You're assuming "before" when it's probably "investigate 100 possible causes in parallel".

Because it helps to raise capital at low costs if your investors and creditors think you're going to replace all labor.

While revenues grow almost exponentially. Reminds me of the confident predictions in the early days of Covid that it was nothing while the data showed exponential growth.

I’m also reminded by the early COVID days when exponential growth was leading to predictions of the collapse of modern civilization and a billion dead, now it’s just another endemic respiratory virus.

Yeah! Just like they warned us that Y2K was gonna cause a lot of problems, and then a bunch of people did a bunch of work and then that problems didn't happen, so those people warning us about Y2k were wrong!

“a bunch of people” aren’t what caused the virus to become less severe.

Y2K was overblown how it was portrayed by the media but is irrelevant to the analogy of unsubstantiated extrapolation of early exponential growth.

Maybe stop getting information from your Facebook feed or over dramatized US news.

Yet people don't use old models through the API much, because changes in benchmark space dont map linearly to changes in utility space. An improvement from 98% to 99%, which is 1pp, might be 2x as valuable for some application. Also benchmarks will asymptote no matter what, that's baked in.

I still can't believe we're going to get AGI before 2050. What's coming is amazing and frightening.

Resources curse

Europe can opt out if they want, hyperscalers are building in South Asia, SEA and MENA where they get tax breaks. We'll see how that plays out for Europe.

Exactly. There are plenty of data centers being built in places that want them. The neat thing about data is that it's a quick speed of light to anywhere on the planet, so it doesn't matter where they are.

Anyone who wants to opt out can do so and it'll play out just fine for them.

The hyperscalers want to sell AI services in Europe. Not everything is about supply, a lot of it is about demand.

> so if the company goes to zero the PE parent company is not on the hook for a single penny.

Sounds like a problem for whoever is providing the financing. Not really my concern unless you're saying there's some systemic problem it causes like with mortgage securitization during 2007. The lender will charge a high interest rate if what you're saying is true.

It’s the shareholders of the purchased company that provide the financing, in the form of debt in the company’s books. Then they exit, and the company lays off people to service the debt, and you and I as taxpayers cover unemployment and other social harms.

It’s literally a way to extract revenue from our broader social institutions by spreading the pain across so many people that individuals don’t complain (or, in some cases, don’t even understand how it harms them).

It's the concern for the community who pays in higher prices, and the employees in their job stability.

Has everyone forgotten the social contract? We do not exist as communities to make a small number of people richer. If the trade doesn't work for all involved, we change the rules.

These things are biologically/neurologically caused. They're adaptations that worked well in our ancestral environment (effort -> reward = satisfaction, stress = effort) which are now possibly becoming maladaptations. We won't be the first organism to experience this (likely unfortunate) transition. What's concerning is that it usually precipitates something bad like large genetic alterations through natural selection or the simple elimination of the organism from certain environments (like fireflies near cities).

Like the lion in the zoo that gets food thrown to him.

Who do you think is going to throw food at you?

There's many true crime cases where the spouse took out multiple life insurance policies then did the killing to earn money. It's a bounty. We should care about the effect in practice.