The moat protecting their high margins is temporary.

Competitors will obviously improve their developer experience over time, and then win on price.

Stripe are stuck. They know they need to lower rates over the long term, but since they already make so much profit overcharging existing customers, they are hesitant to do so, meaning new competitors will enter with a price advantage without a competitive response from Strioe.

Stripes fees are uncompetitive, even their negotiated rates, so businesses tend to leave them as their volume grows.

Reddit and Blue Sky are almost entirely left-wing rage-bait and conspiracy theory content these days, and they amplify such content right to the top of the default feed, yet you rarely see the right calling for these platforms to censor their users.

If the right can learn to tolerate different opinions that they find offensive, then it’s reasonable to expect the left to do so as well, without resorting to these contrived cancel culture talking points.

The vast majority of political violence and riots in the US these days is orchestrated by left-wing movements and individuals. The assassinations of Brian Thompson, Charlie Kirk the attempts on Trump, all the riots surrounding BLM and George Floyd etc

Obviously directly inciting violence is not acceptable, but cherry picking obscure instances of it, while simultaneously overlooking the far larger problems that exist on the left, is bad faith. The threads celebrating the murders of Brian Thompson and Charlie Kirk are some of the most shared Reddit posts of all time, with zero self-reflection from the left about this double standard.

There’s a tremendous double standard here. The offensive right wing content is something you’d have to explicitly search for, whereas the offensive left wing content is front and center.

At this point, 100% of all new funds raised in the name of Wikipedia are actually being diverted to other projects. It’s incredibly deceptive, borderline fraudulent.

Raising funding for Wikipedia, then diverting 90% of the funds for pet projects is dishonest at best, and most likely fraudulent.

The other problem, is that the projects wikimedia foundation has historically funded have a notable political bias, to the point where it has been accused of being a pseudo-PAC.

It just wants to stay at a superficial level, while annoyingly mimicking human traits like “hmmms” and “umms”

I’ve found the better approach is to dictate into the text version and have it read the response. The responses are way better, so long as they don’t contain a table.

If the US had functioning antitrust laws it would be looking at their margins and be considering whether to break up some of the existing players, not considering when allow even more mergers.

Maybe you can just tell us what you mean by not neutral?

I find Grok to be far more academically honest than the other models. The other models seem to be much more aligned with public opinion over academic consensus especially on topics around economics and biology.

I find public opinion on these topics to be very group think populist and prefer the academic take that grok provides

So far, only xAI makes any attempt to be neutral in its answers.

That seems objectively pro-crime.

I’ve never seen any actual research indicating this is true, and given the number of things the left believes that run counter to consensus in economics, biology, social studies, I have a hard time believing accuracy is actually a goal or outcome of left wing philosophy.

Creativity is much easier than reasoning and discernment.

Rarely do I need people to be more creative when problem solving, what I need is better judgement.

Forums like this, reddit, X, readers of news sites etc tend to be filled with people that don’t have much going on in their lives, have a lot of free time to comment, are less likely to exploit the benefits of AI, and more likely to have simpler skills sets that are replaceable with AI.

Talking to people in real world, I would say the overwhelming majority are excited by AI and interesting in using it more rather than less.

You want to start with a high level of discernment, focusing on the most plausible theories first, then broadening only if necessary.

If someone started out with crazy low-discernment ideas, I’d probably ask them to leave to stop distracting everyone else.

Both are attempting to dismiss something useful and important, over trivial and manageable issues, mostly for culture war reasons rather than rational reasons.

Datacenters provide very high utility with very low per capita externalities. There’s really no reason to care this much about them.

Both are attempting to dismiss something useful and important, over trivial and manageable issues.

Also, cross positing the same content on multiple platforms isn’t time consuming.

This is clearly EFF violating their stated commitment to political neutrality, and providing only a superficial and easily discredited rationale for cover.