The Jesse Lacey thread. This has been brewing in my head for 7 years (7 years). So hang on tight. (As I worked on this thread a new allegation surfaced via a Medium piece. I linked to it in the thread. Everything here is still relevant.) 🧵
It’s put ridiculously, but it is a fair point. However, I think that point is contingent on recognizing rising living standards which very much includes the expectations about our diets, a variable that needs to be accounted for when discussing affordability in the present day.
I feel like this was the diet for many middle class families in the 80’s when I was growing up. Its’s reflective of what my parents eat, what I eat when I don’t go out, which is a lot more than my parents did - And it’s not what my teens want I I can afford to apease them.
I agree with this. The people who keep screaming that it’s “cheaper” eat the same depressing, boring food, day after day. I’m not making chicken and rice and sandwiches and stew for weeks on end. Sure, that would be “cheaper” in the long run. But you’re eating like a dog.
It’s only just occurred to me that the reason the internet/social media are so terrible is that everyone is here. It’s just a reflection of the world. The internet of the 2000’s was actually promising because so much of the high quality content was walled off from the slop.
All of this. All of the efficiencies I see coming from AI are in the business side of things and few people have a personal life that complicated. AI can’t assemble furniture, do the laundry, and organize my closet, which would provide far more value than managing my schedule.
This is my thesis: no one uses AI. I repeat, absolutely no one. We live in a bubble.
Even among my friends who pay for it, when I ask them to open ChatGPT and show me their queries, it’s the same handful of basic things.
Most don’t even know they can upload a photo and ask questions about it. Connecting Gmail so an agent can read and send emails blows their minds. An agent opening a browser and checking them into a flight? They’ve never even heard of it.
The massive challenge right now is adoption, and then getting people who already signed up to actually use what they’re paying for. Most have absolutely zero clue what’s possible.
Imagine the compute shortage when everyone starts using AI like the top 1% of users do today.
Machines completely replacing all human ingenuity and creativity destroys the drivers for continued human existence and besides the fact I’ve seen know evidence of this being possible, the question again is, why would we chose this?
I’m tired of seeing the so-called “smart” people making this same point over and over again. Ceding all possible areas of judgment to machines, isn’t inevitable, it’s a a choice. Until that point, AI has the potential to create more and more spaces for areas of human judgment.
Bill Gates: people saying AI will create more jobs don’t understand what’s coming.
“Once AI becomes reliable enough to do the work, it starts replacing people.”
“Once you replace human cognition as a scarce element, you blow it away.”
“Working 24 hours a day, reading more, knowing every language.”
“This isn’t like the PC. This is like evolutionary history.”
“It’s like the aliens really are here. They just didn’t come in spacecraft.”
Just because we can’t envision what that future looks like doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, no one ever envisions the future. Humans find more to do not out of necessity but out of human ingenuity.
We’ve had a decade of protest for student loan forgiveness, yet the moment we get a blunt policy designed to prevent those same kinds of people from incurring that same crippling debt, people are up in arms.
Artists help us imagine a better world. Musicians give voice to anger and hope. Teachers show us how to question. Social workers advocate for change. Religious scholars appeal to conscience.
A country is easier to govern without people willing to speak truth to power.
And again all reasonable positions, I just wonder how many of the numerous folks I’ve seen on here defending student loans have spent the previous five years arguing for student loan forgiveness.
It seems to me the division is between the supporters of higher education who look at costs and those who turn a blind eye to them. Education is a good in itself, but that doesn’t justify burdening kids with a lifetime of debt. This isn’t the best solution, but it’s something.
It seems to me the division is between the supporters of higher education who look at costs and those who turn a blind eye to them. Education is a good in itself, but that doesn’t justify burdening kids with a lifetime of debt. This isn’t the best solution, but it’s something.
The higher education landscape is increasingly being divided between people who think education is a good in itself and people who think it's about somebody else's good. This is not a partisan political divide; it is about whether you believe in human freedom or not.
I agree with this sentiment, but I would I imagine I disagree with the OP on the diagnosis : I think we’ve created this situation by guaranteeing loans and encouraging behavior which has raised costs astronomically. We don’t get away from this idea without reigning in costs.
There’s a major disconnect between the idea of student loan forgiveness and idea that the government should continue to back student loans kids won’t be able to pay back.
The most authoritarian, un-American, anti-freedom administration in American history. In college, you must major in whatever the government tells you to major in. Thread.👇
You can agree with every single point here but still disagree with the idea that kids should go into crippling debt to achieve this. This isn’t a proposal banning anything or cutting off other sources of funding, it’s stopping the backing of the debt burdening kids.
This is especially concerning coming at a moment when we will need philosophers, artists and social workers more than ever. AI will challenge our our moral and ethical code, our social structures and our very humanity more than any tech in history. We should be encouraging those fields of study that prioritize societal benefit and are pro-human, even (especially?) if they are not valued by capital markets.
No comment on the specifics of the policy or whether the specifics here are any good, but it’s interesting people are reflexively against the idea that young kids shouldn’t take out expensive student loans people are increasingly unable to pay back.
Forget the funding piece. How exactly is this supposed to be calculated? Do you pay twice as much on a fifteen year mortgage? Do you have to pay hundreds of thousands in property tax up front if you don’t get a mortgage? There’s more of a practical logic problem than anything.
UNPOPULAR OPINION: Property taxes should be like sales tax. When your home is paid off it should end there. You shouldn’t have to pay taxes ever again.
It’s strange anyone is complaining about this. No sociopath is going through TSA to eat overpriced airport food. People are going through to TSA to see their loved ones off and meet their loved ones arriving, how it used to be before 9/11.
I’ve seen thousands of takes about “food regulations” without any information or specifics about what food regulations actually are, what’s been changed and what’s different.
People literally do not read. It’s a preemptive recall related to a seal issue - no reported issues, contamination, or actual spoilage. This is how food safety is supposed to work, with an abundance of caution, it’s the opposite of things being bad.
When those families stop paying that bullshit the system really starts to fall apart. Most of the people I know doing well didn’t themselves go to the good schools- and I mean lawyers, doctors, accountants, business owners- so why should their kids?
As always; households at $250k - $500k HHI are going to wring themselves totally dry paying full freight b/c they think (correctly imo) that their kids are f*cked for life if they don’t get a degree at a “good” school
Ppl on lower end of that range are the main victims (1/2)