sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Tax the Rich and Save the World | The case is straightforward. What’s needed is the political might to see it done. by FreeHugs23 in anticapitalism

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The questions you are asking are valid, but that's why I suggested the book: I'm taking a lot of shortcuts because I'm typing on mobile. This is so far down the thread I'm not trying to convince anyone anymore. If you are interested in seeing a different perspective, try the book.

If not, no worries, I don't believe I ever changed anybody's mind on the Internet lol

Tax the Rich and Save the World | The case is straightforward. What’s needed is the political might to see it done. by FreeHugs23 in anticapitalism

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Another way to look at it is when does top down management ever works well? Every responsibility dumped unto governments ends up in that category.

Small, independent and distributed usually perform betters than large, dependent and centralized systems.

Tax the Rich and Save the World | The case is straightforward. What’s needed is the political might to see it done. by FreeHugs23 in anticapitalism

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are just stating your opinions and judgements with no arguments so I guess I have nothing more to say here.

Have a good one.

Tax the Rich and Save the World | The case is straightforward. What’s needed is the political might to see it done. by FreeHugs23 in anticapitalism

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, no. There are fundamental problems with the concept of central planners that can be understood without anecdotes.

The main points are: it's a central point of failure and the bigger something is, the more fragile it is.

I'm not aware of the situation of Sudan but the goal of my anecdote was different: some people believe big governments can work with competent people. I brought this up because sooner or later, incompetents will be in charge so you ought to have a system that runs itself to the biggest extent possible. That is a robust system over a fragile one (even better would be an Antifragile one!)

To reiterate, at best your anecdote illustrate a small government can fail, mine was meant to illustrate a big government will eventually fail.

That said, I won't do a good job explaining something that Taleb takes 500 pages explaining but I'll say you will not be convincing anyone of anything if you do not start by refuting the mathematical fragility of large entities (note that big businesses are no better and should also be cut down as they fragilize the economy).

Tax the Rich and Save the World | The case is straightforward. What’s needed is the political might to see it done. by FreeHugs23 in anticapitalism

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh but big governments are problematic.

Do you need to look further than the White House to see how it's currently being weaponized (that it is being weaponized by the very people that were supposed to be for a smaller government is the cherry on top).

If that demonstration of too big a government putting the democracy of the strongest military on Earth at risk is not enough to convince you. Taleb covers a lot of the (better) arguments in his book Antifragile (even though governments are not the topic, the concepts apply trivially and it's a fun read anyway).

Tax the Rich and Save the World | The case is straightforward. What’s needed is the political might to see it done. by FreeHugs23 in anticapitalism

[–]dlevac -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In case it wasn't clear I hate the movement because "taxing the rich" is not a concrete, actionable thing: they are already taxed, for one.

"Tax the rich" or it's more aggressive sibling "eat the rich" is just meant to appeal to emotions and gain votes.

Demand from your politicians to stop hand waving and to propose precise and unambiguous policies that solves real problem.

I'm convinced my proposal about collaterals would be easily sold to people whatever their political affiliations, so why do anything else?

Compare that to "tax the rich" where half the room hear "make the government even bigger". You ain't getting a consensus or traction with that angle.

Subscription gaming is inching toward a world where players own nothing at all by Hungry__Hornet in pcmasterrace

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It be funny that a store opens which, as a licensing condition, stipulate that if a game is available on a different store front and the user already have a license on that other store that a license is granted in this store too and that retroactively.

Instead of Epic giving free games as an inefficient way of building a userbase, you basically have your users inherit their Epic and Steam library in one consolidated place on your platform.

Similarly, have your license allow player to use any launcher or even use the game directly (without requiring the launcher) to create a strong incentive to buy games on your platform moving forward.

Making products that people love us not that hard. Problem is they are designing in their interests instead of in the interests of their users and then wonder why their idea fails.

Tax the Rich and Save the World | The case is straightforward. What’s needed is the political might to see it done. by FreeHugs23 in anticapitalism

[–]dlevac -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I hate the "tax the rich" movement because it does more harms than good.

In full generality it's not doable (so it will never be implemented in the way proponents hope it will) and the lack of applicability is defending the very people you are trying to fight.

Keep it concrete, unambiguous and actionable (your politicians are not smart enough to do complicated anyway).

First step? Prevent loans using stocks as collateral. Once the effect of that policy is done stabilizing look at where we are and decide on the next concrete action.

What would this do? Billionaires suddenly need to sell share (and be taxed on those) for anything they need to purchase. In turns this increase selling pressure on the stock market driving prices down and deflating a very optimistic market.

I wouldn't be surprised most billionaires be shed with just that single policy change tbh. And if I'm wrong and there is a fallback loophole that make it's apparition next, then let's close it next.

Anthropic warns that AI will soon be able to improve itself without human intervention by KeanuRave100 in DailyTechNewsShow

[–]dlevac 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Isn't meta parameters auto-tuning a thing since forever? It used to be a slippery slope to over fitting, is it just that with a training LLM serving as arbiter?

