Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI Is Too Big to Fail

sibylline.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 140 posts

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#101

Post by jhallenworld »

zzleeper wrote: post #97
jhallenworld wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the Oct 10 drop, I made a list of a bunch country specific ETFs to see who is and who isn't so correlated with the US. oct 10 drop yield ytd total return mchi china -5.73 2.19 28.48 ewh hong kong -4.22 3.54 23.05 qqq nasdaq 100 -3.47 0.46 12.4 argt argentina -3.34 1.39 -16.04 currency problems ech chile -3.2 2.18 24.8 ewz brazil -2.98 5.42 26.49 spy USA: s&p 500 -2.69 1.08 9.15 epu peru -2.62 3.5 52.16 metals norw…

Quick q what does "yield" mean here? Also, in which currency are these returns? Because forex shifts (which for sure happened on oct10) mess up the observed returns quite a bit

It's what E-Trade lists for dividend yield or SEC yield. I have no idea if it's before or after exchange to USD. The total return is from totalrealreturns.com, it accounts for USD inflation and includes yield (at least I think), but probably didn't include the Oct 10 drop itself.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#103

Post by cudgy »

miningape wrote: post #73
travisgriggs wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pretty myopic, or something. Shows, at least, a real ignorance about the available possibilities (or lack thereof)—at scale—to the common worker for “saving for a later day”. But I’m all ears. Now that you’ve diagnosed how 401K investing fools get what they deserve, care to offer any alternative solutions as to the entire work force should have been saving towards retirement.

(kinda unrelated but) I personally hate these forced savings schemes from the government. At least in my country the rates are low so it almost feels like I'm donating the entire difference in rates between the pension scheme and the S&P500 + taxes straight to the government. At least give those of us brave (or stupid) enough to do something different with the money the option to.

401k is voluntary

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#104

Post by spwa4 »

tim333 wrote: post #99
nick__m wrote: post #11

Where does all this leave us? For one, you better hope and pray that AI delivers a magical transformation, because if it doesn't, the whole economy will collapse into brutal serfdom. When I say magic here, I mean it; because of the ~38T national debt bomb, a big boost is not enough. If AI doesn't completely transform our economy, the massive capital misallocation combined with the national debt is going to cause our…

The "~38T national debt bomb" is not caused by AI and not that large compared to debts other countries have dealt with. It's about 100% of gdp and Japan is about 250%. The UK was about 270% after WW2 and that got paid down to 50% before running up a bit. Not ideal but doesn't have to make anything implode.

No, the largest cause of the ~38T national debt bomb is Trump. His first term: $8 trillion. His second term: $4 trillion so far, and we're not even at 25%.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#105

Post by seanmcdirmid »

elzbardico wrote: post #87
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a really bad analysis: China's birthrate has fallen like it has in other richer countries because people have become rich and the amount of time and money needed to raise a kid is expensive. Becoming even richer won't help things at all. Freedom has little to do with the birthrate, you could even say a crackdown on liberalization that has occurred would make china poorer and therefore the birthrate would go u…

China modern culture is incredibly materialistic and status oriented. Women in China have extremely high requirements for a candidate mate in the money department, and paradoxically is a highly sexist society, which led to people aborting their female babies during the one-child policy era to ensure their only son would be a man. Because of that, China has a surplus of males in reproductive age, for a proportional lo…

Robots are seen as a way to keep the economy going after a demographic implosion happens. I wouldn't call China a highly sexist society (at least outside of the countryside), far from it, just that women have high standards for mates and would rather be alone than marry wrong. And their families/society is letting them do that so isn't that a good thing? Even if they get married, they are going for either a DINK lifestyle or at most one kid, because that's what they have time for.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#106

Post by travisgriggs »

cudgy wrote: post #103
miningape wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(kinda unrelated but) I personally hate these forced savings schemes from the government. At least in my country the rates are low so it almost feels like I'm donating the entire difference in rates between the pension scheme and the S&P500 + taxes straight to the government. At least give those of us brave (or stupid) enough to do something different with the money the option to.

401k is voluntary

I guess. My company (and I believe most) highly incentivize it by offering matching funds. The company says, "want to save $1000 of your paycheck? We'll throw in $500". The general wisdom is, you'd be an idiot to leave money like that going unreclaimed.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#107

Post by sshine »

OptionOfT wrote: post #83

What I really find really weird here is that when I buy stock in Apple, I do so because I think Apple will create new value. But with AI the hope is that the value created will be proportional to wages being removed. I.e. if AI creates more value, it means that the large majority of people will actually have less money, bar a few lucky ones. You have to remember that AI is being touted as the final solution to basica…

> with AI the hope is that the value created will be proportional to wages being removed […] if AI creates more value, it means that the large majority of people will actually have less money, bar a few lucky ones

That’s one (not unreasonable) prediction of AI automation. Another is that it will empower the same people whose tasks are made redundant to create value somewhere else. In a way they have to, or they will perish. The sum of all value created does not have a fixed upper bound.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#108

Post by OptionOfT »

sshine wrote: post #107
OptionOfT wrote: post #83

What I really find really weird here is that when I buy stock in Apple, I do so because I think Apple will create new value. But with AI the hope is that the value created will be proportional to wages being removed. I.e. if AI creates more value, it means that the large majority of people will actually have less money, bar a few lucky ones. You have to remember that AI is being touted as the final solution to basica…

> with AI the hope is that the value created will be proportional to wages being removed […] if AI creates more value, it means that the large majority of people will actually have less money, bar a few lucky ones That’s one (not unreasonable) prediction of AI automation. Another is that it will empower the same people whose tasks are made redundant to create value somewhere else. In a way they have to, or they will…

Weirdly enough I have the feeling here that companies don't want to do make more money with the same (retrained) people.

They want to make more money with less people: https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/mckinsey_ai_monetizat...

> All of these copilots are supposed to make work more efficient with fewer people, but my business leaders are also saying they can't reduce head count yet.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#109

Post by wrs »

jcranmer wrote: post #80
wrs wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Did you miss the BBB? They’ll pass any legislation they’re told to.

The BBB, i.e., the bill passed via the special mechanism that only works once a year and has stringent requirements on what can be in the bill for the mechanism to work.

It's a pleasant surprise that the Senate did respect its own purely parlimentary and nonbinding mechanism [0]. But I'm not sure what point you're making -- the bill did pass, as I suspect would just about any other bill the President wants to pass.

[0] https://epicforamerica.org/federal-budget/understanding-the-...

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#110

Post by array_key_first »

devin wrote: post #25
philipwhiuk wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-establishment is sort of a requirement for doing a start-up. Aggressiveness is a requirement for doing a start-up in times of constrained capitalism Low quality is driven the by the availability of capital for dumb ideas. So... a while now?

These startups backed by venture funds are anti-establishment? Are you joking?

Part of being deep in the establishment is that you have to proclaim you're anti-establiahment.

It's like the perfect pop song - "I kissed a girl" by Katy Perry.

Do I think she's kissed a girl? No, no I don't.

Post reply on HN