You don’t need to prevent rich people to remove money from elections. There are laws that other countries have passed that effectively nuter their influence on that.

Economics is about studying how it works, not forming opinions on how it should work.

If you want to discuss changing economic systems entirely, then discuss that, not ways to break the current one.

Our current economic system would not function with the changes proposed. All sorts of problems occur if you try to tax wealth when it’s created. Companies would receive no investment because anyone with money would have already hit the threshold and wouldn’t benefit from investing it. Not to mention that founders would be forced to walk away fairly early in the business even if they succeeded without investment.

Capitalism is inherently exploitative. You can’t have a profit as a company if you pay workers the same amount that you earn. If you pay workers out the entirety of the value and cut out the shareholders, you’ve just created socialism.

In my opinion, guided capitalism is the best system. Which means adding taxes and regulations to prevent the worst problems.

Like the fact that we already tax wealth somewhat when it’s sold off, and my proposal adjust inheritance taxes to 100% over a certain dollar value (10-20 million for example)

So as the company you founded gets bigger, you’re forced to just give more and more of it away to the government until you don’t control it anymore?

I would much prefer to see a higher estate tax, 100% of all amounts over 10-20 million.

If you know you can’t keep it you’re far more likely to do something useful with it while you’re alive.

SpaceX has advanced what humanity can do in space by a significant amount. It achieved something no government was even considering attempting until they proved it possible.

Google has added some massive value to the world, making information more accessible and advancing hundreds of other services and companies. From Gmail to Waymo it too has advanced humanity significantly.

How does that statement make any sense? If you tax them, they won’t have the money to fuck off with.

You have hurt yourself in your confusion.

Yea, because you don’t have an economics degree.

Musk may be an asshole, and Tesla may be absolute shit, but SpaceX is a good company and would have never existed without Musk’s wealth from other ventures.

That process of making a fortune, then investing in other companies so that they can become successful is a critical factor for many organizations.

Google is another example, it took millions of dollars from a few wealthy investors before it blew up.

From which, taxing people on death or taxing them while living?

The problem with “wealth” or taxing it while someone is alive is that there’s a problem when it comes to businesses.

If you taxed Zuckerburg, Musk, or Bezos 90% of their wealth, they would lose control of their companies because that’s where most of their wealth exists as the stock they own in their company.

I’m a big fan of a limit on wealth transfer to your children though, cap that shit at 10 million and give the billionaires a reason to spend or give away all their money before they die. Spent money stimulates the economy.

Politicians pushing “their” religion isn’t really compatible with the separation of church and state indented by the first amendment.

He isn’t, it wasn’t, and you’re an asshole.

It was a picture of Trump with a quote that he had said about a school shooting saying “We have to get over it”. This guy also added “This Seems Relevant”

As he should, absolutely his first amendment right was violated.

If the right can spout pure hatred and bullshit with impunity, so can everyone else.

Yup, the whole generation grew up having been too distant from the horrors of WW2.

Most of them don’t even know what happened the day after the British protectorate ended in Israel.

Hell most of them don’t even know when, how, or why Israel was created.

History repeats itself because people forget.

I’d argue home assistant with some smart LEDs and a few sensors would be great.

Having a bulb that let’s you know the outside temperature/weather when you’re getting dressed in the morning is neat. Having a dimming pattern for sleeping time. Tons of other really simple stuff available too.

I mean, we really don’t have the data to prove this either way.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/faulty-nvidia-h100-gpus-and-hbm3-memory-caused-half-of-the-failures-during-llama-3-training-one-failure-every-three-hours-for-metas-16384-gpu-training-cluster

Meta’s training of Llama3 405B model had a 1.34% failure rate for GPUs over the 54 days it ran, across 16387 gpus. It’s not likely that all of those faults led to bricked hardware either, they could have just lost part of their performance or memory.

The real question is does that test scale to the long term, often with hardware like this there’s a bathtub curve for failure. If those units used were brand new, many of the failures could have just been the initial wave of failures, and there could be a long period of relative stability that hadn’t even been seen yet.

GPU based coin mining demonstrated that GPUs often had a lifespan over 5 years of constant use before failure on consumer cards in often less than ideal operating conditions.

You’re pulling shit out of your ass at this point, there are some doom reports out of people suggesting that may be a problem, but there are also reports out of other companies(meta for example) with documentation saying the rate is much lower and the mean failure is 6+ years.

The other leftovers from the crash also won’t have that problem. It’s not just about GPUs. Datacenters and their infrastructure last a lot longer, and the electric generation/transportation networks will also potentially be useful for various alternative applications if the AI use case flops.

They’re still somewhat functional for those workloads, and they can even use those low-precision components to emulate high-precision using libraries like cublas, though obviously not as fast as hardware that could do it natively.

It’s not like they can’t do it at all. It’s just that Hopper was better at FP64 than Blackwell is but if Blackwell chips become effectively free due to an AI crash then you could likely still use them in that capacity.

The power costs are nothing compared to the hardware costs for those things.

Getting the massive power required is difficult for datacenters but the usage per unit of compute is actually quite low.

It’s important to note that in some previous bubbles, the leftovers of the crash ended up spurring new beneficial growth after.

GPUlike computing power available at scape for essentially free after the ai crash could be used in all sorts of potential ways.

Maybe it makes rending movies with special effects super cheap, and available even to tiny indie studios. Maybe scientists grab it for running physics simulations or disease treatment computations.

I hear theres a few neo Mennonite colonies starting up that only use tech before the turn of the millenia. Maybe you could look into them.

And the vast majority of my automations don’t use it because it isn’t required.

I will stand by what I said, the tool is great even if you don’t touch AI at all with it.