matthest's comments

Note that this is CNBC and they're writing from a stock market line-go-up POV.

For everyone else, this is good news.

From the article:

"Huang was validating what the rest of the market has been witnessing. An independent developer, rather than a giant, richly valued lab like OpenAI or Anthropic, came up with the next big thing in AI and, in doing so, exposed a potential major flaw in the investment thesis behind the large language models: They may be getting commoditized."

Read the article, it actually raises some fascinating points that are agnostic to the possibility that he may be financially well off.

Eh, buying and holding the S&P 500 (the Vanguard Bogleheads strategy) has allowed a lot of people to retire early.

Definitionally the 1% is people making ~$800k+ a year.

Upper-middle class is people making ~$200k/year.

A lot of people have moved from middle class to upper middle class over the last decade. Both those categories are outside the 1%.

Wealth inequality is increasing, but the wealth isn't all flowing into the 1%'s pockets.

Lots of middle class people have graduated into upper-middle class: https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/the-middle-clas...

Wealth inequality is still a problem. But it's not just the people at the very top benefitting.

The study doesn't say it went into the 1%'s pockets. It says it went to 2 places:

1) The salaries of corporate employees 2) Shareholders and capital owners

Regarding number 2: "Shareholders" would include anyone who owns any stock at all, including a lot of middle class people with a simple S&P 500 ETF in their portfolio.

And the increase in productivity allowed more people to become capital owners, AKA entrepreneurs. The explosion in software entrepreneurs, for example.

Example of what it looks like from their Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIwURyqRsm-/?utm_source=ig_we...

What specifically about his impact on the world?

From this angle, what's the difference between Meta and a junk food company?

Both sell things that are bad for you, but that the consumer has complete control over whether or not to consume.

And not all of what Meta is selling is bad. There's a lot of information exchanged on Facebook, Instagram, etc. that are good for society. Like health/nutrition advice, etc.

Best case scenario is that AI makes it so everyone can be a 1-man CEO. Competition goes up across the board, which then brings prices down.

"Abundance" is really just supply and demand 101. Which has proven to work over and over and over and over again throughout human history.

Shop around and see what others are offering. I believe your anecdote, and I've also seen several other anecdotes about how rents have dropped - someone said as much as $1k.

I'm sure it's a big mix right now.

Supply and demand 101 continues to work.

Originally written in 2013. Still hyper relevant.

I would argue this has more or less been the case for most of history, in a different form.

It used to be that most people died young. If your genes weren't strong enough, disease would've knocked you out before you became a teenager.

It's only relatively recently that we've made it possible for people of all genetic types to survive into adulthood.

Does anyone else think the fact that companies hire superfluous employees (i.e. bullshit jobs) is actually fantastic?

Because they don't have to do that. They could just operate at max efficiency all the time.

Instead, they spread the wealth a bit by having bullshit jobs, even if the existence of these jobs is dependent on the market cycle.

I don't blame you. Our next president is going to have send you a Statue of Liberty or something to patch things up.

First, let me say I'm glad the FTC is going after monopolies. True capitalism requires competition, not massive corporations.

That said, I feel like going after Big Tech is a massive misuse of resources. Not because it's not a monopoly (it is), but because there's a far more important monopoly that should be broken up: healthcare insurance.

Something like 7 corporations dominate 70% of the healthcare insurance market. The AMA had a study last year that concluded these insurance companies are charging monopoly pricing.

This is why Americans are paying astronomical prices for healthcare.

This is IMO by far the most pressing issue. Yet the FTC is seemingly spending all its time going after Big Tech, which has a comparatively lower impact on the quality of everyday Americans' lives.

How's your sleeping environment? Do you have black out shades? Keep your room cool?