I got mouths to feed, and if I only worked at places where I respected everyone in top leadership, well ... we'd probably starve.

Depending on how we measure it, either 58% or 75% of that heavily subsidized soy goes to feed animals.

https://insideanimalag.org/share-of-soybean-crop-for-feed/

The real risk is when shareholders realize an LLM can do the CEO's job.

But you still get a lot of "shareholder responsibility" comments. Imagine a company that dumps sewage into a river (be that literal or metaphorical). Internet people come around to tell you this is the nature of capitalism and shareholder structure means (increasing?) return on investment is critical and so CEOs have to spend all their waking hours having to juggle this

Am I arguing against this? I don't know - I'm not an economist. But I would like to point out there is such a thing as shareholder fraud and the venn diagram between "sacrifice quality to please shareholders" and "deceiving shareholders" has to be one big intersecting circle, you know? Especially when the guy (Zuckerberg with dual-class shares) can't ever be fired

CS hiring has always been very cyclical, and there have been more flush times prior to 2010 where CS more or less guaranteed a good paying job.

Insurance companies are using AI (whatever that means in this case) to make coverage denial decisions. That can be reasonably summarized as robots are taking away our healthcare.

Link, please? I 100% believe this but I'm curious about the reporting by which you discovered this

Google this and take your pick:

ai decisions health insurance

Also, to be clear, I don't think violence is the way to confront the oligarch sociopaths. There is clearly enough momentum to fix a lot of the monopoly / anti-consumer issues over the next 4-8 years. Assuming Trumpty Dumpty doesn't try to put our military at polling places or some other anti-democracy putinesque bullshit like that.

That’s quite the assumption.

Oh, no, I was agreeing with you. What you posited wrt elections is what I’ve been anticipating (with dread) for the past 18-ish months.

My bad, I thought you were referring to the implicit assumption about momentum. Not the explicit assuming that Trump doesn't put troops at the polls. He sure is trying his best to normalize troops in civilian settings.

Nobody in your circle of friends/acquaintances perhaps.

You're okay with sitting at the rear seat of a car while it drives you around the city though.

Can't speak for anyone else, but absolutely no. I don't have any interest in self driving cars.

Even if it can give the right answer when asked, will it necessarily account for that in a recipe it generates? A beginning cook may not know enough to ask.

A naive hope perhaps, but this ignores the risk of LLMs just creating a bad recipe based on the blind combination of various recipes in their training data.

As the parent comment said the people seemed to be enjoying the food otherwise so the LLM didn't create an unpalatable combination, and I can't think of any combination of edible and unharmful ingredients that might combine to something harmful (when consuming a reasonable amount)

This is exactly what makes it dangerous. Food can taste ok but actually cause you to get sick. Not all bacteria is going to taste off. I'm assuming you're not a chef because if you were then you'd know how absurd your statement is.

For a super simple example, if you don't properly handle or cook raw meat then you risk getting sick even though the food might not immediately taste bad. Maybe that's obvious to you but might not be to the person preparing the food. Another example: Rhubarb pie is supposed to be made with the leaves and not the stalk because the stalk is poisonous and can cause illness. Just kidding, it's actually the other way around but if you were just reading a ChatGPT recipe that made that mistake maybe you wouldn't have caught it.

If meat was involved, the cooking time may have been unsafe if other precautions weren't taken by the cook (like checking the internal temperature).

Even if I change the setting, my messages aren't truly secure against this unless all recipients do the same on all of their devices.

Even if it didn't, collecting it seems wildly expensive.

Or free if we managed to run solar powered sails (or so) skirting the very top and autonomously sending the harvest down.

If by “free” you mean “very very expensive” then i agree with you. It would cost a fortune to even just attempt a pilot project proving feasability. Then we would need to send up regular replacements to the “sending the harvest down” hardware at the minimum. Just imagining the cost of a tank which can be launched into space, autonomously dock with the collector sails, then deorbit and land makes my head spin. And then doing that at scale, paying people to launch it, paying people to operate the system.

It could be free if we imagine some crazy advances in autonomous self-replicating spacecrafts. But by then we live in the post-scarcity diamond age probably.

I meant some semi permanent harvesters (which would cost a fortune to build and deploy).

Sending the harvest down could maybe happen inside plastic containers built in place, made with the abundant sunlight, some Co2 and water (not sure if there's CO2 this high though. In retrospect we'd need also some metals to print some sort of the antenna reflecting radar frequencies (for the ground stations tracking them on the approach)?

And with the hundreds of small containers (carefully balanced so they don't smash in the ground but slowly rain onto the area) maybe it'd be easier.

I don't know. I think it's hard sci-fi, achievable within our lifetimes :)