I learned about all of these projects on HN at one point or another.

But it's a decent enough proxy for the parts of human progress that I think are meaningful that it illustrates the point well.

That website is an excellent resource and you can find other more compelling charts there.

No, that's not the shape of the line. You can view it here:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-average-gdp-per-ca...

The hockey stick upturn in recent centuries needs explanation.

I'm pushing back so hard on this comparative definition of wealth (which I notice is the secondary definition you found behind large possessions) because I think it's silly to do that when we have an unbelievably dramatic increase in wealth in recent centuries which needs understanding first.

Hand-waving away human progress and forcing zero sum definitions of wealth feels unserious. You have terms for things like inequality, why not use those instead of distorting what wealth means?

No one made that claim.

By nearly any sane metric the world is wealthier. You can verify this on sites like Our World in Data.

We are healthier, have more leisure time, are less likely to die in natural disasters, etc.

It's willful ignorance to define wealth in a way that wouldn't show humanity as having gotten more wealthy. You're doing harm by overlooking massive gains we've made and understanding why we made them and instead redefining the common sense understanding of basic terms.

We could very obviously stop our progress in resources and technology. It has happened throughout history many times and we see plenty of modern examples.

You seem to be treating the accumulated products of civilization as though they are geological facts rather than fragile outputs of maintained institutions.

Maybe you should ask yourself why you believe that 1) access to resources and technology are "basically constantly rising" and 2) why the relative difference in wealth today is more important than the (magical?) existence of a system were everyone has continually gotten more access to resources and technology.

Wealth is obviously not zero sum. Humanity is far wealthier today than before the industrial revolution, and the trend is still towards increasing wealth.

"I should run my purchase decisions past an AI in the future."

Trying to establish the right to run models locally while we still can makes more sense than waiting to see if they do try, then organizing too late.

If production increased (dramatically) while temperatures increased in the past, could this trend continue?

I won't bother sharing the source because you'll find some reason to dismiss it I'm sure.

It's interesting you claim my comment is propaganda when I cite a scientific source and yet have nothing to say about the parent comment which claims we no longer need to worry about heating due to climate change. Which of those comments seems more propagandistic?

Nearly 10x more people die from the cold than from the heat.

"...9.43% of global deaths were attributable to non-optimal temperatures, with 8.52% from cold and 0.91% from heat."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5...

Discernment still exists.

Who is focused on destroying the world?

I don't think hardly any super villains exist. People might have a different assessment of what destroying the world means than you do.

It seems conceivable in social groups that having an honest accounting of how people are feeling (via emotions) available to the group might benefit the group in achieving their goals while not always benefiting the individual.

I think this will be commonplace in the not too distant future.

Some disasters will happen, just like they did before AI. Skeptics will gleefully point out these failures while more and more non-technical teams ship code.

I still use it because it's great for quick and simple things, and I save frequently, but it is extremely frustrating when it happens.

Orders aren't public though. Only the actual trades. This is important because by the time the trade is known by others very often the edge is gone. Especially if you have other people watching the same trader and they all try to copy the trade at the same time.

I didn't know Gemini models were that capable. I admit I'm still skeptical about this approach though - even if it were capable of accurately labeling people and locations across decades, there's no way it could know when a scene is of personal interest. I kept a running log for each sibling as I was manually doing the labeling, knowing what they'd want to see, which presumably is only possible for me and my siblings to do with any accuracy.

If AI could ever do that then we've definitely hit ASI!