Xen9

This is actually known as the Drowning Child problem, and its most important implication is that any billionaire is "extremely evil."

The parent comment would still be correct though, and billionaires are just filling a power vacuum, nothing wrong about that. I genuinely believe U.S. is also just filling the power vacuum & mostly has done nothing wrong, similar to other superpowers. There's nothing inherently wrong about letting the child drown unless you are the child & can protest about your own drowning, and there's nothing wrong with filling the power vacuum, because the universe has determined that someone ought to do it sooner or later. And we cannot do anything about this.

I define problem/issue/similar words in the following way: a thing that, if deemed existent by me, is also my own fault & realistically fixable by my self.

Then I certainly feel confused & may be wrong.

---

Edit:

You're near-certainly right that pegging in dollars would means some rate, let's for simplicity presume a constant ratio, between dollars and what it's begged to.

I think crux is what happens if we model two different currencies, one of which is begged, and the price of te commodity in each.

If after the conversion rate you can get cheap gold, that keeps golds value low and pegged currency's value high, I would guess.

Again I think restricting impots in the commodity is necessary to maintain supply.

It's a bidirectional relationship. The value of gold actually remained stable when the U.S. dollar was pegged to it. I view that as evidence for pegging stabilizing the value of the commodity it is pegged to. However is an simplification, because share of the dollar relative to other currencies policies has changed. I also only believe the system I depicted would work, if the exports of the commodity were restricted so that no one or only the central bank could sell it abroad.

You're right. How can any state with nuke-backed right to issue ultimatums slowly get weakened like that? If Russia states limits, and convinces U.S. that they will launch if the limits are crossed, and these limits are within the threat budget of Russia, can they not make U.S. agree to things (and vice versa)?

If you can always move to smaller denominations, deflation would not be an issue:

If the price of an apple at t_0 is $2 and (using arbitrary symbol for the other currency) §2, and at t_1 $20=§2, then at t_1 citiziens in the nation using § as currency would pay §0.2 for an apple, et cetera.

The other currency would have to use scientific notation, for cash.

(if deflation wasn't the the cause of that crisis, this is not an answer).

*(Silvio) gesselized

I apologize for the typo.

I don't know the best rule to use for the process, since there seems to be many potential combinations of rules for it, but the idea of forced-gesselization is that if you buy a house with the bad money from foreign gray markets dealer, when you try to sell the house, you are taxed as if house and the bad money you bought it (this type of situation would be gray area, as such requiring intervention and appraisal of actual value by government body, which is not to be desired; but such practice also would not have to be commonplace) with had been in the demurraged currency, e.g. for the duration of the ownership.

Normally we can think of sales value to mean value - tax, where tax = g(ownership_duration), where g is gesselization function, which would preferably remain same over time but doesn't have to be linear or simply value or function of time as long as it is simply enough high schooler can solve for it without a computer.

Did it ever fluctuate like that when it was pegged?

If oil is cheap energy, and you cut down oil revenue, how do you prevent Russia from turning oil into cryptocurrency?

The distinction between government and crypto currencies is wrong one to make.

I fail to see how gold-pegged, gasselized (demurraged at constant rate until they vanish down to UBI limit, except from government/CB wallets, with other assets also demurraged when sold/bought via cap gains style taxes), constant supply cryptocurrency would not be in fact better than the dollar and the euro and the yen, and it would be both inflation & deflation resistant.

What psychedelic/mind-altering/weird coaching prompts do you use?

I have separate system prompts for taboo-teaching, excessive-pedanticism, excessive-toxicity, excessive-praise, et cetera.

My general rules is anything & everything humans would never ever do, but that would somehow allow me to explore altered states of consciousness, ways of thinking, my mind, the world, better. Something to make me smarter from the experience of the chat.

Malgorhitms are. We could, if we didn't confuse use it with LoTR entities, have belgorhitms, which would not only be recommended by Kahneman & Tversky, but also recommend by intelligence analysts, the historical opposites of corporate analysts, minions Belegron.

Algorhitms, "changing how one thinks" is real, and ultimately good. The social changes, when they start expecting you to Anki your work contract (which would, if the Anki was monitored, be highly legally effective against you); or requiring you know Kellyed Bayesian decision theory because that's a prequsite for getting reasonably priced insurance, or simply, surviving, that is unknown. I give 37.7% confidence Elon Musk was gaming in 2025 U.S. politics using construct akin to a Bayesian decision tree.

It would be great if one didn't have to change how one thinks, whether they delve into CLRS or TikTok.

My grandparent used consider global bubbles as the norm, likely because his own parents never told him that local, company-limited bubble are actually the norm. Fortunately my own parents are more agreeable with how I manage my finances, and my whole family – including the 380-minutes old grand-grandparents – is still alive & well. We still see each other, despite the occasional confusion my use of the English plurals causes us (not to mention everyone's own ups & downs, and the weird reproductive mechanisms of our larger genus within the world).

