You didn´t need to legislate these people out of working in hollywood, you just labelled them as bad and let society do the rest. It’s a much more efficient mechanism of control.
More trivial example: I tried shit-talking Taylor Swift at a social function and it was a huge mistake. Taylor Swift has effectively PR´d herself into being a good, relatable person, even though she is a horribly hollow shell of a human being.
(Speaking of internalizing mechanisms of control, “Burn Out Society” is pretty fantastic).
What’s the translation of folkforer literally? In english we have brown-noser, ass-kisser, boot-licker; I’ve added ball-fondler and throat-holster. In Spanish there is the chupamedias, or sock sucker, and French has le fayot, which literally translates to “bean” so I don´t know how the hell is going on there.
I don’t want to be confidently ignorant; I’m willing to hear other sides; but I’m also not willing to be buried under a bunch of information that obscures the truth. So, yeah, if your company has a $1 trillion valuation and you are actually still burning through $70 billion dollars a year and 70% of your revenue is vendors you are loaning you money… i mean, come on.
Then I disagree with him very much, that’s a viewpoint that good and bad is arbitrary, which is almost always in conjunction with it being absolute and from god. According to religious people secular morals are arbitrary, when in fact they are decided on our best knowledge about not doing harm. And the morals of religious people are absolute no matter how insane, like cutting the foreskin of an infant is considered a good thing.
“Folkeforfører” If you don’t have ø you can write it as “oe”. And the translation is literally seducer of people. Where people means the people of for instance a country. Hitler is considered a folkeforfører.