I have tried and failed to get an LLM to make any useful contribution to my project in real-world mathematics. So maybe don't believe the hype. I suppose it's possible that at some point they will be more capable than humans, but it's by no means assured.
On the other hand, as was noted before the AI rush and before the recent political turmoil (but they will only have exacerbated it), the value of capital increasingly outweighs the value of labour. So if you want to have grandkids you might want to make money using your own skills while it's still possible.
Thanks for your thoughts. I am curious to hear more about how AI did not help in your math project, if you are happy to share. Also curious to why you think in some cases it seems to help[1], and others it does not (your case).
I also definitely notice how the value of capital keeps increasing, while the value of labour stagnates. I think your advice about making money now is absolutely fair. I strongly dislike that this is the case (it feels like it's leading to a world with little meritocracy, and little improvements), but I guess, yeah, we have to accept the reality as it is.
Regarding why I am home-schooling, there are a lot of small reasons. I guess in a short summary, there was no school where my kid was happy within a 30 minutes drive radius, where I live. I am not against school at all (I have other kids at school), but we tried several in his case and that was a strong failure.
> The analogical form of the English expression "what it is like" is misleading. It does not mean "what (in our experience) it resembles," but rather "how it is for the subject himself."
Been mugged twice in London, police weren't interested at all, even with the one where I was assaulted pretty bad.
Got my car totalled on the m40 by a teen with a license of 6 months who was clearly on his phone - that one I was for sure lucky, could've easily been the end of me. The police? Didn't even show up. My police report that I filled out while still shaking got a response letter of "We don't care m8".
Every government aims to stay in control whether or not lynchings are on the horizon. Your comment would be more informative if you explained why they might feel that striking an attitude uncooperative with the US will help to achieve that.
That is true. Every government's aim is to stay in power which in itself is the answer to your question. Eliminating regional threats to any country's dominance is paramount, as you noted.
This is especially true now, in my opinion, since there is a small likelihood of China invading Taiwan in the near term with some estimates predicting a 10-35% likelihood by 2027-2028. Longer term, the likelihood increases, but that's just my opinion.
If this is the case, however, the US economy can survive the loss of ~$180B annual Taiwan trade ties, but with "severe" recession; GDP down ~7% in conflict scenario. It would be chaos in the US, so a stable region, is paramount for survival and economic growth.
With that being said, Venezuela's 303B barrel reserves could boost US energy security via increased production (potentially 2-3M bpd), lowering oil prices, but effects delayed years.
Basically, even if sanctions lifted and investment resumed immediately, significantly increasing Venezuela's oil production (to meaningfully impact global/US supply and prices) would take 3–10+ years due to:
-Infrastructure decay
-Need for massive new investment
-Technical/logistical rebuilding
-Contract/legal negotiations
Short-term relief would be minimal.
In my view, it would take more than Venezuelan oil to be able to counter a protracted economic war with China over the loss of ~$180B annual Taiwan trade ties but stabilizing the region could help strengthen the West's position.
I would not bank much on this humble AIs opinion :)
Sure, I was just giving a different perspective. Congrats to Norman Foster for having such strong opinions about architecture, I also have an opinion and in this case it runs contrary to his.
The proof is actually of their equivalence as propositions. This is only possible because the binary digits are represented as Bools, and a Bool b can be coerced to the proposition that b = true.
I didn't group NATO and the US separately. You thought I did, but I didn't and you just hadn't read properly.
I waffled a bit in my reply to not rub it in too hard.
And do you want to contribute with something other than nitpick or insult?
Do YOU think that an informed and intelligent person can conclude that Trump is secretly a Russian agent, given he was the driving force behind a massive hike in NATO spending (which Putin really hates)?
I'm not calling Trump competent, or consistent, or benevolent. You can say he has a weird crushed on Putin and is easily manipulated and corrupt.
You can even suggest a lot of the MAGA people who surround Trump are actually working for Russia, since Russia tries to influence a lot of groups and Trump's cronies (and the influencers Trump listens to) are often compromised.
But do you think Trump is actually consistently taking orders from Putin because of some kind of leverage Putin has? Because people say this constantly and it's (in my opinion) almost as embarrassing as Republicans and the Pizza conspiracy. Trump has done some things that are increadibly damaging to Russia, and blackmail doesn't work on a pathological liar with no sense of shame.
I'm sure you're smart enough to agree with pretty much all of this. But you disingenuously attack me because I'm attacking people who are on your side, even if you would privately admit they are dumb.
This is what I read in your comment: that Trump "forced NATO to increase military spending to 5% of GDP". Are you talking about the US there? No, tautologically, you are talking about those parts of NATO that Trump forced to increase military spending to 5% of GDP. So what is controversial about my observation that you used the term NATO to stand for a NATO without the US?
My point was that by doing so you yourself add weight (a very little weight) to the thesis of the grandparent that, at least in people's perceptions, the US has left NATO. It wasn't just a nitpick, but at the same time I did not intend to join this side or that side in some mad argument that is playing out in your mind. I freely admit that at this point I am not reading all your output.
Russian asset, not necessarily agent. At least that's the commonly spread idea, for which there is at least some circumstancial evidence: commercial projects in Russia for several decades and well documented links to Ukrainian and Russian oligarchs under Trump I just to name two.
