At this point if you gamble and lose in crypto, you shouldn't be afforded any particular protections. Sucks to be you. Now, if you should happen to be inadvertently involved - say, you're invested in a vehicle that doesn't clearly disclose they dabble in crypto - I think the path to responsibility is less clear.

But for the most part, buyer beware. This isn't five years ago. Any investor getting involved at this point has plenty of information available to them to decide whether or not to engage. If they insist on being an uneducated (dumb) participant, it's a choice. This industry wears it's malfeasance directly on its sleeve.

Regulate all you like. Dog fighting is illegal too. But don't do it on behalf of those poor duped investors - they're actively making their choices. They have no excuse.

I think the idea is to summarize a whole bunch of tweets, like trying to nail down a consensus interpretation of an article. It also sounds like a terrible idea.

I think the point is to remove the truth from any given article and replace it with the groupthink interpretation of paranoid Musk fanboys.

If the U.S. had a libertarian value system, then maybe libertarian politicians would actually get elected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"As flotilla chief of staff as well as executive officer of the diesel powered submarine B-59, Arkhipov refused to authorize the captain and the political officer to use nuclear torpedoes against the United States Navy [during the Cuban Missile Crisis", a decision that required the agreement of all three officers. In 2002, Thomas S. Blanton, then director of the U.S. National Security Archive, credited Arkhipov as "the man who saved the world"."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"On 26 September 1983, three weeks after the Soviet military had shot down Korean Air Lines Flight 007, Petrov was the duty officer at the command center for the Oko nuclear early-warning system when the system reported that a missile had been launched from the United States, followed by up to five more. Petrov judged the reports to be a false alarm. His subsequent decision to disobey orders, against Soviet military protocol,[4] is credited with having prevented an erroneous retaliatory nuclear attack on the United States and its NATO allies that could have resulted in a large-scale nuclear war. An investigation later confirmed that the Soviet satellite warning system had indeed malfunctioned. Because of his decision not to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike amid this incident, Petrov is often credited as having "saved the world"."

How many people in the USA know the names of these two men? Let alone celebrate their lives annually?

And those are only Soviet-era people we know about. How many more people prevented needless nuclear missile launches?

Would some rushed-into-development military AI program have done the same?

I am glad to see people discussing some of that at least. But this article (coincidentally on Slashdot the same day) should give us pause:
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
"... AI workers at other Big Tech companies, including Google and Microsoft, told CNBC about the pressure they are similarly under to roll out tools at breakneck speeds due to the internal fear of falling behind the competition in a technology ..."

Also remember, every day, anywhere in the world, you also owe your continued life-as-you-know-it to the "proper" functioning of 1970s-era Soviet computers that the USA tried to sabotage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"An example of fail-deadly and mutual assured destruction deterrence, it can automatically initiate the launch of the Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) by sending a pre-entered highest-authority order from the General Staff of the Armed Forces, Strategic Missile Force Management to command posts and individual silos if a nuclear strike is detected by seismic, light, radioactivity, and pressure sensors even with the commanding elements fully destroyed. By most accounts, it is normally switched off and is supposed to be activated during times of crisis; however, as of 2009, it was said to remain fully functional and able to serve its purpose when needed."

Related (by me, from 2010):
https://pdfernhout.net/recogni...
"... Nuclear weapons are ironic because they are about using space age systems to fight over oil and land. Why not just use advanced materials as found in nuclear missiles to make renewable energy sources (like windmills or solar panels) to replace oil, or why not use rocketry to move into space by building space habitats for more land? ...
        The big problem is that all these new war machines and the surrounding infrastructure are created with the tools of abundance. The irony is that these tools of abundance are being wielded by people still obsessed with fighting over scarcity. So, the scarcity-based political mindset driving the military uses the technologies of abundance to create artificial scarcity. That is a tremendously deep irony that remains so far unappreciated by the mainstream.
      We the people need to redefine security in a sustainable and resilient way. Much current US military doctrine is based around unilateral security ("I'm safe because you are nervous") and extrinsic security ("I'm safe despite long supply lines because I have a bunch of soldiers to defend them"), which both lead to expensive arms races. We need as a society to move to other paradigms like Morton Deutsch's mutual security ("We're all looking out for each other's safety") and Amory Lovin's intrinsic security ("Our redundant decentralized local systems can take a lot of pounding whether from storm, earthquake, or bombs and would still would keep working")."

The food pyramid from your childhood is dead and gone. The one on the wall in your doctor's office is more likely to look like the Mediterranean diet. Very light on red meat, more plentiful on fish and lean white meats, and vegetable centric.

Most people's health is just fine until it isn't. Eating whatever you feel like on the basis that it hasn't caught up with you yet isn't a great game plan.

Italy and Japan have shrinking populations. We would too, if it weren't for immigration. However our population growth rate is still low, and if it were any lower we'd be facing serious economic and social challenges. Sure, a shrinking population would drop housing prices, but we are far from having so many people there isn't space to fit them. Our real problem is seventy years of public policy aimed at the elimination of "slums" and the prevention of their reemergence.

