Or we elect enough progressives who care about the country to unleash antitrust enforcement and shatter large corporations.

Now if you like Capitalism, and love America, you would want that because we've hit the point in Capitalism where it has essentially become Monopolism in all but name. So companies like Deere would have to be broken into a half dozen companies, and firms like Blackrock shattered into tiny shards, maybe one for every brand they own.

The only way to save Capitalism is to make sure we have vibrant competition. A great example of our early stage Monopolism is that an established industry, baby formula, suffered shortages from a single plant having issues. In a vibrant Capitalist society issues at one company would result in competitors swooping in to try and get market share before the original company could get that facility running again. In Monopolism, as we saw, there are insufficient competitors to step up.

Cannot even find a use for the AI data centers / GPU's they have already?
Are they going to lease out the GPS?
With that much competition?

I guess Mark / Meta want to get into the low margin datacenter business. That's going to put a crimp on profitability.

One of the greatest crimes of the 20th Century was some idiot judges allowing click-through EULA's (et al.) to be treated as valid.

The judges saying that a company could force a contract, with untold numbers of pages filled with a legalese on a small (they were all small when this started) screen, should have had their opinions legally drawn and quartered for utter stupidity. You want people to sign a contract? Not like most will read it anyway, but get out the paper and make them sign it. I can think of a few dozen things we wouldn't have to deal with today had we treated contracts equally.

Anthropic and OpenAI both have quiet reports that AI doesn't do much for productivity in the positive, and the negative is reduced knowledge about code operation.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.202...

The problem for (in particular) Dario is that hyping the jobspocalypse was never about reality, it was about the AI hype train. They needed, and still need, to keep the gravy train running until they get exit liquidity for their initial VC backers. Anything less means the ultra-wealthy are left holding the bag for the crazy levels of investment / CapEx spending. That's a bad thing, as one of the only big sins in Silicon Valley is VC / Private Equity money getting wiped. That's one of the few times you'll see people get shunned. Neither Sam nor Dario want to be blacklisted so you can be dang sure they're going to run the hype train until they can get IPO's.

I still love running into people believed his bullcrap about AI writing ALL TEH CODE this year, April at the latest. Some of them, mostly people who aren't developers and/or don't program in general, were very adamant and called my questions (and outright disbelief) foolish. Now most are sheepish at best, with a few ever more rabid that it will happen "real soon now" just wait... any day now... just wait.

This happened at Kimberly-Clark regarding outsourcing.

A small group of people was offered advanced training on a software package that was hot. They were offered company their standard pay plus weekly paid flights, lodging, meals, and a small guaranteed bump in salary, the whole ten yards, for months to go on-site and get the skills. All they had to do was sign a contract stating they would hang around for a couple years, with the caveat that if they quit they would have to pay that substantial amount of money back.

Fast forward a short period of time, in contract terms, and new executives come in and look at "costs" to cut. Why, look at those expensive people! They can outsource that for less so they fire the people they spent a ridiculous amount to train. This was bad for the workers, but as they didn't quit the company ate the training costs. All of them ended up working elsewhere because those skills were in demand.

Fast forward again and the overseas offshoring company is causing more problems than osolutions. So KC goes looking to rehire these people. Well most of them were employed, for a LOT more money than KC had been paying. They did manage to get a couple people back... but at SIGNIFICANTLY higher costs and three of them flat out refused to come back as regular employees and were hired as consultants for a bit more than FOUR times their previous salaries.

Well, they need to keep that hype train running as long as possible.

They need to create a reason for the US government to take "stakes" (bail out) VC and private equity.

Otherwise the .5% could lose significant sums of money.

not with a bang but with a whimper.

The irony of this causing the AI bubble to pop would be too delicious for words. You might be asking yourself: "Why would this, a chip that makes inference cheaper, hurt the AI bubble instead of helping it?" and the answer is brutally simple:

We have billions of pre-sold Blackwell GPU's sitting in warehouses waiting for install. That's on top of the billions it will take to put them into compute modules and install them for use. There are more yet in pre-sold Vera Rubin GPU for compute modules to install. All of those modules that were to be used for inference are now expensive paperweights in comparison to an ASIC. An insane amount of cash tied up in now (if true) overpriced and expensive to run modules.

