"easy not complex" I'm not completely convinced by this point : it's hard to stay simple ! Maybe I'm just nitpicking between simple vs easy, but words especially in such a context (language and specs expression) are important !
That's true for sure in most business endeavors. The goal is to fill the area under the demand curve and there are demands for F1 race cars and for scooters. The analogy breaks down somewhat with software in general and for sure with superintelligence. A superintelligence can provide those "low-level" (ie scooter) services perhaps just as effectively because it's super intelligent and knows how to do things efficiently - for example by spawning agents of different intelligence levels. It can thus fill the area under the demand curve. This is what the big AI firms are shooting for.
given the fact that we've moved in my office from 3-people offices to open-plan office to flex desk now I'm not exactly sure I would want my coworkers to speak all day to their computers and gesturing / walking in front of a projector (provided there will still be coworkers with IA)
Haven't you been served the videos on LinkedIn where people have a thing strapped around their mouth that they can talk into? Apparently it traps the sound so your coworkers can't hear you.
Of course they're mercilessly mocking you instead, but hey.
Lobbying is fine, though. Lobbying isn't bribery, although sometimes it probably looks like it. Lobbying is also an industry saying "please don't kill us; here's why that thing will kill us". The people making the decisions have the power (hence lobbyists need to exist) and they need to be better.
The revolving door between politician to made man (lobbyist) seems like a bit of a problem, no? These poor ex-politicians/staffers need to earn those mil+ salaries or they couldn’t effectively save these poor industries from demise? Perhaps the politician being asked to go easy on the regulations is potentially influenced by the ex-politicians rather lucrative position?
Corruption does not need to be overt to be destructive. It’s absolutely pervasive.
I will treat this comment charitably and just say that it's yet another case of "definition of X sounds good, so X can't be bad".
I believe in reality it's less about "please don't kill us" and more about getting officials to set up the "pleas profit us" situation.
Yes, money don't change hands in an office, so it's TECHNICALLY not a bribery.
Well, unlike regulators, companies die without profit. So they do indeed need profit. Smaller companies might want a system currently tilted against them to be changed. Larger companies might spend a fortune on regulation-following that has harmful outcomes, e.g. raising prices, for no benefit. Both of those motivations sound reasonable, and both getting their way may result in more profit for them. There's nothing wrong with profit.
The only thing that can possibly be bad is the regulation-writer, or the regulation enforcer, behaving incompetently and/or corruptly, who decides or enforces bad rules.
WTF 386 was for me a sci-fi like device I wouldnt dare think about having when I was a kid. I had a very nice 8086 I cherished, with VGA video no less ! (Yes driving a vga card with a 8086 was slow..
reply