• 0 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 16th, 2026

help-circle


  • My experience with using ai, and at this point I’d say this experience is extensive / daily, is that it gets things wrong A LOT and with a high degree of confidence in its position.

    In the early stages of using it I felt my problem solving desire start to slip, but after pushing through that and realizing I should not trust this any more than I’d trust human judgment it’s more like having another person to work with. That’s helpful but if I let me own thinking guard down at all I put myself in a lot of risk.

    I hope most people that do use AI regularly eventually push through to this stage and we all will be way better off in the long run for the assistance.

    I fear most people won’t push through. This study points to the obstacle, I’d love to see what can be done to help people overcome it, probably there’s room for AI usage training that we need to start to consider.


  • Any AI, LLM or otherwise, isn’t human by definition.

    Human art should be by and for humans. AI art masquerading as human art is reprehensible.

    AI art might need its own set of awards though. I don’t see a problem with AI art being valued on its own merits, it’s the deception and theft that are the problems.

    Current LLMs being fully based on theft I think should be disqualified, but I don’t want to rule out the possibility that some future AI won’t be worthy of its own consideration.



  • If everyone in the US donated 100,000 that would raise 34.2 Trillion.

    That’s a nice dent.

    If we took all of the wealth from the top 10 billionaires it would equal about 2.5 Trillion.

    The combined wealth of the 1%, however, is about 52 trillion.

    So, we could pay off most of the national debt by instantly burdening everyone with a one time $100,000 tax bill. If you can’t afford it you have to make loan payments on it.

    OR we could confiscate all of the wealth of the top 1%, pay off the debt, and have plenty left over to let the 1% keep some wealth and maybe fund some other things.

    None of these options are practical obviously, but it does imply that the top 1% could easily afford wealth taxes of some kind and it would help pay down the national debt and that the non 1% could not do anything other than take on fractional ownership of the debt directly.

    This shows one group can afford it, another group definitely cannot.

    We probably need to start electing people exclusively from the bottom 99% of wealth holders, or better yet the bottom 50%. Ideally it should be illegal to be allowed to run the government if your net worth or the net worth of your family puts you at all in the top percentiles of wealth.