Not only that, but the data center warehouses will all need to be redesigned. All of those custom racks. All of that power. All of those layouts. *POOF* Useless due to expense. Oracle is screwed. Their data center commitments are based on Blackwell and Vera Rubin compute modules. This working would make those data centers obsolete before they're even constructed. Even if they stop building them what happens to the GPU's in storage? The pre-sell commitments to TSMC? The nVidia cash cow sales? The data center construction contracts? The power? The stock market based on infinite growth of a few companies? Anthropic? Who will be left holding the bag?

That is, unless, it is so limited as to not be useful in controlling OpenAI's (and other's in the future) inference costs. That also hurts because it shows that making inference cheaper isn't plausible at this time and that makes just breaking even look night impossible. That means OpenAI and Anthropic lose another path to making any plausible profit.

There's over a trillion in CapEx right now floating on Blackwell and Vera Rubin compute data centers... and if Jalapeño is real it just nuked them outright. Of course the question of their commitments for buying compute comes into question because you'd better believe Oracle / Microsoft / Google / Amazon are going to do their best to not absorb the cost of all those modules / data centers / power commitments. That means OpenAI and Anthropic might be on the hook for an insane amount of spend on modules too costly to be useful.

This is why some US vehicles are near impossible to import to the EU for sale.

Another issue is the terrible lighting decisions in the US. See: Technology Connections

https://youtu.be/O1lZ9n2bxWA?s...

See also: Cybertruck

European law mandates that vehicles include impact protection zones, avoid dangerous sharp edges, and incorporate speed limiters if they exceed 3.5 tons. The Cybertruck, as the release points out, “clearly violated” these rules.

Americans build flat out dangerous vehicles... stuff that makes TVR look like the pinnacle of safety.

You were close but you've forgotten that regulators are, effectively, captured today. There isn't really a free market in late stage capitalism, it's all about the extraction of wealth.

As my relatives put it: Not until they get the morons like Farage, Robinson, and a whole host of other hate-filled nutjobs relegated to the dustbin of electoral politics. There's far too much going on in the EU right now to start adding open Russian assets into the parliament as MEP's.

Clearly you think everyone is treated equally. There are a few decades worth of precedent you could use to disabuse yourself of that blind spot.

The question isn't if it's collected the question is if there are procedures in place to hamper it's use as much as plausible and to create actual jeopardy for misuse. As one of my friends put it, the question isn't if they're going to have CCTV cameras, it's:
1) Will those cameras be somewhat limited in placement? (e.g. major roads, monuments, et al.)
2) Will you be able to have your own cameras not plugged into the network? (no compulsory "Search Party" integration of home / business security)
3) Will you require the data stay local to the municipality / county? (no central clearinghouse like Axon Fusus or Flock Nova)
4) Will you require a state/county warrant to access the cameras? (more judges who might as questions)
5) Will you make it a felony, with a MINIMUM 5 years in prison, to access the data without a warrant? (the threat of actual prison)

You want the person accessing the cameras to face a real consequence. They are the first line that must take a pause. The fact you're doing it on the state level means no federal pardons apply. That's not a guarantee, but it's a dang site trickier to start saying you'll get off without a hitch if someone breaks the law.

This is similar to the radiology argument.

Company builds "AI" (it isn't AI but let's pretend) that can "read" images. Company goes to sell this to a hospital CEO. They say it will do the work that radiologists would do, and it only costs (X) tokens per scan. Imagine the savings! Hospital asks about liability, and here's the kicker: The AI company says just have one of the remaining human doctors the hospital has on-site to review the scan.

Now skipping the part where it says it can do the work, it's dumping liability on the human who now not only has to review their own work but also the AI. The AI doesn't have to be perfect... the human has to be perfect. In a logical world the CEO would tell the company to go sell their hokum elsewhere until they're willing to put their own reputation AND finances on the line to stand behind their work. However if the average CEO can sign a contract to pay the company 15% less than a human overall, then add that 15% to the bottom line, they'll get a bonus, so you'd best get to work doc.

When the mistake happens, you'll get sued... instead of the "AI" system and it just sucks to be you person who went to school to become an actual SME. We've already seen them blame software devs/engineers when AI writes crappy code that causes problems. You think they aren't going to dump other bad crap on humans when the tool breaks?

You really believe that line of horse shiat?

Keep drinking that flavor aid.

Had it not been for Ronnie Ray-Gun and the Republican Party. Heck, we'd probably be the world leader in solar panel engineering and wind turbines had that old cuck, and decades of center-right / far-right politicians, not fellated the fossil fuel industry for cash. GM's EV1 might have just been the first in a line of American EV's from the Big 3 - and Japanese auto makers - decades before Tesla.

Republicans really do ruin everything.