Then they'd let him mostly be after 1991 until we made the mistake to push for the Euro in early 2000s.

Or if only there was a tool like Soulver or Calca...

This sounds like one of those "Hacker News Dropbox" comments...

Billions all over the world managed to acquire it just fine.

If that's an acquired taste, I doubt 99% of drinks that aren't an acquired taste would do much better, assuming there's anything doing better than coffee to begin with.

Not even Cola and tea come close.

Knowledge about any MCP is not something special inherent in the LLM, it's just an agent side thing. When it comes to the LLM, it's just some text injected to its prompting, just like a CLI would be.

The actual one end is the phone, not the app, period.

For legit reasons? Because many switchers complain for stupid reasons, like the macOS distinction between apps and windows.

Making it work less, faster, and saving tokens. Duh!

Rent seeking isn't about whether the product has value or not, but about what's extracted in exchage for that value, and whether competition, lack of monopoly, lack of lock in, etc. keeps it realistic.

And yet, it's what any business with limited stock or slots (from restaurants and car companies to airlines) have done since forever...

You do understand however that aside from the growth/maturity path, this is also a path to enshittification and skinning their users, which might come even faster to LMMs than say Google , because the latter managed to have hundres of billions in investments in record time to recoup and IPOs on sight.

Or not everybody shares your priorities and ideological outloook, or even pragmatic assessment of how more fucked they are with the right vs the left in power in the past, and it's the above that's naive.

Perhaps they're adverse to people so apolitical and self-righteous that think nobody can't vote anything else than what they're selling, unless they're stupid or immoral.

But also I don't think movies aren't silly because they deal with all the "big problems". After all they didn't have a problem making silly movies in eras with far worse problems, social and economic. And they could make hella fun movies on heavy topics just fine (Blazing Saddles and racism for example, or MASH and the Vietnam war - even if nominally about Korea).

Modern comedies aren't silly or fun, not because times are troubled, but because they're written as shallow moralizing lectures. Any "caring" is performative. They're also walking on eggshells, and are too polite to have any edge. And then there's the derivative reboots and remakes, which many of them are.

Which doesn't matter, since they measured rich and middle class, and poor and discriminated against both before and after.

Did you think the new measurements were done at some ghetto and the earlier higher ones at Martha's Vineyard?

So it's a documentary?

Even the basic reproductive instinct has become "ineffective on humans".

>There is no joke in that - all jokes build upon the assumption of this being true

No, there are countless jokes in the movie that don't depend about how the world became stupid (be it cultural or genetics or combination) at all. Literally all of them are like that.

>If it were true, then decline wouldn't have begun in the 19th or 20th century but around the time that property and currencies emerged.

Why, did the movie say it's the result of "property and currencies"? And even if somebody said so, who said it's just about "property and currencies" merely being a thing that starts this decline, and not surpassing some level of development of property and currencies (e.g. late capitalism), which prevents mitigating factors from working?