This is an interesting development. I would predict some of the biggest losers in the AI boom will be Indian (and similar) outsourcing companies. Companies like Wipro and Infosys have thrived off richer countries' businesses wanting grunt work done cheap, not caring necessarily about quality, as long as it meets some baseline functionality. LLMs are very good at this.

In addition, support volume must be taking a hit from AI agents too. When pricing stabilises, will Indian outsourcing still be competitive? Maybe. Maybe less so. If I were working for Infosys right now I'd be a more than a little worried.

Perhaps Anthropic anticipates a glut of engineers in the near future.

It will go to zero, with waves of mass layoffs until AGI has been achieved.

I genuinely can't tell if this is satire or not.

2010 OG account. He's been holding in this opinion for over a decade, waiting for his moment.

Americans always think a British accent is exactly one accent.

Americans think a British accent is either "posh snob" or "chimney sweep."

Meanwhile the rest of the world thinks an American accent is either "Travis Bickle" or "Yosemite Sam."

I live in London part of the year.

Me too. I first assumced it was an OCR error, then remembered they were emails and wouldn't need to go through OCR. Then I thought that the US Government is exactly the kind of place to print out millions of emails only to scan them back in again.

I'm glad to know the real reason!

I just want to add that I would expect the exact same thing from the German government. Glad to see we're not all that different

If you want to become a billionaire, the best way to do it is invent some new addiction.

No need. Profiting fron gambling will do it.

True, existing addictions are a good bet, but a brand new one with no competition, regulation or recognition? That's you you get Zuckerberg wealthy.

AI romance partners is the obvious new frontier here. Just imagine: an automated romance scam and you get to sell their data.

Calling it now: this is ignobel prize-worthy research. If it doesn’t get a nod I’ll eat my hat.

I love this fact. If you're a fish with no neck, the route it takes is the most direct and obvious. But as evolution gradually lengthened necks the route remained the same!

As someone in the UK, this was especially chilling.

For context, internet has been nerfed in the UK, because of Epstein scandal politicians there started thinking too much of the children.

Once you start noticing how often you see content that references e.g. anything that's happening in the US right now (I'm in the UK), you realise how 'news' is everywhere.

If you go on reddit, unless you've curated your subreddits and never touch /all or /popular, it's very heavy with 'news'. The Google app, a left-swipe by default on your Android phone is all 'news'. Twxtter/Bluesky/etc. are full of news. Avoiding news entirely is almost impossible on today's internet.

I have had success with this approach too, but key to all this is being careful about where you go online to minimise exposure. These days I don't use any 'social media' platforms, but I do visit HN and BBC news (both of which are of higher quality than most places, and crucially only have a few stories on a typical day - the rate of new content is low). This way I stay informed without falling down rabbit holes about every twist and turn of every (mostly awful/depressing) thing happening in the World.

Yes, laws only matter if they are collectively believed in. International law just the same. This has always been the case, but largely speaking in the West, for the last century or so, the rule of law has been broadly believed in, including international law.

The story here is that the US seems to not currently believe international law is an effective tool for projecting its power. Whether correctly or otherwise, it has believed that up until now.