The situation only exists because regulators in the 80s-20s believe that hardware should be a sanctioned monopoly. Intel, AMD, NVIDIA, Sun Microsystems, IBM, HP, and Microsoft were all involved. If it's not Jensen it'd be someone else, there is a good reason NVIDIA is called NVIDIA and not JENSEN. Jensen's leadership is as much resonsible for CUDA as G. W. Bush's.

Would you mail your child's location & schedule to anonymous strangers? You are making the world much more dangerous by doing this, by many orders of magnitude.

Edit: to be clear they spent lets say 50,000 dollars to make something that is worth 0 dollars (or negative). If there is money to be made with AI it's in serving and the ideas of the users, but the biggest users will get ripped off by smaller, and so a race to the bottom.

As for inequality that's a matter of monetary policy not of how anthropic spends it's money.

2. [October 1893 — The Harness "Electropathic" Swindle](https://thequackdoctor.com/index.php/harness-electric-corset...)

3. [September 1951 — TV Racket in San Francisco Hit](https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Maintenance/...)

The first is just like quite a few of the AI pitch start-ups that have gone bust. IMO the quality of the spam isn't good, it reads like it was written by an illiterate drunk that constantly mixes and abandons metaphors.

So the world is noisy and uncertain, and we have this light that eliminates noise and illuminates some object inside the chaos, actually no madness not chaos sorry. And now that object is hope and now you're on a journey to get that object and the book is drawing you in... to the world you already inhabit? Oh and the book is also light and the vehicle??? WTF!!! is this magic school bus cracked out bot trying to say??

When you forgo process the odds that you'll make good art drop to 0. Tool use is a much better path forward for self driving, artistic computer than big data. Images 2.6 only has use as a tool.

I propose two tests What extent would the harm persist if society ceased stigmatizing the behavior?

What extent would the harm persist if the institutions that impose the penalty was changed? Be that ownership, site design (as proposed, albeit nebulously, in the article) or institutional organization.

To help bring legitimacy towards democratic coercion the status quo must not hold a privileged position, beyond their practice. This is especially important in issues involving the younger generation where the older has out-sized power and influence. Look no further than the recent political revolutions that have happened in majority youth countries.

Personally I find it concerning that Haide has slowly walked his audience from reasonable positions to no children should never be allowed (by a site) to talk to anonymous unverified adults, and that'd he double down on this absolutist position when site changes show improvements in harm by his definition. I fear they will only become more insular from here, even if they could untie sexism and ageism from their philosophy I'm not sure what it'd look like but it'd be more interesting, perhaps even a chance to understand protection. I know I'd rather risk a shark bite than life as a slave, if Haide views children as slaves to social media I wish he'd just go mask off and say it already.

No matter how efficient we get we won't be able to offer future generations a better quality of life if we don't use more.

There is no secret sauce, no moat. Many of Antropic's larger clients could build and serve better models if they wanted. They just cynically decided that coding, without a world model, and at high cost is the most important thing, they will find out quickly Google passes them how wrong they were.

They don't even have basic system visibility, the industry is far to immature to monopolize.

And so the goalposts move, oh now we've always cared about user resources, AI is using too much, but in 3 months when it's better than all human programs at resource management what will they move onto? Did we forget that unused resources are wasted resources? Or can that only justify poorly human-written programs.