VieEnCode (u/VieEnCode)

VieEnCode commented on I guess I kinda get why people hate AI anthony.noided.media/blog... · Posted by u/NM-Super

mjr00 · a month ago

> Microsoft’s AI CEO is saying AI is going to take everybody’s job. And Sam Altman is saying that AI will wipe out entire categories of jobs. ANd Matt Shumer is saying that AI is currently like Covid in January 2020—as in, “kind of under the radar, but about to kill millions of people”.

> I legitimately feel like I am going insane when I hear AI technologists talk about the technology. They’re supposed to market it. But they’re instead saying that it is going to leave me a poor, jobless wretch, a member of the “permanent underclass,” as the meme on Twitter goes.

They are marketing it. The target customer isn't the user paying $20 for ChatGPT Pro, though; the customers are investors and CEOs, and their marketing is "AI is so powerful and destructive that if you don't invest in AI, you will be left behind." FOMO at its finest.

VieEnCode · a month ago

And a great deal of the talking shops/podcasts/keynotes/nonprofits around AI existential risk are all part of this same play. They receive funding from the large AI companies so that the latter can continue to talk their own books using this angle.

VieEnCode commented on I wasted years of my life in crypto twitter.com/kenchangh/sta... · Posted by u/Anon84

maaaaattttt · 3 months ago

In recent months I changed views and shifted from the desilluioned "this is a casino" mindset that is described in this article to a "we need this now" one. An example in this article [1], the US can now unilateraly decide to prevent an individual anywhere in the world from having a functioning financial life and this because of the quasi (western) duopoly that is Visa and Mastercard. Nothing against the US in general, this is simply too much power to put in a single decisional entity, whatever/wherever it is. The "crypto" related systems now seem like a needed extra option to the current payment system (the same way cash is almost always an alternative to credit/debit card payment and vice versa)

[1] https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/11/19/n...

VieEnCode · 3 months ago

If, after all these years, Crypto has not become a stable store of value that can replace a fiat currency and let you buy your groceries with it, why do we suddenly 'need it' to do that now, and what would change that will enable that to happen?

VieEnCode commented on The top 10% owns 87% of the stocks awealthofcommonsense.com/... · Posted by u/jasdi

dredmorbius · a year ago

As I'd just noted in another comment: in 1929 the US (and eventually global) stock markets collapsed.

This set off the greatest period of wealth equality in the US, through a combination of factors:

- Strengthening the power of the Federal Reserve to re-liquidate banks.

- Direct government employment of individuals, whether through the Works Progress Administration (WPA), Civil Conservation Corps (CCC), and eventually of course the armed forces as the US entered WWII.

- Enormous strengthening of labour rights and unions within the US.

- The US stepping in as the world's leading manufacturer in the post-war era, having its industrial plant intact, raw materials available, and demobilisation providing for a vast increase in the labour force itself without wage reductions.

- Generally progressive policies in government regulation, civil rights, educational access, housing access, transportation improvements, and healthcare over the period 1945 -- 1975.

- A highly progressive tax policy.

Not all of that is obviously replicable today. The US faces strong disadvantages relative to other countries in raw manufacturing (though can produce very-high-value goods which make up in trade value what they lack in sheer tonnage) and demographic challenges (along with much of Europe and advanced Asian countries, notably Japan, Korea, and China). But other options remain available and to my mind useful. Changes in tax policy to re-distribute aggregated wealth and make tax havens (both onshore and off) far less viable would likely be good starts. These are of course politically challenging, particularly under present circumstances, but might remain within possibility.

VieEnCode · a year ago

You are missing the mass destruction of assets of the wealthy in WWII and the increase in bargaining power of labour in the post-war years (perhaps driven by loss of life/injury for those of a working age). The post-war public sentiment, at least in the UK, was that the lower orders of society had fought the most and suffered the most, and there was an appetite for a new social contract that saw Churchill voted out from office and gave rise to the National Health Service, etc.

