That layoff that they're doing sounds a lot more palatable to investors if the CEO says they did it through downsizing.

Employees burning out because they're doing less grunt-work? I'm not buying it. What could this guy's angle be? Well, maybe, just maybe, he's selling an AI-based productivity tool? https://get.convictional.com/a... "Our product is so good that your employees will burn themselves out doing the real work, instead of the grunt work." Hmmm...

TVs have never had good sound, not even the good ones.

But it makes sense. TVs aren't about sound, they're about pictures. You want good sound, you've always needed to have a...sound system. I go even further, with separately-purchased amplifier, and separately-purchased speakers. It's true that some amplifier/speaker combos do sound decent. But if you want the best quality of each component, you need to buy components.

TVs have never had good sound, period. Not even high end ones.

Let me help you out, since I can see you're struggling. Just tell me where else money comes from, beyond what is created by the government! Good luck!

From *your* statement I take it you don't know anything about economics, because anybody who actually knew something about it, would be able to explain their position and would want to do so. The real reason you don't want to continue this conversation, is because you know you've encountered somebody who doesn't buy your progressive BS talking points and can back up his position. Perhaps you are...a coward?

Whether we call them billionaires or the ruling class, the subject here is AI training, which makes the discussion of "the rich" off-topic.

I do actually believe AI will increase productivity. But productivity alone doesn't produce money. In our civilization, money can only be created by the government. When it does this, the value of each dollar decreases.

The fundamental problem is that UBI is at its core, a redistribution of money. It goes *from* those who have it, *to* those who need it. Those who have money, don't make enough to give everyone a UBI, even if *all* of their income goes to fund UBI. So let's say we have the government create more money to make up the shortfall. Now we have an inflation problem. Argentina is a shining example of how this works, experiencing more than 100% inflation per year, when its government tried to pay its obligations by "printing money."

The average per-person income in the US is about $43K per year. Let's say we take all the income over $43K, and give it to people who make less than $43K, to make everything equal. That would be the theoretical limit to what UBI could do, and $43K does seem pretty basic. Now, the problem is, all those people who make more than $43K by busting their butts and doing what it takes to earn more--they will no longer be motivated to bust their butts and earn more. Human nature says they will do exactly how much they are required to do. Or at least, the vast majority will not be motivated to make more money that they cannot keep. Now, that $43K starts to erode, because the rich aren't rich any more and don't care about all that extra effort. Oh, and we're just talking about income, and neglecting to pay for infrastructure or defense, every single dollar is going to redistribution.

No, the math doesn't work out, productivity or not.

I wish I had a better answer for you! I don't know if there's a solution. My solution took a lot of sweat and stress to figure out, so I don't envy you.

Well, since Google is the one paying for the time and effort, it only has to be worth their money for *their* purposes.

Oh have no fear, they will absolutely find ways to monetize this new platform. And sites will find ways to get people to visit. Frankly, if sites provided content solely to get advertising revenue, I feel very little compassion for them. They can die, as far as I'm concerned.

Makes sense. CloudFlare does offer a catch-all.

Yes.

I have domain isaacsoft.com, for which I've set up about 80 addresses on CloudFlare. Most of those are routed to the exact same GMail inbox, tonyisaac@gmail.com, though a few are routed to a family member's inbox. I do not route unknown email addresses @isaacsoft.com, just the 80 that I've specifically set up.

I don't use POP3 to retrieve emails from GMail, though I used to.

GMail itself is cracking down on emails that don't comply with DKIM or SPF. https://powerdmarc.com/gmail-e...

I've been using CloudFlare routing to GMail for nearly a year now, with no issues. I do mark spam as spam, and GMail does what I expect with such emails.

I doubt GMail will start flagging CloudFlare as a spammer, they probably have agreements in place with each other to prevent that from happening.

LLMs can also be trained on official documentation, it isn't just human forum posts.

You find a way to insert the word "billionaires" into every post, don't you!

Well, to answer the question, AI doesn't just train on human Q&A sites. It also trains just fine on original documentation, like documents that describe the syntax of a language or framework.

For one thing, AI can train directly on the documents that come with a product, or describe a programming language or framework. They don't *just* rain on human conversations like SO. You can point AI to a language document and ask it to write code based on what it finds there, and it will do it. Over time, I expect documentation writers will learn to write documents specifically designed for AI to train on.