291–300 of 1001 posts
I am actually curious in knowing an answer to this: Does anybody think this is a good thing? A benefit to the world? Not if anyone is cheating or scheming or being a rules lawyer, but is it good?
All these things are apparently valued at trillions of dollars these days. Where's the trillions, or hundreds of billions worth in improved quality of life? What has gotten better other than the ability to produce more crap?
Try to keep perspective, these valuations are just functions of the stock market the end result of some spreadsheet. They have nothing to do with quality of life. Why would you relate those two things in the first place?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this is a bubble... The pop stage will be devastating...
> If this is a bubble... The pop stage will be devastating... Why? It could be sudden. It could be slow and gradual. I've seen no reason it needs to be one versus the other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s defensible about Anthropic’s revenue? It seems like OpenAI and others are equivalent. Open weight models are catching up. Google has ads networks, video platforms, and so much more. I am skeptical that Anthropic and OpenAI can defend their dominance for long enough to make meaningful gaap accounted profits
Anthropic seems to have clawed its way to being the best AI and charging for itself. Microsoft had to slash the Anthropic budget… which it exceeded while being the exclusive host of OpenAI. Google seems to have a good B2B and internal leveraging AI to make $. OpenAI/Microsoft seems to have squandered an early product lead. And then you have the Muskiverse, where we have an rocket ship company that buys surplus cyber…
Whatever Anthropic is paying is too much, since it means xAI will get to observe Anthropic's software, weights and operations in detail. It's probably contractually prohibited from doing so, but I doubt that would stop Musk, given what's at stake.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comments like these make me feel like we're living in different worlds. I use LLMs multiple times a day and they've significantly improved my quality of life. They are also steadily becoming more useful over time (e.g. now solving math problems).
I’d love it if for once someone on here saying LLMs are some life changing apparatus would give a single example.
Literally saved his dog's life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If this is a bubble... The pop stage will be devastating... Why? It could be sudden. It could be slow and gradual. I've seen no reason it needs to be one versus the other.
I mean, isn't the definition of a bubble that it pops quickly? If it slowly loses value over time, its not really a bubble.
There is no consistent definition of a bubble. We have no fundamental reason current valuations have to collapse suddenly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have evidence of corruption, present it. Otherwise it's just generic cynicism leading to a thought terminating cliche.
Why else would they change the rule ?
These indices aim to replicate the market. They’re not trying to pick stocks.
There is a serious argument for saying they fail to replicate the market if they structurally exclude trillions of dollars of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, didn’t know that. If SpaceX tanks and 401ks are left holding the bag, this could result in the biggest class action lawsuit ever.
why? the cards are on the table. If you buy a turd from me after I disclose the composition, that is on you
Regular people want to invest so they can make money and companies want people to invest so that they can raise money. So pretty much everybody wants the 401k money to be invested in the stock market.
But the issue is that investing in the stock market is very technical, so some smart asses invented the index funds to make it easy for daddy and mummy to put their retirement accounts to work.
The index has safeguards in place to try and reduce its volatilty. So people are happy, cause they are investing in stock without having to look closely at what it is they bought.
But if suddenly some people change the safeguard rule, so that their buddy can dump their overvalued stock over people who think they are investing relatively safely, then it can be argued that there is foul play.
People are not finance specialists and they are heavily incentivized to buy index funds, so they need to trust that the people who are telling them to invest are not hiding things from them. If that trust is broken, lawsuits will follow.
It’s like: imagine you own a Toyota and have a maintenance contract with Toyota, and one day you have your car serviced and they tell you they changed the brakes. They tell you the brand of the new brakes and they tell you it’s fine while in fact, they put some cheap garbage that fail after 100 km of driving.
When the brakes fail and your car falls off a cliff, you go and see them and they tell you: “yeah those brakes were bad, but we told you we put them in, you could have looked up that these were bad, it’s all over the internet, so that’s on you”.
Is SpaceX going to eat Tesla? As in, are a bunch of Tesla investors going to be migrating across to SpaceX since that seems to be getting more of Elon's attention these days, especially with xAI barnacled onto the side of it? The money to participate in the IPO has to come from somewhere...
[flagged]