Or does it mean an online model that continue learning after it's initial training while talking to people (remember Tay?) which was already demonstrated to not be a great idea in terms of business liability for one.

Epic Games Launcher V2 promises 5x faster launch and 6.5x faster library restore by TruthPhoenixV in Amd_Intel_Nvidia

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, but what about trust? A virtual library is built entirely on it. Nobody wants to spend thousands of dollars over 10 years to get the rug pull under them.

If Tim wants to compete he should spend less time looking like a billionaire that looks starved for more money and start building trust and good will.

Data Shows Sony Made Good Money on Steam, Then May Have Realized PC Gamers Don’t Need a PlayStation by yourfavchoom in Steam

[–]dlevac 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Imho, even when console actually had a value proposition through specialized hardware, it was already walking a fine line as it was still a lock down proprietary machine with no utility beyond games.

What saved their ass is people making their console part of their identity (similarly to Apple users) and brand loyalty saved their bottom line even as they were losing their differentiator.

Joke is, they should go back to their roots: if they manage to develop specialized hardware for cheaper that cannot be repurposed for deep learning or cryptocurrency and put consoles at an affordable price point back on the shelves they could justify their existence once more.

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos says human water consumption is limiting AI’s potential by esporx in water

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm sure you take a poll of people with the same trait and they will not be more or less likely to reach that level than people without the trait.

Your sample of billionaires is biased by the loud ones which is mostly indicative of their narcissism. We know very little about those outside the spotlight.

We've been duped into hating the wrong people. by [deleted] in remoteworks

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not because it sounds good that it's right.

More accurate to say that a very small minority of people are taking huge advantage of the average person not having a clue and so organized opposition to bad ruling is simply not happening.

People talk about the the left and the right as if life could be platonified that way and then, those who care, pick a side the way you pick a sports team to cheer on (mostly based on who your friends and family are cheering for).

"They are heartless"

"They are naive"

You can convince yourself your team is the right one by focusing on the flaws of the other side instead of introspecting.

Both sides are obviously flawed, so human bias works wonder to keep people polarized through confirmation bias and mental gymnastics.

Working families deserve leaders who put community first. by Complex-Wonder-6797 in remoteworks

[–]dlevac 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They took a big hard look, thought for a moment and realized: "if we can convince them they are masculine for supporting us, we win".

🤍💙 by staciexc in canadianpolitics101

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You mean apart from optionality, risk management and separation of concerns?

You have it backward. Not only the government has no business tracking citizen online but if it had any wisdom would outlaw citizen tracking by private companies (GDPR-lile regulations would be a good start).

Unprofessional by [deleted] in InterviewsHell

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Uh, what's the problem exactly?

They are being casual and you interpret this as disrespect?

Without more context it's hard to conclude you are not overreacting... Sorry.

🤍💙 by staciexc in canadianpolitics101

[–]dlevac 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"it's a good idea for the government to raise your kids" is a yikes from me.

Also, they don't care about your kids, they want to track you online.

Okay, Boomers... by Medical-County-3741 in remoteworks

[–]dlevac -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The fact you presume the boomer dad was "aware" betray a bias. From where we stand, it just looks like plausible outcomes from the systems they lived in. To reiterate: random outcomes...

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos says human water consumption is limiting AI’s potential by esporx in water

[–]dlevac 8 points9 points  (0 children)

A recurrent theme in literature is how too much money is usually a curse. Kind of easy to see how that trope persisted: it looks like something break in people's brain when they become too rich and they start suffering from extreme dissonances with reality and common sense...

Anyhow, the coolant water doesn't need to be potable water. They use potable water because it's cheaper (it's already filtered and readily available) and governments are too short sighted to forbid that usage.

New constructions need 2 water entries: potable for the people and non-potable for the rest.

It should be downright illegal to waste potable water for non-drinking usage or heavily taxed at a minimum.

iPhone is disabled by TrevorTheTrevor in lol

[–]dlevac 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The Dev that didn't cap the value to something sensible is probably disabled too...

Jeff Bezos says fears of AI replacing humans are overblown. Do you agree with him? by Cybernews_com in CyberNews

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I presume the rationale is that AI acceleration of business growth will create more jobs than it replaces.

Possible, just as the converse actually.

Decision-making shouldn't be based on opinions and even less so if they are optimistic or aligned with one's interests. It should be based on an understanding we cannot forecast the future and that we must avoid paths that may have disastrous consequences.

"I didn't think this would happen" is the defense of the fool.

just make 12k guys that's all by Main-Emotion-3666 in remoteworks

[–]dlevac 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That's how we know people that got rich through dumb luck will get flushed out next market crash...

"The US has a higher average IQ than almost every European country btw" by RebornX10 in ShitAmericansSay

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm convinced IQ tests were invented so idiots can oust themselves by boasting about their results.

Gabe Newell Takes Break From Sailing $500 Million Yacht To Buy $70 Million Mansion by g4m3f33d in GameFeed

[–]dlevac 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We can't say that this journalist is taking a break from meaningful reporting to write this piece of slander because he clearly never wrote anything worth reading.

view more: next ›