If you think about it, "slum" is just a derogatory word for a neighborhood with a high concentration of very affordable housing. Basically policy has by design eliminated the most affordable tier of housing, which eliminates downward price pressure on higher tiers of housing. Today in my city a median studio apartment cost $2800; by the old 1/5 of income rule that means you'd need an income of $168k. Of course the rule now is 30% of income, so to afford a studio apartment you need "only" 112k of income. So essentially there is no affordable housing at all in the city, even for young middle class workers. There is, however a glut of *luxury* housing.

In a way, this is what we set out to accomplish: a city where the only concentrations of people allowed are wealthy people. We didn't really think it through; we acted as if poor to middle income people would just disappear. In reality two things happened. First they got pushed further and further into the suburbs, sparking backlash by residents concerned with property values. And a lot of people, even middle-class young people, end up in illegal off-the-book apartments in spaces like old warehouses and industrial spaces.

When I read the part about a lock on the exit, I was immediately reminded of this, but a more recent example of free, unregulated living arrangements familiar in the Bay Area would be that. So yeah, those evil regulators, ruining everybody's lives. Oh, the horror!

...but I'm going to enjoy going through and learning how this is some kind of an imposition on personal freedom, or how it's part of the president's secret strategy to ruin the world.

If you treat it as entertainment right from the start, it's much less annoying.

"The hard part is it requires nerves of steel because you will be up 100,000 one day and down 200,000 the next day and up $120,000 a day after that. The point is it's all doable mathematically. "

That's what's wrong with this article. They evaluate the model on its accuracy, or lack thereof, on a single race. That doesn't work

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't expect anything GPT-like to outperform a more simple statistical model on sports gambling. Still, this article doesn't make a lot of sense.

What a language model might be good for here is populating the statistical model, like collecting facts on the different players current injuries from news stories.

I always took these kinds of things as a bit of a joke myself. They can't overthrow the government. But historically what does make paramilitaries forces (more specifically, pro-government militias) potent is being tolerated / allowed / tacitly encouraged by the government - when such groups or more are less in line with the ruling party and allowed to do its "dirty work" that is illegal for the regular police and army. (Yes this is in the presence of some degree of law and order... after all, the ruling party doesn't have to do anything but look the other way).

This has happened all around the world lots of times (yes including but by no means exclusively the Brownshirts) and yes I do think Trump would welcome such support, based on his past actions and statements so far. And yes I do think he would fire the head of the FBI to protect this type of activity, since he already did that to protect himself once.

https://solarbuildermag.com/pr...
"BLUETTI, a manufacturer of solar + storage products, including LiFePO4 battery stations, is debuting a sodium-ion battery technology at CES 2022. Recently BLUETTI has announced the âoeworldâ(TM)s first sodium-ion battery stationâoe, NA300, and its compatible battery module B480. Sodium-ion batteries have become an alternative to their lithium-ion counterparts in many industries due to their high abundance and low costs. BLUETTI's first-generation sodium-ion battery excels in thermal stability, fast-charging capacity, low-temperature performance, and integration efficiency, despite slightly lower energy density than its LiFePO4 ones. ..."

But I am not sure what happened with it as I no longer see it for sale on Bluetti's website.
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
"NA300 & B480
World's First Sodium-ion Battery Power Station
Debut at CES 2022 (Jan 5th, Las Vegas)"

Which makes me wonder if the technology was still unstable in some way then?

In any case, good luck to Natron Energy with their product. The world definitely can use better batteries.

My bot told me to tell you you're full of shit. It also asked for your social security number, birthday and address.

Like the US declared and promised Russia it wouldn't take NATO any farther East after the wall fell? But then, no enemies to fear, no need to spend money on the military industrial complex. Generals and the oligarchy who supply them always need someone to fear.

CEO pay is based mostly on stock price. Reduce the outstanding pool, and individual shares become more valuable with zero sales (or in this case, declining sales), no innovations, no infrastructure investment or plan. This is just a payoff to the oligarchy - large corporate investors, fund managers. & c-levels. Jobs would not have approved - he would invested in innovation, R&D. He was a perfectionist. This company coasting on the laurels of Steve Jobs has finally run out steam. People have enough Icrap and there's nothing new in the pipeline. The greedy are taking the money and running.

There's a lot of mythology around who Trump voters are. Part of it is that statistics can be confusing, especially if you're prone to jump to conclusions. Yes Trump wins the voters without a college degree, and people without college degrees tend to make less money, but we can't leap to the conculsion that Trump voters are poor. In fact, data shows Trump lost the $50k and under income group solidly in both 2016 and 2020. In 2016 he won every income group greater than $50k, although only *strongly* in the $50k -$99k group. In 2020 he solidly lost every income group betlow $100k, but but won the over $100k group by an enormous 12 point margin.

Putting it all together, Trump's core voter group are people with limited educational attainment who are economically comfortable of (good for them) well off without having a college degree. However he doesn't own any particular socioeconomic group; really elections are determined by changes in turnout in key swing states. There was strong turnout among Trump's *share* of $50-$99 ke voters in 2016; I don't think many of those voters changed their mind, but their compatriots who sat 2016 out came out to vote in 2020.