Live data from Hacker News

Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

ft.com

101–110 of 192 posts

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tax increases may also help. I don't live in a costal state, but when I do consulting work typically at charity rates alongside my standard full-time job, I have to pay 24% federal tax, 15.3% FICA, and 7.85% state tax. I am already taxed whenever I want to help anyone at 47.15% . That's before the required tax structures and consulting for doing all the invoicing legally. God himself only wanted 10%, so it seems a…

You're talking about your marginal rate and we simply are far to the left on the laffer curve, raising taxes will raise revenue. I'm not unsympathetic, my marginal is close to the same - but generally I think people's claims that they will stop working are generally more bark than bite and the evidence largely backs that up. If you don't want a tax-based solution, I do hope you are agitating for SS and medicare cuts.

>I think people's claims that they will stop working are generally more bark than bite

They stop paying taxes and work off the books instead but you don't announce that publicly for obvious reasons.

The incentive to do this increases with tax pressure. The willingness of people to pay for tax-free work equally increases because you'll pay less.

There's also an increasing asymmetry of what the government gains from a tax hike versus how oppressive it becomes that becomes unfavorable as tax rates go up.

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#102

For me the question is who is going to subscribe who hasnt already. And that is before we consider the next gen hardware that can run this stuff locally. But from what I see of the economy around me here, people just dont have the spare funds for LLM luxuries. It feels like 15+ years of wage deflation, and company streamlining, has removed what little spare spending power people had here. Not forgetting the inflation…

But from what I see of the economy around me here, people just dont have the spare funds for LLM luxuries. If you have to pick between Disney+ for your kids and a chatbot subscription, it's a pretty easy choice. More and more people are making choices like that.

for the chatbot, right? can never tell on the orange site..

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking about your marginal rate and we simply are far to the left on the laffer curve, raising taxes will raise revenue. I'm not unsympathetic, my marginal is close to the same - but generally I think people's claims that they will stop working are generally more bark than bite and the evidence largely backs that up. If you don't want a tax-based solution, I do hope you are agitating for SS and medicare cuts.

>I think people's claims that they will stop working are generally more bark than bite They stop paying taxes and work off the books instead but you don't announce that publicly for obvious reasons. The incentive to do this increases with tax pressure. The willingness of people to pay for tax-free work equally increases because you'll pay less. There's also an increasing asymmetry of what the government gains from a…

okay, i hope you are pushing for social security and medicare cuts then. hard choices are hard for a reason.

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> either increase taxes or reduce spending I see this sentiment a lot, they are not equivalent. The US must reduce spending, if it wants to protect the dollar. Tax increases may also help. The relationship between tax rates, GDP, government revenue, the market value of new US debt, and the value of the dollar, is complicated and depends on uncertain estimates and models of the economy. Increasing taxes can reduce GDP…

> Tax increases may also help. I don't live in a costal state, but when I do consulting work typically at charity rates alongside my standard full-time job, I have to pay 24% federal tax, 15.3% FICA, and 7.85% state tax. I am already taxed whenever I want to help anyone at 47.15% . That's before the required tax structures and consulting for doing all the invoicing legally. God himself only wanted 10%, so it seems a…

It sort of depends on how much time you are putting in when you bill $40k, no?

You say you consult at charity rates and then point to taxation as the sole reason it isn't worth your time...

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#105
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to believe in AGI but the more AI has advanced the more I’ve come to realize that there’s no magic level of intelligence that can cure cancer and figure out warp drives. You need data, which requires experimentation, which requires labor and resources of which there is a finite supply. If you had AGI tomorrow and asked it to cure cancer, it would just ask for more experimental data and resources. Isn’t that wh…

Generally, I agree, but it also depends on perspective. Intelligence exists on many levels and manifests differently across species. From a monkey's standpoint, if they were capable of such reflection they might perceive themselves as the most capable creatures in their environment. Yet, humans possess cognitive abilities that go far beyond that, abstract reasoning, cumulative culture, large scale cooperation etc A c…

> If a being could fully comprehend the underlying rules of the universe, it might not need to perform physical experiments at all, it could simply simulate outcomes internally.

It likely couldn't, though, that's the problem.

