AI bubble

[JuiceyJones]

In fairness the word c**t springs to mind whenever i hear his name.

100% c**t
Aside from the fascism (as if that's not enough), the Grok 'nudify' feature that wasn't fussy about age was the final straw. Banned in Europe now but still available in the land of selective freedoms. And then there's the blatant deleting of key govt data, incl scientific, with the DOGE fiasco.

I'm a mile outside of DC. Wife used to work in gov. They are desperately (on the quiet) trying to hire back many of the ppl that doge let go most of whom have either moved onto other jobs or feel so burned that they would never return to gov work. Turns out gov is complicated and getting things done timely. Who knew. Trying to jam round pegs through square holes does not work in that field.

[Euler]

The chance of the EU even getting marginally close to the effectiveness of a US company is vanishingly small.

That's because the EU operates under a regulatory framework. Like data centres, the North Virginia has 650 and they're incredibly unpopular because of the environmental impact which the EU would never tolerate. We don't want US levels of 'success' because of what's required to achieve it.

The trouble is neither the US nor China operate under the same framework, and therefore they are both crushing the EU. Several Asian companies are powering ahead as well.

It reminds me of the scene that I saw when I worked in Germany, just after reunification. The gap between the former East Germany and West Germany becomes so large. That's what caused the collapse of the Berlin Wall.

You see how certain economies are powering ahead, and others aren't, and then you realise that while it's not the same as East and West Germany. Eventually, the gap will become too big to bridge without a significant shift.

A lot of these fast-growing economies don't really give a shit about EU regulation. They're happy to exploit it.

There has to be a balance somewhere. Europe is not going to grow with the level of regulation that it has.

The US innovates, China replicates, the EU regulates.

[ShaunWhite]

Counties and economies aren't about 'winning', they're about sustainability, standards of living and the welfare of the people. The US and China are both terrible places to live because of the unregulated development. I'd choose to live in one of these 'loser' counties like Norway or the UK over either of them any day. And I think we're past thinking any form of control or socialism means East German standards, unless you're American and still believe in McCarthyism.

We're unlikely to agree though being on polar opposite sides of the political divide. But that's permissible outside of the likes of 'winners' such as China and increasingly, the US.

[ruthlessimon]

Line = up?

[Euler]

Ny STX stock is now nearly $1000 from around a $30 cost, mental.

[Euler]

Counties and economies aren't about 'winning', they're about sustainability, standards of living and the welfare of the people. The US and China are both terrible places to live because of the unregulated development. I'd choose to live in one of these 'loser' counties like Norway or the UK over either of them any day. And I think we're past thinking any form of control or socialism means East German standards, unless you're American and still believe in McCarthyism.

We're unlikely to agree though being on polar opposite sides of the political divide. But that's permissible outside of the likes of 'winners' such as China and increasingly, the US.

Eventually people get upset that others have more than them. Whether thats in a country or across the world. It seems to be a universal thing, whatever your political preference. It seems to be human nature.

[Euler]

I should add, I actually think the answer is not to necessarily be like one country or one philosophy. You should be looking at all of the things that are available and picking off the best bits of it.

Whereas all too often we seem to end up in this no man's land where absolutely nothing happens and nothing is achieved. We seem to have no direction at the moment.

[firlandsfarm]

In fairness the word c**t springs to mind whenever i hear his name.

I know what you mean, it also springs to mind with me whenever I hear people criticise very successful people! I often wonder if it's extreme liberalism (the sort of liberalism they want everyone else to pay for) or jealousy.

[firlandsfarm]

We're unlikely to agree though being on polar opposite sides of the political divide. But that's permissible outside of the likes of 'winners' such as China and increasingly, the US.

You left the UK off the list Shaun, say "boo" to a non white person and you are likely to be arrested even if you have been stabbed!

[Acheron]

Counties and economies aren't about 'winning', they're about sustainability, standards of living and the welfare of the people. The US and China are both terrible places to live because of the unregulated development. I'd choose to live in one of these 'loser' counties like Norway or the UK over either of them any day. And I think we're past thinking any form of control or socialism means East German standards, unless you're American and still believe in McCarthyism.

We're unlikely to agree though being on polar opposite sides of the political divide. But that's permissible outside of the likes of 'winners' such as China and increasingly, the US.

