Loving the pelican silliness. My ChatGPT is over the moon about it. Gonna miss it when it really is done. Though maybe a pelican riding a bike game could become the benchmark in a year.

My guess is that advertising raises desire by a few percent in most cases. There would be some instances of a run away craze, probably with a massive rise followed by a collapse, but that most products would largely be unaffected. I assume some advertising strategies would backfire and reduce demand.

For me, I feel like most of the time it is been exposed to the existence of an item and my ability to see how it could be useful. I don't think random advertisements I come across impact me that much since most of the advertisements I see don't seem to correspond to anything I want or do or spend money on.

Humans use their imagination to figure out what choice of action leads to a future of less uncomfortability. Often times, these are choices between short term future and long term future. Advertising is a way of helping shape that argument as to what choice is to be taken, but the underlying drive is already there.

You could also look for cases where propaganda is used against consumerism and see how impactful that tends to be.

SVG: https://jostylr.com/imgs/frog_habsburg_jaw.svg

PNG: https://jostylr.com/imgs/frog_habsburg.png

Then I tried Codex with Sol 5.6 High and got a face forward one.

SVG: https://jostylr.com/imgs/frog-habsburg.svg

As for squeezing in the time to do mathematics if the paying jobs disappear, there is a good chance we will have a world of plenty very shortly. I have a belief that the Austrian economists are right that there will always be plenty for humans to do and get rewarded for, but I also think that the costs of living will be so low that someone who wants to do mathematics will have plenty of time to do so. I hope this person holds the faith long enough and tries to see how the AI's can help accelerate one's own understanding. I am no fan of AIs generating a bunch of papers that no one reads or cares about, but I could say the same about the immense number of papers made by humans as well. If anything, the AIs make all of that immense knowledge more valuable as it is now knowable and accessible through these tools. There is also the fact that the mathematics job market has been oversaturated for at least 20 years. What our new tools allow is for people to be able to do mathematics outside of having access to a research library and top mathematics department.

Most people going through conventional school don't get the freedom to learn to be themselves in a community until their 20s, not mastering it until often their early 30s. As for academics, Sudbury students have repeatedly demonstrated having no problem quickly learning whatever it is they want or need to learn as an adult. Many Sudbury students go to college, getting A's even in their first semester, making good bonds not only with other students but also faculty and administrators. They help form communities wherever they go. They are engaged in classes in a way that their peers are not. They are coming to academic learning fresh and eager not weighed down by 14,000 hours of conventional school tedium. Those who do not go to college often advance very quickly in whatever work they end up doing as person skills are the key to being successful.

The results speak for themselves. You can read about it in Peter Gray's book Free to Learn and other works by him.

Also keep in mind that teaching, which is what conventional school focuses on, is not the same as learning.

Are your devices likely something that they would have fun with and choose to engage with or is it likely to be ignored unless adults use some kind of persuasion to have them use it? Is it cool with a child using it for a bit and then not using it for a few months and then wandering back to it? How far up into math does it go compared to what an a randomly sampled adult could actually do mathwise? Also for reading, are you using phonics or whole word sighting? For math, to what extent is it screen manipulatives versus manipulations of digits? Also, do you have provision for an older child to start learning this stuff so the basics need not be at a 4 year old presentation level, but the concepts still need to be covered?

In Sudbury schools, the typical age of self-taught reading is 7-9 though it can range from 4 to 12. Useful arithmetic usually seems to happen much earlier than reading though reading tends to get completed by the children on their own while arithmetic does not advance further than the needs of money exchange without special effort. In the long run, Sudbury students have no problem with college level material, including mathematics, but it could be nice to have something that eases the white knuckling if it does not undermine the child's self-directedness.

I used to follow him years ago and liked his content but I drifted away long before AI.

I wonder given his deep expertise how much he could get into teaching how to spot and fix bad AI JS code.

>Katie Jo Collier, a spokesperson for the utility, said the transition was rooted in a longtime understanding with Liberty “well before data center load growth was a consideration,” calling it “a planned transition for many years, not a reaction to recent developments.” NV Energy sold its California electric assets to Liberty in 2009 and agreed to keep supplying power temporarily. That arrangement was extended in 2015, again in 2020, and once more in late 2025, and each time because Liberty had not yet secured an independent supply, a timeline corroborated by regulatory documents reviewed by Fortune.