Now that you mentioned, "as highly conscious and self aware person", I observe the wave like up and down breathing effective, which I did not pay attention to while on the site, as a cost-effect. The interesting part is I am not always sure if I am actually waving from breathing, of if this is the illusion, and it was for half minute certainly both. This is the type of thing one remembers a decade afterwards.

I don't know if this is AI, it looks like it, but could well not be.

I believe this isn't "just fun" but having told the AI to not to make it work for meme effect on HN. Obviously AI could fix easily, including but not limited to the music itself.

I don't live in Germany but hate internet banking and de-letterization and other "digitalization" because it's first step in erosion of rights. The second step is forbidding the offline version.

The problem is no proper theory of backups exists: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41173227

It would be great use of my money, were I a billionaire, to build a vacuum-insulated sodaduct & cervisiaduct as a ring going around Europe perhaps with a monorail on the bottom (for convenient repairs) & photovoltaic cells on top to power it the monotail. Technically you can have two monorails for one track, one above and one below, so the upper monorail could be used for something else as well. The ice & carbon dioxide would be delivered separately to keep the the drinks fresh, and there would be few be a different pipe for drinks from different German & French & Spanish districts inside the cervisiaduct.

I don't watch YouTube but if I would / I would if I'd cut out anything with faces or speech & use an LLM to summarize what's technically relevant from the transcript in a way that fits length of what remains.

Pipeline such content, but use weighted random videos, with low weights for types of content with clickbait headings & perhaps blacklist for words like meme or lol in transcript to cut out things with stock footage. I am not sure of exact best way to remove it, actually, other than "using the transcript for some computational technique of probabilitistic stock footage prediction" which I bet would be most effective.

For clarity, I don't consider anything mentioned even practically feasible or relevant.

I mentally tripped over by forgetting that if stock costs 500 + [0,10] (where it fluctuates) normally, you must in order to participate even without any fees pay 500 + [0,10] and not just the [0,10].

That's why you keep it offline at all times! And for calls use something dumb & leave that at home.

Oh yeah, I think in my head I confuse the size of the bet with the size of the ranges where it could be claimed to frequently cross the line between sell or buy (which I proposed would be what is most frequently crossed over), but in normal stock markets the market never hits the bottom. Compare this – real markets – to discrete signal between in [0.00,5.00] with smallest change being 0.25, and the market frequently going to zero or near zero, where know it often goes from [0.00, 1.75] to [2.25, 5.00]. In such case you wouldn't lose as heavily. So then markets can be roughly & informally modeled as what's the relationship between how much it somehow "often" changes vs. what's the risk cost, e.g. since normally stocks don't drop to zero constantly what's the bottom part in the traditional market graph that stays the same (it doesn't seem trivial to me what's the best way to consider what's often and what's the bottom part as the bottom part may change over time even if it most of time in real world remains constant, but I think the idea doesn't need one to know the exact alforhitm as yet to speak of values that if often crosses.

So what, then is the exact information value of these candy bars of when the stock has not changed value? What do they tell us? And moreover, are they consistently valued, since the primary tail risk seems to be (probably, I am not expert) market crash, which means one would expect each to have the unchanging candy bar to relative to future performance, so that if we have a reasonable assumption of market crash probability, then some pattern should emerge & things should make sense?

I believe it's trivial to formalize this point & honestly fruitless to not to figure it out, but I will post this comment & perhaps later on return to this. To me the primary here is that the candy bar is what matters, and that if any markets like my [0.00, 5.00] market exist, my strategy would be profitable in those.

Moreover, I think in trading strategy the idea that one wants to guess how fast they can cross the threshold to not to lose, to be able to "Martingale" as you out it is valuable & kellyable.

Can you not use this information of it being closed for high frequency trading?

Also I have pondered, to put it very simply, why wouldn't it be profitable, since the markets fluctuate, to gamble small amounts constantly at where they most often (this is more complex but you could simply draw line as well) cross a line, such that you can always lose everything, and then sell every time it goes over that line & buy when it's below regardless of how much you would make?

Eventually the safest eay to be a human will be to hide from the best AI by mimicking the lesser & more quantitious AI mimicking the homo simulacra.

Example: Big AI outbids energy providers because its owners are hunting some person whose computational activity they do not like. If you consume unusually lots of energy because you are eccentric human & not having AI system guide your power use, you will stand out. The big AI might rationally buy you out from electricity because you didn't mimic how normal people's AI has them do their power expenses.

99.99% of source code is not Kolmogorov optimal.

This is a good thing.

This is the problem of gnosis vs doxa. Regardless of one's intelligence, since the priors (or rather posteriors as at least I as Bayesian thinker would really look at paper X and then look at who made it (how much funding they had), where, and the context (is this obvious marketing) and compute from overly safe approximation it's BS, the actual probability that tou call priors) actually are reliable & you cannot know what you cannot know & Postman.

