undefined

points

[-]

My prediction is that while those “advancements” may come to cars, the only practical differences will be lower quality products, cost savings for the car companies, probably more expensive for consumers, and somehow it will also be collecting more data to sell to advertisers.

by mym19901 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

If you look at the average price of a new car, adjusted for inflation, it has pretty much always gone up aside from recessions. There have been plenty of advancements in car technology, they do not make them cheaper. It actually gives reason to charge more for them due to perceived increase in value.

by raz32dust59 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

Yes but you're getting a lot more for the same price. It's a lot more powerful, comfortable, safe and efficient while the effective cost has remained the same.

by blactuary1 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Just a few more weeks, a few more hundreds of billions, it's right around the corner....

by epolanski50 minutes ago|

prev|

[-]

I think he means LLMs, we knew about RL already.

by xingped1 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Ah yes, the famous "trickle down" theory, which you may know from its smash hit "trickle down economics"! Surely this time it'll be different, right?

by elmer21 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

How can you say tickle down economics doesn't work? The US has made it easier for businesses to grow and the result is the highest standard of living ib tje world.

by ks20481 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I think it's hard to quantify "highest standard of living", but for the attempts at it (e.g. HDI, etc), the US is not number one.

by mym19901 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Hate to break it to you, but the US doesn’t even break the top 10 in a lot of reports.

by ba1afd89f34cb231 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Trickle-down economics specifically refers to economic policy that favors the wealthy and corporations with the argument that this will lead to wealth trickling down to the economically less fortunate. Examples include the Reagan and Trump tax cuts.

This has been studied somewhat extensively (https://academic.oup.com/ser/article/20/2/539/6500315?login=... is one example), and it’s been shown over and over that this does in fact not work and leads to larger wealth disparity, across many countries where it has been attempted.

It’s possible you’re working off some other definition of the term based on your comment but that’s the generally accepted usage.

by asdff50 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

The person you replied to was the second person I've seen on HN this week try and defend trickle-down economics explicitly in more or less the exact same terms and justifications. What is going on with that? Did Peter Thiel tweet some pro trickle down dreck recently that these people latched on to?

by epolanski49 minutes ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

The US alone!

by m0llusk1 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

AI car navigation is here, but driving is a social act. Have you ever tried to keep an automated taxi out of a private driveway or the scene of an emergency? There is a lot of work to do and limited evidence of LLMs raising the bar.

by Supermancho2 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Worse, the view is largely phrased as gaslighting AI. Blaming the cause of particular grievances that coincidentally have been sourced at the same time as the rise of AI, is purposeful.

> [Your train] never comes on time. Fuel is more expensive. The roads are still congested with traffic. Your kids are (probably) doing worse at school. Food costs more. Houses cost more. Rent is higher. Buying a computer or a PS5 is more expensive. Politics is still full of mentally unstable people. The environment is getting worse. You will still die of heart disease or cancer. Food quality is worse. Your kids can't find work. Wealth inequality is accelerating.

None of this has to do with AI.

> But hey...on the flip side...a lot of people are rapidly building software (that nobody is using), and AI is solving mathematics problems (that nobody - including mathematicians - wanted it to solve)

Plain wrong on both counts.

> Imagine what a "country of geniuses in a datacenter" will be able to do Apparently...nothing.

Nonsequitor, probably based on a personal beef. Datacenters, at best, are understood to be for hosting more AI - not for people to somehow live in as an arcology of discovery.

by neumann12 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

I think only because these are all things that AI companies are saying will be helped by AI so give us more money. Nobody advertises their product publicly as "you will be able to buy other product to do the same things you do now but pay people less and make more profits" even though that is where the value is for them.