>But independent experts have questioned whether NV Energy’s own demand projections are reliable. In testimony filed with Nevada regulators in Oct. 2024, energy economist Rose Anderson of Synapse Energy Economics warned that NV Energy’s major-project load forecast is ‘highly uncertain’ and that existing customers could end up paying for infrastructure built to serve industrial demand that never materializes.

>In statement to Fortune, NV Energy reiterated its spokesperson’s statement about the transition having been planned for years. “It is important to note that the NV Energy’s wholesale agreement with Liberty Utilities was always intended to be temporary and transitional, with a clear timeline and multiple extensions over the years to support Liberty’s long-term planning efforts to secure its own access to energy supply. To ensure reliable ongoing service to Lake Tahoe customers, NV Energy agreed in 2025 to continue providing energy service to Liberty’s customers until their transmission access is available and/or until Greenlink is online.”

>“NV Energy has provided reliable service to Liberty’s customers in the Lake Tahoe Basin for years and fully intends to continue that commitment while Liberty secures its own transmission access and energy to supply those customers,” the utility added. “NV Energy has taken proactive steps to ensure there is no service disruption to Liberty customers, now or in the future.”

>Rates were already climbing

>The supply crisis arrives on top of an existing affordability fight. In its 2025 general rate case, Liberty originally sought a 19.1% revenue increase—about $37.51 more per month for the average residential customer, according to CPUC filings. The CPUC approved a smaller increase: 11.4%, with a 9.75% return on equity rather than Liberty’s requested 11%.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47708792

Points: 5

# Comments: 1

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47392177

Points: 24

# Comments: 2

An interesting multi-pronged approach is post labor economics which is being promoted by David Shapiro: https://www.youtube.com/@DaveShap

The basic premise is that currently we have households being supported by labor, capital, and transfers. With labor largely going away, the leaves capital and transfers. Relying on transfers alone will lead to ownership of the people by government. So we have to find ways to generate way more distributed capital ownership by the masses. This is what he plans, discusses, and promotes.

Links to my projects. I am a mathematician, Bohmian (quantum mechanical theory where particles have definite positions guided by the quantum mechanical wave function), Sudbury staffer, hobbyist programmer (now hobbyist manager of AI coders). Currently into exploring fully embracing families of rational intervals as real numbers.

But I did check their dismissive claim about the 90% coding at anthropic by watching the link they provided. The Anthropic guy said that 90% was achieved at various teams within Anthropic and also hedged about the exact nature of it; it is a messy metric to be precise about. I thought the other was not generous in interpreting it which makes me skeptical of the edge of the rest of the article.

The real question to ask is why can they take on so much debt? And for that, one needs to acknowledge the fact that, particularly for the well-connected, debt is easy to obtain as banks essentially create money for loans. There are constraints (otherwise the banks would make themselves trillionaires), but the constraint is not the quantity of money. This creation of money through lending leads to inflation which further supports operating via debt as those who take out loans see the real value of the loans decrease. The banks just made up the money so there isn't a direct loser from the inflation other than everyone who has to deal with increased prices. You can think of it as a broad, regressive tax on the population to fund these firms doing far more than they should.

With an actual constrained money supply tied to real wealth in the economy, the PE firms would have to focus on the best deals which means the businesses that are truly dying and their role is to turn the nonproductive assets into something productive.

---

I asked ChatGPT to critique my answer (which is unaltered above) and it said to tone down the lending being propped up by inflation and instead emphasized the following:

>Inflation can help leveraged borrowers, but in PE the bigger structural advantages are: • Interest deductibility (a massive tax subsidy to debt) • Limited liability (upside captured, downside partially socialized) • Fee extraction independent of performance • Ability to load debt onto the acquired company, not the PE fund

I then asked it to answer the question without regards to my context and it basically said PE is different because of

> • short ownership horizons • high leverage • strong control • financial returns as the primary goal

Here is the link to the short conversation if interested: https://chatgpt.com/share/6963a0de-7a04-8012-8c36-afef5dd74f...