I didn't expect so much honesty, I would have expected "We and only we are the greatest and best".
But one thing is found critical is that he always made sure his apartments were priced at the low end. He’d rather make sure they were all full all the time instead of dealing with volatility.
The man is hugely successful and they just named one of the colleges after him at my University.
100% occupancy at 90% of the market price with high quality tenants makes you more money than 80% occupancy + agent advertising / finding fees at full market price with bad tenants.
and wages for everyday working joes
but Nvidia tho
Case in point: large advertisers and entertainment companies "pander" to these sorts of views, because it is broadly popular
This is not the work of a shadowy cabal
Most people in the country dont give a shit about historical injustices and are worried about how they are going to pay their rent or put food on the table today.
Would investors stop giving them money? Would users sue that they now had PTSD after looking at all the 'unsafe' outputs? Would regulators step in and make laws banning this 'unsafe' AI?
What is it specifically that company management is worried about?
As with all hype techs, even the most talented management are barely literate in the product. When talking about their new trillion $ product they must take their talking points from the established literature and "fake it till they make it".
If the other big players say "billions of parameters" you chuck in as many as you can. If the buzz words are "tokens" you say we have lots of tokens. If the buzz words are "safety" you say we are super safe. You say them all and hope against hope that nobody asks a simple question you are not equipped to answer that will show you dont actually know what you are talking about.
Plastic is incredibly complex, and the foundation of so many aspects of modern life that it's very difficult to take it all in.
I genuinely can not think of a single product that only exists thanks to plastic.
I would also like to see a comparison between reducing days worked and hours worked per day, which is rarely mentioned.
The experiment uses a 100-80-100 model: workers get 100% of the pay for working 80% of the time in exchange for delivering 100% of their usual output.
Would only be assuming, however, given the success it would appear that it was achieved.
fwiw I do not think that I have encountered a "knowledge worker" who couldnt do 100% of their job in 80% of the time with minimal effort. Manual jobs / service jobs obviously different of course.
Deleted Comment