>Forcing it into our retirement funds, 401ks and IRAs.
Not just forcing it into. Forcing the funds to fight for it betting the stock rice higher and higher in a runaway style - the effect created by limited float and high valuation as the funds tracking indexes would try to get the amount reflecting the proportion of the valuation of the company vs. the whole tracked index valuation, and with such huge valuation the limited float leads to the price rise (similar to the short squeeze) and the higher the price on the float the higher the valuation, rinse and repeat...
That's exactly what happened with Nortel in the dotcom crash. Everyone's pension and retirement tied up in a company that couldn't turn a profit and was, at its peak, 38% of the TSE300.
I don't think dominating an index to anywhere close to that degree is likely here, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some similar strategies being used. Changing the rules is already from the Nortel playbook: The Nortel Rule allowed index funds to have over 10% of their holdings in a single stock.
Some index funds are not obligated to perfectly replicate the index by buying shares, FXAIX (Fidelity S&P 500 mutual fund) has the option to use futures, swaps, options, and statistical sampling in addition to buying equity shares to try and replicate the returns of the index.
that explains. I was always wondering why in Siberia
(where i worked for 2 summers back then at university times) coming out from house with freshly applied DEET you're getting covered with mosquitos - i was attributing that to the especial ferociousness of the mosquitos there - yet it sounds like the smell of DEET for them in those towns may have become like a BBQ smell for us :)
Yes, they are mostly attracted to CO2 I think. So some traps that burn propane to attract them. Others I've seen are basically a screen over a fan with a block of dry ice. They use those to collect for like an hour then weigh the mosquitos and test for diseases in a swamp.
not, yet places where i worked - Purovsk, Krasnosel'kup - 35 years ago were already having the things of the future like android driven large trucks (dead-drunk drivers with only basic lizard brain instincts operational during deep night cargo ship operations) and self-driving tracked construction equipment like cranes, etc - as they would follow deep tracks (koleya) in the unpaved roads not being able to get out of those tracks on their own, so the driver would get out and walk in the forest gathering mushrooms, etc. while the equipment would drive itself along those deep tracks. And having a
wall-to-wall fight with "vahtoviks" beats the fun of fighting monsters in any game :)
back then it were large ships. Today the issue is building large Starships. How many would we need to move several millions people and various equipment to Mars. May be not ice - though ice should work if building in space (or on the Moon). And ice can be oxidizer if aluminum is used as fuel, so you just burn large part of your ship too. For building on Earth - something cheap and easy to shape. Say 3D sinter-printering from sand.
As Anthropic with all its revenue still needs a large outside capital, it suggests that those AI costs those CFOs pay probably don't cover the actual Anthropic's costs.
It looks to me like the initial explosion was at the upper part of the rocket. Reminded the Starship explosion https://x.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1935548909805601020 where on 0.25 speed also visible what the start of the catastrophe was at the upper part.
Interesting that just 2 days ago NASA picked Blue Origin instead of SpaceX for this year Moon flights.
On a sidenote, one can wonder how much, giving coming SpaceX IPO, it costs for Bezos to hire a Starship engineer :)
Analysis video by Scott Manley notes that other comparable tests did not have visible fire at all, so it seems it started lower on the rocket and that the upper fire ball was either a secondary explosion or something coming up the transporter stand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaR6yEE-Myo
>Much of modern life is automating away the boring useless bits.
>AI, on the other hand, changes the conversation on what’s boring or useless.
A compression algorithm finds and removes redundancy. Simple automation is like simple compression algorithms (RLE like). AI (which even internally - at least the encoding to the representation parts - looks like compression) just like a much more sophisticated compression algorithm which finds and removes redundancy where we thought the creativity and originality were.
It does look like our civilization has accumulated a lot of cruft masquerading as creative/original/intellectual activities ("Bullshit jobs" comes to mind, also all that talk about stagnation in science, and all those huge collective collaborations - where collective there is a stagnation - and now with AI individual scientists will again be able to wield all the bleeding edge across the wide fields while digging deep in desired target research direction), and the AI is the vacuum cleaner for that cruft.
>if human beings are simply hardwired to suffer from some form of obsession
the powerful obsession machinery brought us through the long natural selection process - obsession to watch for snakes and spiders, to maintain cleanliness, etc. With modern civilization we arranged to plug into that powerful machinery other stimuli too - like that RI and all the others making us productive society members. The most happy countries aren't most productive. Especially when they are obsessed with being happy like those Finns obsessed with sauna instead of tokenmaxxing.
Interesting design to revisit in the context of electric self-driving trucks. The cameras/radars/lidars can be attached high around the trailer, no need for the driver cabin. And the batteries are naturally placed low.
Not just forcing it into. Forcing the funds to fight for it betting the stock rice higher and higher in a runaway style - the effect created by limited float and high valuation as the funds tracking indexes would try to get the amount reflecting the proportion of the valuation of the company vs. the whole tracked index valuation, and with such huge valuation the limited float leads to the price rise (similar to the short squeeze) and the higher the price on the float the higher the valuation, rinse and repeat...
reply