Sounds like the problem is the house and not the stove.

I definitely can't imagine any issues running a functional market economy under the theory that the first amendment allows you to make or conceal any claim you like about a product.

Will this change my tax exposure when providing 'gratuities' to supreme court justices?

You're forgetting the big one: that the system is designed to fail and create an uneducated unskilled worker class for the wealthy elite.

It seems like an open question whether being repetitive and rule based is actually a virtue as an AI use case or not.

'AI' is an easy sell for people who want to do some 'digital transformation' they can thought-leader about on linkedin without actually doing the ditch-digging involved in solving the problem conventionally "Hey, just throw some unstructured inputs at the problem and the magic of Agentic will make the answer come out!"; but that's not really a a good argument in favor of doing it that way. Dealing with such a cryptic, unpredictable, and expensive tool is at its most compelling when you have a problem that isn't readily amenable to conventional solutions; while it looks a lot like sheer laziness when you take a problem that basically just requires some form validation logic and a decision tree and throw an LLM at it because you can't be bothered to construct the decision tree.

There are definitely problems, some of them even useful, that are absolutely not amenable to conventional approaches; and those at least have the argument that perhaps unpredictable results are better than no results or manual results; but if you've got some desperately conventional business logic case that someone is turning into an 'AI' project either because they are a trend chaser or because they think that programming is an obscurantist conspiracy against the natural language Idea Guys by fiddly syntax nerds that's not a good sign.

Why does it matter if it's fake if it looks good? It's like mp3... If you can't hear the difference (and you can't, despite any claims you may make to the contrary - it's physically and biologically impossible), why does it matter if it's compressed?

Intel makes a lot more than CPUs. Intel makes them itself.

AMD only makes CPUs. AMD pays someone else to make them.

nVidia only makes GPUs. nVidia pays someone else to make them.

So of course Intel spends a lot more on R&D. They are developing a much wider portfolio and they are making it all themselves.

Sitting on the toilet doesn't give you hemorrhoids. Straining, having a poor diet, and trying to "hurry it up" gives you hemorrhoids.

If you're on the toilet for a long time because you have a low fiber diet and have to strain to eliminate, you're probably going to have hemorrhoids. The phone you're using to pass the time more pleasantly is not what's causing them.

I swear to God, when did so-called "smart people" get so stupid?

As a direct test of the tool that sounds pretty underwhelming(and it's not a cheap upsell); but what seems really concerning is the second order effects. Your average office environment doesn't exactly lack for emails or bad powerpoint decks; and both get chiseled right out of the productivity of the people expected to read or sit through them. The more cynical sales types just go directly to selling you the inhuman centipede solution; where everyone else also needs a copilot license so they can summarize the increased volume of copilot-authored material; but that only bandaids the "if it's not worth writing why are you trying to write more of it?" problem.

Money has definitely changed the food pyramid over the years. Various lobbies, and all.

But to your points about vegetarianism/veganism, I think the reason most people who try these diets have poor outcomes on them is because they unwittingly end up eating more ultraprocessed foods that are actually worse for them than what they ate on their previous diet. Most packaged "vegan" options are just awful. Ultra-processed TVP is as bad for you as cured meat in the long run.

My wife and I are on a "mostly" plant-based diet, and we do it with fresh fruits and vegetables, not ultraprocessed "imitation" meats and other garbage like that. I eat between maybe 8 and 16 ounces of meat in a normal week, and it's fresh meat from a local farm, not packaged, cured, processed, dyed, antibiotic'd, hormoned meat. It makes a huge difference.

I would venture a guess that the high cholesterol problem came about with ultra-processing of foods in the 1960s and 70s. More chemicals, more industrial food manufacturing, less nutrition in fruits and vegetables due to monoculture and mega-chemical farming, etc.. A lot of the chemicals used in the ultraprocessing of foods are probably toxic and inflammatory, and cholesterol production and plaque buildup is one way your body can defend the epithelial cells in your cardiovascular system from these toxins in your blood. It just so happens that this can also kill you.

Now, here's the ultimate problem. There are too many people. Eating healthy food requires agriculture that is free of pesticides, herbicides, hormones, altered DNA, chemical growth stimulants, and ultraprocessing. The amount of land we have could not possibly produce enough healthy food to feed everyone, and it can barely produce enough garbage food to do it. So, good luck solving that one.

It's also not clear why we'd need investors if AI good enough to eat all the jobs exists. Even without 'AI' a fairly massive amount of investment is handled by the relatively simple 'just dump it in an index fund and don't touch it, idiot' algorithm; and even allegedly sophisticated professionals have a fairly tepid track record when it comes to actually realizing market-beating returns.

Obviously it's this guy's job to promote retail investing as a cure-all; because that's what he sells; but this seems transparently stupid.

If 'AI' has eaten all the jobs; why exactly would we have humans 'investing' for a living? Surely AI good enough to eat all the jobs could also match or exceed the performance of the average trader?

This proposal basically seems like UBI, but capitalism-washed with a pointless (and likely dangerous; given that retail noise trading is basically gambling for people who think they are too smart for gambling) financial services layer tacked on to avoid admitting that it's UBI by pretending that everyone is an investor instead.

I came to the same conclusion years ago. American culture especially glorifies extreme behavior in literally all things. Anything you do, you must take it to a crazy extreme, or else you're not *really* an American, right? "What do you mean you can only eat a 32 ounce steak?!?!?" Or, "hey YouTube, today I'm going to tell you that eating meat every day for every meal is the most healthy diet out there! Don't for get to smash that like button and subscribe! And by the way when I don't want my data compromised, I install this Chinese VPN! It's great!"1

Nothing will kill you in reasonable amounts (and for you pedants out there, this statement is not meant literally, but requires some capability of higher level abstract thought to understand). If you do everything in reasonable amounts, you are probably going to be just fine.

The outbreak of refined sugars has really been the downfall of our health and well being. People can't seem to make the right decision here not to consume a quarter pound of sugar every day. If artificial sweeteners accelerate cognitive decline by 1.6 years, that is probably a better outcome than dying of diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, stroke, and the myriad of other diseases that come from over-consumption of sugar.

We may not have had the safety culture to the same degree; but, given the number of insecticides that are acetylcholinesterase inhibitors not miles off the efficacy of their more alarmingly named colleagues among the g-series and v-series nerve agents; it seems pretty likely that 50s chemists knew full well that they were poking some very, very, troublesome compounds.

Probably not in a position to tease out some of the more subtle neuroanatomical changes at low prenatal doses or the like given medical imaging of the time; but with a bunch of these we are talking about either compounds we worried about IG Farben tinkering with during the war or close analogs thereof.

Who is so dumb that they a) watch YouTube and b) actually pay for it?