@HealthRanger A better alternative is just making everything free at that point. Production can be arbitrarily scaled up to meet demand as i said and any actual limits can just be enforced more directly. Much fairer than an oligarchy who no-one else can catch up to owning everything.
@HealthRanger I don't support this but it's not unreasonable assuming an AI-led economy. Production can be scaled up arbitrarily and as long as the money is cancelled via taxation or publically owned product purchase it won't lead to inflation but it will lead to him owning the entire economy.
@SocialistMMA Blaming Jews generalises an entire group of people many of whom are working class, almost all of whom suffer under capitalism and plenty of whom are already on our side when most leftist movements have understood that we need to unite in order to effectively challenge capitalism.
@SocialistMMA We don't because most leftists aren't that stupid. "Jews" are not responsible for this, capitalism is. Israel as with the US uses capitalism (AIPAC etc) to advance its interests and Israel is important to the US because it's their ally in the oil-rich Middle East. That's it.
@NYCMayor Zohran: common sense argument about why unilateral regime change is bad.
Comment section: actually kidnapping other nations' presidents is ok if we don't like them.
@haider1 Yet another instance of scientists verging beyond their field and saying stupid shit. Unfalsifiable claims: "unique neurons"; confident statements about what's impossible: "can't be replicated". Stick to AI.
@yakiimogo People who disengage are people the political class know they don't have to listen to. If you're only ever angry when it's not your own team mascot doing the genocides, wars and impoverishment then by all means continue to watch as worse snd worse people get elected.
@jyo_pari I've said many times that one of the keys to solving LLM's remaining problems is having the ability to update its own weights. That and more sensory modalities. Glad to see we're finally seeing it.
@SpecialPuppy1 It's very simple: we have abundance already and it's not reaching everyone PRECISELY BECAUSE of the kinds of people who wrote that book. Producing even exponentially more of it will still not help most people, especially if they are using AI to take what little power we have.