VieEnCode commented on More than 20 Musk staffers resign over DOGE's 'dismantling of public services' theguardian.com/us-news/2... · Posted by u/jmsflknr

VieEnCode · a year ago

Unfortunately, they will be replaced with those sympathetic to the nerd reich takeover and thus ultimately reduce friction and for those in charge looking to wield the wrecking ball. It feels like half the goal of DOGE and similar measures is to purge those with a conscience and loyalty to public service and replace them with those willing to do almost anything asked of them.

VieEnCode commented on Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation [pdf] (2023) hhs.gov/sites/default/fil... · Posted by u/sturza

pjerem · a year ago

> But this is what we wanted?

Define "we".

I mean, you are right, but it's not the individual choice of the majority of people.

VieEnCode · a year ago

'We' being techno-utopian, libertarian startup types I guess. Which isn't that unfair on this site.

VieEnCode commented on Cheaper to rent in Barcelona and commute to London (2013) bestburgerinnorthwestlond... · Posted by u/sebg

jack_riminton · a year ago

You're not seriously suggesting that HN commenters like to nitpick small details and miss the wood for the trees?

VieEnCode · a year ago

I've often wondered why HN so often seems to prefer to prefer to upvote some tangential rabbit hole rather than discuss the topic in the article itself.

VieEnCode commented on What excessive screen time does to the adult brain longevity.stanford.edu/li... · Posted by u/rzk

MrJagil · a year ago

“One of the biggest issues with picking up the phone right away in the morning is that when you have an object close to your face, it’s registered as a threat,” says Loeffler. “You wouldn’t want to wake up and look a bear in the face every morning. On a physiological level, it’s the same thing.”

This is interesting to me. It does make some evolutionary sense but at the same time, i wake up every morning and look at my girlfriends face, hopefully that does not subconsciously trigger the same response.

That said, the "sky before screens" idea has been rummaging in my mind since i first heard about it https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/sky-before-screens-has-ma...

VieEnCode · a year ago

Surely the same thing could be said about picking up a book or a newspaper first thing in the morning?

VieEnCode commented on The Double Irish Dutch Sandwich: End of a Tax Evasion Strategy conversableeconomist.com/... · Posted by u/speckx

yieldcrv · a year ago

Given that 100% tax compliance at the highest rates would not solve any high tax nation’s budget holes

You should be asking the same questions that companies are asking: instead of “why arent we getting hosed equally” its “why are we getting hosed at all”

VieEnCode · a year ago

“Given that 100% tax compliance at the highest rates would not solve any high tax nation’s budget holes“

Can I ask where this claim originated from please?

VieEnCode commented on Americans' love affair with big cars is killing them economist.com/interactive... · Posted by u/avyfain

xwall · 2 years ago

Key Ideas: Heavier vehicles are safer for their occupants but more dangerous for others: The weight of a vehicle is a critical factor in car crashes, with heavier vehicles causing more fatalities in other cars, pedestrians, and cyclists.

The heaviest vehicles kill more people than they save: Analysis of crash data shows that for every life saved by the heaviest 1% of SUVs and trucks, more than a dozen lives are lost in other vehicles.

Weight advantages have changed little over time: Despite improvements in safety features, the weight advantage of heavier vehicles has remained relatively constant, with heavier vehicles still causing more fatalities in lighter vehicles.

Carmakers prioritize consumer preferences over safety: Manufacturers are producing increasingly heavier vehicles, driven by consumer demand for larger, more powerful cars, despite the safety risks to others.

Regulators are ill-equipped to address the issue: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's rating system focuses on occupant safety, not the safety of other road users, and tax policies subsidize heavier vehicles.

Public awareness and concern are growing: Surveys show increasing concern about the size and safety of SUVs and pickup trucks, with researchers and policymakers starting to take notice.

Electrification may exacerbate the problem: The shift towards electric vehicles, which tend to be heavier than their internal-combustion equivalents, may increase the weight of vehicles on the road, further amplifying the safety risks.

VieEnCode · 2 years ago

"tax policies subsidize heavier vehicles"

Interesting post. Can I ask you/somebody to expand a bit on the quote above please?