That's a lot of leaps I just took, because it's honestly way too complex to get into litigating when people/companies should be allowed to break the law. The much simpler answer is to simply not let companies/people break the law, and fix the law when it needs fixing, and not just so one dude can become a billionaire real fast.

Airbnb/Bed Boat, Neighbor, Swimply, Uber/Lyft, Bird/Lime, BlackJet, Waymo/Cruise, Splacer/Peerspace, Zenefits, Tilt, Loomis/Stablecoins, Coinbase, Worldcoin, Stripe, AngelList/Sydecar, Polymarket, Uniswap Labs, Doordash/Instacart/Postmates, CloudKitchens, Shef, Done Health, Forward Health, Cerebral, Pacaso, Sonder, 23andMe, Ro/Hims/Hers, Viome, Juul Labs, Oura Ring, Particle Health/Moxe Health, Roblox, YouTube, Popcorn Time, Kickstarter/Indiegogo, Republic/Wefunder, Deel/Remote, Lambda School, Make School, Mission Bit, WeWork, Oyster/Papaya Global, HiQ Labs, FlexPort, Katerra, Zipline, Starship Technologies/Serve Robotics, 3D Robotics, Anduril Industries, DraftKings/FanDuel, Cydia, Eaze, MindMed, Odin, Swarm Technologies, Starlink, Convoy/Uber Freight, Carvana, Tesla, VoltShare.... oh yeah, and OpenAI.

What do all of these companies have in common? They all manipulated markets, bent and broke laws in order to get that "exponential growth". They didn't want to wait around and find out if their businesses would be legally allowed to grow. So they just broke or worked around the law, with the intention of becoming billionaires. But that's okay, because growth rate! We're not doing anything bad, people want these things! Who cares if it might be illegal or the spirit of the law frowns on what we do? Money!!!

This is just one of the reasons why becoming a billionaire requires you to cheat. There's also the tax loopholes, the inducement to harm (both of the customer and by the customer), anti-competition, etc. In order to get these gains, you need to cheat, because if it were easy to do legally, ethically, and quickly, somebody already would have. It's corporate doping.

It was literally introduced for the decision making I mentioned. The US Census was introduced for the reasons of creating better representation for the actual, specific populations in the US.

In 1810, the Census started collecting information on manufacturing and manufactured products, and later agriculture. In 1850, it collected social data, including religious information. It has expanded many times over the years, in order to collect the data needed to more accurately serve the needs of the people. It started counting Native Americans in 1860, stopped counting Slaves in 1870, and started counting Native Americans living on Reservations in 1890. Over the years additional entries have been added as different peoples have immigrated, changes to the country (like the Great Depression), and in 2020 for the first time, questions asking about same-sex couples/spouses/partners.

These questions may seem invasive, but they actually help protect vulnerable people, by showing the number of people who are impacted by the economy, by policy, and more.

School shootings didn't happen for multiple reasons that are not SSRIs:

  - Semi-automatic and automatic weapons weren't available to the public
  - There were no video games and few movies glorifying a lone gunman "getting revenge" on a society that spurned them (there movies about gangsters, or war movies)
  - There was no anti-American/facist "militia/tactical" cultural meme
  - There was not yet any widely known stories of suicide-by-cop and fame via mass-murder
  - The American cultural ethos had not yet turned cynical; once Vietnam and Nixon's betrayal happened, it was all downhill
  - We stopped locking up crazy people in insane asylums
  - Social isolation and urbanism increased population density and animosity

Let's say your town has a lot of pig farmers. The pig farmers are afraid their business is diminishing. So they lobby the local government to put a tax on chicken and beef, to encourage more pork consumption. Which local officials might be inclined to do for economic reasons. But then you collect religious data, and it turns out 50% of the population is Jewish, Muslim, and Hindu. So half the population now has to pay a tax, which is effectively a tax on their religion, because their religious belief says they can't eat pork.

This is a made up example, but the point is that you need to know about your citizens so you can make just laws that respect those citizens (and encourage businesses, job training, etc based on demographics). It's why we have a census.

The idea that gain-of-function has no demonstrated benefit is the same as saying there's no demonstrated benefit to going to the moon or mars. Science is not a business. It does not need to show you a YOY return. It's done in order to discover new information, which may have a benefit, or may not.

But in fact, Gain-of-fuction has already given us real scientific discoveries that have improved health outcomes. There are multiple of them documented here (https://web.archive.org/web/20241207202814/https://pmc.ncbi....) and a simple Google search outlines more.

Now, here's the really interesting thing. In 2014, Obama put a moratorium on Gain-of-function (https://www.science.org/content/article/us-halts-funding-new...). Then, in 2017, Trump lifted the moratorium and continued Gain-of-function funding (https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/dual-use-research/feds-lift-gain-...). So Trump's cronies are actually complaining about the program that their predecessors started up.

Well vaccines are all fake, right? And we don't care about making people better, right? So clearly these labs must be terrible. Why would we want to fund more people in doing science? I mean really, what has science ever done for us?

"Despite the obvious potential for catastrophic global impact research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have, politicians, so-called health professionals like Dr. Fauci, and entities within the Biden administration's national security team lied to the American people about the existence of U.S.-funded and supported biolabs"

Wait. Wasn't Trump the president right before Biden? So, what was it, they opened 160 labs in 4 years? Or was Trump just clueless when they existed when he was in office?

Also, great dig on Fauci. Working as a physician, scientist, immunologist, and Director for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for 38 years, definitely doesn't qualify him as a health professional.

Additional theory: Altman is behind it.

there are many, many public reports of ICE detaining individuals merely for having a spanish accent. they've detained US citizens multiple times, even deported some, because they were hispanic.

I highly recommend reading the news...

We do need more tools for the AI to turn our requests into deterministic, reliable, correct results. But this isn't a DSL thing, it's more like a pipeline of steps to get from A to Z. This will likely require multiple bidirectional passes, to confirm with the human along each step, and fix and re-do the pipeline when a mistake is found. You could encode the final result in some kind of DSL, but it'd only be useful as a read-only artifact; if you change a line of it, without extensive testing in an immutable environment, it introduces bugs. We need to lean more into reliability with LLMs since they are so fallible.

Humans need help in forming, understanding, and expressing logic; that's what a language is. But computers have an easier time of it. They can essentially read and write whole lot of 0's and 1's and automate the same process without language. An AI is an in-between state: a computer designed to deal with language, to think and act like a human. AIs are pretty good at dealing with human stuff, but they're a poor choice for doing computer stuff.

So really, if you want to do something you'd normally use a DSL for, you should be talking to your AI, and telling the AI to encode it into computer-speak. Binary files, libraries, programs, composeable piped applications. The AI can take what you think and turn it into a regular old computer program, just as easy as you would write a DSL. But you don't need a DSL to do this; the AI can already program.

In fact, talking to an AI might have better results. Humans screw up code because they can't really hold all the logical permutations in their head at once. But the AI can take instructions, decompose them, explode all possible permutations, identify outliers, and encode the result in a programmatic format, that a library that parses actions can then turn into a deterministic program. The AI can take your instructions and convert it into executable binary. No need for pseudocode.

So the future of programming, if we desired to go there, would be Natural Language Programming. Our speech is the programming language, and the AI is the compiler. The trick would be to work on the loop between the human and AI, to be as specific and deterministic as possible, to ensure the compiled program does what we intend and expect. It's not hard for an AI to make a deterministic program, but it is hard to be sure that it's deterministic in the specific way we want.

The XZ backdoor affected millions of computers, with the potential to effect hundreds of millions of computers, many of which had the capacity to affect billions of people. From one completely unregulated software library.