Eventually people get upset that others have more than them. Whether thats in a country or across the world. It seems to be a universal thing, whatever your political preference. It seems to be human nature.

In fairness the word c**t springs to mind whenever i hear his name.

I know what you mean, it also springs to mind with me whenever I hear people criticise very successful people! I often wonder if it's extreme liberalism (the sort of liberalism they want everyone else to pay for) or jealousy.

Isn't the resentment largely justified in such an unequal world? The haves say they deserve every cent while most of the have-nots hardly have a chance no matter what.

The betting markets are like a game, a competition, so you can accept that 1% win there (like winning in sport). But when you're talking about the quality of life around the world it's not a game at all.

Sure, overall standards may be increasing and much is made of the sponging of benefits but you only need to take a walk to the next neighbourhood to see the strains and hardships that poorer people endure. Most winners have a better start in life, a fact that has little to do with human nature.

[ForFolksSake]

Isn't the resentment largely justified in such an unequal world?

... inequality could get a lot worse as a result of AI ?

" AI is widely expected to worsen inequality if left unregulated, as the economic benefits and productivity gains are likely to concentrate wealth among tech owners, investors, and highly skilled workers. However, under the right policy conditions, AI could also act as a great equalizer "

[firlandsfarm]

Isn't the resentment largely justified in such an unequal world? The haves say they deserve every cent while most of the have-nots hardly have a chance no matter what.

Since the beginning of time the 'best' has always been rewarded more than others. It's simple Darwinism. The best hunter secured the best meat. The best 'farmer' grew the best crops. Some countries have tried absolute equality (normally called communism) but abandoned it when they could not get it to work. Probably because why contribute more than others for the same benefit. Some think we have a benefits culture in the UK but that and more is exactly what a 'communist' culture is. The strong are expected to support the weak ... that works in a micro culture such as a family but is almost impossible to get a country to accept it. Why would someone in Inverness be happy to support someone in Penzance?

[Acheron]

Since the beginning of time the 'best' has always been rewarded more than others. It's simple Darwinism. The best hunter secured the best meat. The best 'farmer' grew the best crops. Some countries have tried absolute equality (normally called communism) but abandoned it when they could not get it to work. Probably because why contribute more than others for the same benefit. Some think we have a benefits culture in the UK but that and more is exactly what a 'communist' culture is. The strong are expected to support the weak ... that works in a micro culture such as a family but is almost impossible to get a country to accept it. Why would someone in Inverness be happy to support someone in Penzance?

Human civilisation is only getting started and if the end isn't nigh then who knows what the positive potential of cultural/societal change might be. History only makes for a convincing argument when you're lucky enough not to be on the losing end. The winners may point to it as proof but to me that's merely a luxury and somewhat of a cop out if basic compassion is worth anything. Sorry if that makes me a commie!

[Euler]

People are lost in the debate about inequality and have forgotten that the best way to improves peoples lives is to grow the economy, not trash it.

On average the United States produces much more per person than the UK. The World Bank’s GDP per capita in current US dollars is about 84,534 for the United States and about 53,246 for the United Kingdom in 2024.

At the same time many standard inequality measures show the US as less equal than the UK. But the fact that the United States has a far higher average level means that a big portion of the US population can still have higher living standards than a big portion of the UK population even though the US is less equal.

Even within countries, inequality can be measured in ways that are incomplete. Many headline statistics focus on cash income and treat each person as identical, when the economic reality is richer.

Also snapshot of the distribution at one moment mixes together people at very different points in life. Older people have had more years to work, save and pay down debt, and will tend to have more wealth. That does not mean the system has become unfair in a new way, it is partly a normal consequence of time. But a lot of people talking about inequality seem completely oblivious to this, probably on purpose.

If you are at the end of your career, you are bound to have more money and assets than somebody at the start of your career. You could say inequality is baked in.

[Euler]

Having lived through several technological innovations I'm an AI optimist.

Suddenly I can work at PhD level on pretty much any project. I can write code, I can automate stuff, I can do all sorts of things that I couldn't just a few years ago.

In fact anybody can.

Whether they take the opportunity or not is purely down to them and I guarantee you a lot of people will not take the opportunity.

I've taught my kids how to use AI, inevitably are they going to outperform others. If I was a young person, I would get a job, borrow money, learn every AI tool on the planet, and then start positioning myself as an expert. You could change a lot of lives in your future career.