At a basic level, whatever abstract system you can think of, there must be an optimal physical implementation of that system, the fastest physically realizable implementation of it. If that physical implement was to exist in reality, no intelligence could reliably predict its behavior, because that would imply that they have access to a faster implementation, which cannot exist.

The issue is that most physical systems are arguably the optimal implementation of whatever it is that they do. They aren't implementations of simple abstract ideas like adders or matrix multipliers, they're chaotic systems that follow no specifications. They just do what they do. How do you approximate chaotic systems which, for all you know, may depend on any minute details? On what basis do we think it is likely that there exists a computer circuit that can simulate their outcomes before they happen? It's magical thinking.

Note that intelligence has to simulate outcomes, because it has to control them. It has to prove to itself that its actions will help achieve its goals. Evolution doesn't have this limitation: it's not an agent, it doesn't have goals, it doesn't simulate outcomes, stuff just happens. In that sense it's likely that certain things can evolve that cannot be intelligently designed (as in designed, constructed and then controlled). It's quite possible intelligence itself falls in that category and we can't create and control AGI, and AGI can't improve itself and control the outcome either, and so on.

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#106
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaving large portions of the population jobless surely can't be good for business and political stability.

This is what's making me laugh a bit about Ford's brazen "we're firing all the white-collar workers" nonsense. Ok, go for it. Who are you going to get to buy a $80,000 F-150?

Chevy workers?

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#107
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're testing different models depending on the business case. Our initial tests using 3, 7, and 8B models are working fine. We're not using the big ones since our use cases don't demand them.

Like Qwen, or Tulu3, or what?

Testing LLama, DeepSeek, and Mistral atm.

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#108
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, I agree, but it also depends on perspective. Intelligence exists on many levels and manifests differently across species. From a monkey's standpoint, if they were capable of such reflection they might perceive themselves as the most capable creatures in their environment. Yet, humans possess cognitive abilities that go far beyond that, abstract reasoning, cumulative culture, large scale cooperation etc A c…

> A chimpanzee can use tools and solve problems, but it will never construct a factory, design an iPhone, or build even a simple wooden house. Humans can, because our intelligence operates at a qualitatively different level. Humans existed in the world for hundreds of thousands of years before they did any of those things, with the exception of wooden hut, which took less time than that. But also wasn't instant. Your…

My point wasn't so much about how fast humans achieved these things, but about what's possible at all given a certain cognitive architecture. Chimpanzees could live for another million years and still wouldn't build a factory, not because they don't have enough time, but because they lack the cognitive and cultural mechanisms to accumulate and transmit abstract knowledge.

So I completely agree that intelligence alone isn't the only factor, it's the whole foundation.

Re: Bank of England flags risk of 'sudden correction' in tech stocks inflated by AI

#110
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, I agree, but it also depends on perspective. Intelligence exists on many levels and manifests differently across species. From a monkey's standpoint, if they were capable of such reflection they might perceive themselves as the most capable creatures in their environment. Yet, humans possess cognitive abilities that go far beyond that, abstract reasoning, cumulative culture, large scale cooperation etc A c…

> If a being could fully comprehend the underlying rules of the universe, it might not need to perform physical experiments at all, it could simply simulate outcomes internally. It likely couldn't, though, that's the problem. At a basic level, whatever abstract system you can think of, there must be an optimal physical implementation of that system, the fastest physically realizable implementation of it. If that phys…

I agree that computational irreducibility and chaos impose hard limits on prediction. Even if an intelligence understood every law of physics, it might still be unable to simulate reality faster than reality itself, since the physical world is effectively its own optimal computation.

I guess where my speculation comes in is that "simulation" doesn’t necessarily have to mean perfect 1:1 physical emulation. Maybe a higher intelligence could model useful abstractions/approximations, simplified but still predictive frameworks that are accurate enough for control and reasoning even in chaotic domains.

After all, humans already do this in a primitive way, we can't simulate every particle of the atmosphere, but we can predict weather patterns statistically. So perhaps the difference between us and a much higher intelligence wouldn't be breaking physics, but rather having much deeper and more general abstractions that capture reality's essential structure better.

In that sense, it's not "magical thinking", I just acknowledge that our cognitive compression algorithms (our abstractions) are extremely limited. A mind that could discover higher order abstractions might not outrun physics, but it could reason about reality in qualitatively new ways.

Post reply on HN