DeepSeek just proved Lina Khan right
-
That's not a traditional view of investing or the manner in which securities are built to be valued, but it is admittedly the modal paradigm to which we are subject.
-
Which is why NFTs work. They're refreshingly honest: They represent nothing of any kind of value, yet are valued. Something something fetishism.
-
-
-
Their unhinged need for growth/metastasis to to feed their ego scores is unquenchable and ending the world.
It's tragic we won't physically stop them via revolution. We are cowards that mistake this quiet slaughter for peace. The planet will have to do it for us, and take us and a lot of innocent surface life with them.
-
-
There's something to be said that bitcoin and other crypto like it have no intrinsic value but can represent value we give and be used as a decentralized form of currency not controlled by one entity. It's not how it's used, but there's an argument for it.
NFTs were a shitty cash grab because showing you have the token that you "own" a thing, regardless of what it is, only matters if there is some kind of enforcement. It had nothing to do with rights for property and anyone could copy your crappy generated image as many times as they wanted. You can't do that with bitcoin.
-
-
-
I mean yes, true, but it was capitalists who made smartphones and computers. I'll just link my other reply here.
-
Certainly. But very few people really do value investing anymore. Even professionals.
-
Those poor little hothouse flowers.
-
Even someone as far back as Adam Smith knew that businesses hate competition and will do anything they can to avoid it. The broligarchy was speed-running the construction of an oligopoly and lobbying the government to erect barriers to entry so they could take their sweet time milking us dry. Now I'm not sure about what the real backstory of DeepSeek might be, but it is still satisfying to see Altman get his ass handed to him.
-
Wow, we could have been talking about Jacquard mills and running essentially the same narrative.
-
Yeah, they seem to have sped up the process. But something else to keep in mind is that we don't know what the saturation point is with current AI technology. It's most likely far less that what has been hyped, and if our governments had any sense, they should be getting a sensible regulatory framework in place right now rather than being overtaken by events as they usually are.
-
I'll be honest, I'm just hoping this AI shit calms down. Every 5-6 new papers published in the Journal of Computer Science is some AI slop. Like we get it, it's fun filling a big ass matrix with weights which then inadvertently solve a problem you have. Could I please have some novel research that probably won't go anywhere anytime soon but is kind of fun to think about and tinker with?
-
it's a shame the US will likely not see another lina khan in the foreseeable future.
-
It sometimes happens like that. And sometimes a big player will emerge early in the proceedings and stay on top for an extended period: General Motors, Boeing, IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, Google. Sometimes there's even a bit of innovation before they settle into stealing all the light from the smaller trees.
