201–210 of 234 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't think of a less inspiring figure, than the man who made EVs mainstream and built the most successful space company?
The man who takes credit for those things? Things which are the work of others? No, I do not find that inspiring.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What could be better is to be happy with what you have. This statement requires further qualification; for example, you certainly wouldn’t say that to someone in an abusive relationship - or someone living in poverty.
It does not. I obviously did not say or imply that everybody can be happy with what they have. People who have more than you existing doesn't have to be a reason that you're unhappy though.
Versus:
> What could be better is to be happy with what you have.
Contradiction detected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice contradiction. > Crypto was never anything else than a grift. Ah, alright then, I guess it's not useful for anything. > evade financial regulators Sounds useful to me! > enable large scale movements of shady money. Large scale movements of money? Super useful!
>> Crypto was never anything else than a grift. >Ah, alright then, I guess it's not useful for anything. No. It's a simple English sentence: it means it's not useful for anything else other than grifting. The grifters find it particularly useful, just like MLMs, traditional ponzi schemes, HYIPs etc. But that doesn't mean any of those grifts are "useful". > Nice contradiction. Only for the monkey jpeg brigade, who fee…
I've paid for my domains and vps with crypto, I can pay for my search engine, send donations to non-profits I support, so there's your use case. I don't even have to hand over my personal banking information, so no worrying about data breaches, another use case!
I'm sure you would consider paying for a legal service to be a legitimate use case.
> monkey jpeg brigade
Whoa, name calling, well that always shows the strength of your argument.
> who feel that the artificial demand from criminals laundering money and posing as legitimate crypto investors is a feature
Didn't realize I was a NFT supporter by calling out your contradiction. Oh, and a straw man too, always nice to see. Also, technology can be abused? Who would have thought?
Its a shame that primary users are the criminal masterminds who've apparently become art connoisseurs of monkey jpegs.
I don't seem to remember supporting "laundering money". Do you mean in the same way that banking at HSBC, BYN Mellon, Deutsche, Swedbank, Danke and others is supporting money laundering? [1-6] Or how banking with BoA is supporting fraud? [7]
Although its nice to see that you believe in "legitimate crypto investors".
1: https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/06/30/... 2:https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-20/swedbank-... 3:https://www.acfcs.org/news/419424/Danske-Bank-reveals-Estoni... 4: https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/business/bank-settles-us-... 5:https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/17/deutsche-ba... 6:https://www.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2013/investing-n... 7:https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/bank-america-pay-1665-billion...
> If the only ones using it are criminals, then it's no longer useful even for them, because the whole point is to claim legitimate crypto profits.
Uh, sure? Sounds good man.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other common thread is it’s all the same grifters. The same people who hyped up the worlds slowest coal powered linked list as the future of money are now hyping up AI. I do think AI is somewhat different as we will be left with more to show for it than “PayPal for Cambodian human traffickers running pig butchering scams.” My banal take is: notwithstanding above, all the risk premium is gone for investors and emp…
> The other common thread is it’s all the same grifters. Yes, the same grifters are migrating to AI. But there's a real industry in AI, unlike blockchain, where it was almost all grifters. The pure scam industries, day trading, binary options, cryptocurrency, contracts for difference, retail FOREX, etc. do have many of the same people. If you want to follow this, there's Offshore Alert.[1] [1] https://www.offshoreale…
This just in:
"MetaQuiz is the brainchild of MetFi DAO, a true trailblazer, investor, and incubator in the realms of AI, Metaverse, and Web3. With its unwavering commitment to innovation, MetFi DAO is reshaping education and entertainment in unprecedented ways. The platform aspires to redefine how individuals from diverse backgrounds learn, grow, and earn rewards in a secure and engaging environment. ... MetaQuiz introduces an unprecedented pathway, where the allure of learning seamlessly merges with tangible opportunities for earning."
AI, Metaverse, Web3, DAO, education, and gambling! What could possibly go wrong?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand the leap from "it's difficult and there are many special circumstances" to "it's never going to happen". I don't get why you think that any of these problems are unsolvable given enough time.
Here's one way to get to the "it's never going to happen" outcome: The grand-parent comment argues that we need AI that works in a much broader set of circumstances to "solve" self driving. In particular it would need to understand how other humans would react to its actions in novel situations. That is approximately a description of having a Theory of Mind. Some argue that you can't have a Theory of Mind without bei…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does not. I obviously did not say or imply that everybody can be happy with what they have. People who have more than you existing doesn't have to be a reason that you're unhappy though.
> I obviously did not say or imply that everybody can be happy with what they have Versus: > What could be better is to be happy with what you have. Contradiction detected.
Given the absurd pace of open source, I'm not sure if the money itself is in "AI", maybe certain applications but if I can run something 95% as good as ChatGTP-4 on my home desktop in a year or so, then I'm not going to be paying for any "AI" solutions.
In a year it may not be legal to run that GPT-4 on your desktop. Every nation sees the writing on the wall.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What could be better? Reality. Most of tech is not funded by existing billionaires.
So let's say you want to start a company that makes some stupid AI cookbook and you want money to payroll people. How do you do that without investor cash?