So then you are hands in the air, trying to get others internalize, a discussion culture where you actually can as normal thing claim or are by default assumed to be probably superficial.

Even if someone knows lots about foundational things like philosophy & what they want etc., statements have a certain feel to it regardless of mathematical truthness, and at some point you will do the value benefit calculation that you might be superficial but you should learn about others topics first because you know you can for less time gain more information that is valuable from them.

---

Pearl's causality as far as I see is best modelled with cdr car + NBG as embedded agency foundations + computability in the mix + signal theory (time as discrete evolution from one state in the chain to another; signal theory is relevant when you have multiple agents or the environment & PARTS of you run at different clocks or something more complex) i.e. part of formal embedded agency. Doesn't feel too meaningful without it except epistemologically (close what can we know type questions) where causality might be a good lens, especially to filter inquiries.

Products with volatile demand don't necessarily follow.

A SOP for static content, it feels great.

I use many SOPs daily. The principle is that if you can forget everything about it but the name, obtain the documentation, and relearn it, you should do about the same thing as without.

Though you can find SOPs similar to modern from 1950s USSR docs, the U.S. Navy ones like folding SOP or military shower SOP are especially pragmatic.

Even with all the social & economical issues within & outside of the U.S., they should in my view occupy the power vacuum for the time being. The real issue is then not that U.S. is evil, but that you cannot both be the tyrant playing zero sum with China & Russia, and the gentleman.

Security wise U.S. cannot even if they can intervene with socially bad policy except to prevent widespread civil arrest etc which is why CIA exists. U.S. pre-emptive wars were good for the military-industrial apparatus that keeps them in power & made sure others can't get those places. In global strategy terms, I suspevt Web3 & DeFi should be seen as an economical third party that reduces Chinese & Russian share of the Western economical pie at times dollar weakens.

The public can never understand that you need to be "though" to win because might makes right in statescraft & geopoli, so the U.S has to censor the internet including inside NATO to prevent economical ties' risk of dying due political pressure. It's understandable. If the game is played classified, and most humans hesitate to pull a gun's trigger, they have no idea about the world inside the entities that protect them. They cannot see that it's a very very zero-sum world, hobbesian world.

This is different from human history because WWII ±25 years we boiled over the techno-industrial pot, and nowadays all of the seemingly evil work of US & its agencies is, actually, necessary for the survival of mankind.

The title is semantically questionable:

- US? - AI has power to erase?

I did not create AI & believe even autonomous AI systems are for time under human moral responsibility.

The effect of AI socially obviously is that there will be no public forums, so we get back to middle ages, except the peasant is smarter & more obedient, which is a good mix for mental health issues.

Regardless, when one needs more data: 1) Pick small nation with slow democracy & bureaucracy 2) Do massive AI horde campaign targeting politicians & keeping them busy 3) Simultaneously ship SpaceX connected drones in crates & humanoid robots. 4) Now the people cannot sleep in peace & you start gathering behavioral surplus very effectively. 5) Sell behavioral data & reinvest in sociological ruin of the government before they close OODA.

The interesting step is what happens when standard baseline human has eventually no more surplus to give. I would guess models develop far enough that you can nudge the non-wallnut humans who don't care about privacy or anything to vote for candidates that then pass laws to outroot more eccentric people by cutting the rights to any sort of privacy.

I personally believe in the instrumentalist view of philosophy of science & endorse the "instrumentarian power" term Zuboff coined for this. It's the very significant difference, Zuboff probably said it also but I cannot recall as I read the work young, that would you rather have no free will and no one else's interest dominates completely over yours or would you rather have no free will and some other human have chosen what matters?

As endgame, such state makes lots of AI alignment literature paradigmatically obsolete.

Only predictive capabilities & AI trained on data can be more valuable than having perfect profile of the person who turns out to be an enemy of your nation in whatever sense. Taking a person down once you know everyone they have ever talked, been interested about, or thought, is trivial. This can only be acheived by mass surveillance & hoarding.

Arguably US as a nation state has the very best LLMs in the world, which is why I personally think they have been running weak AGI for few years, e.g. for autonomous malware analysis, reverse-engineering, and tailored malware generation & testing capability. Because they can actually store the personal data long term, without habing to delete it, this may be of gigantic strategic advantage due web being highly "polluted" after 2020-2021.

I would from this guess US has bet on AI research since end of WWII, and especially within last 30 years, noting the rather highly remarkable possibility that Surveillance Capitalism is actually part of the nation's security effforts. The warehouses of data they have built are warehouses of gold, or rather, gold mixed in sand since of course lots of it is also garbage.

Not so if you EMI tape the GOS phone case, disable USB-C except for charging, use second profile to encrypt your actual data so you can attest before decrypting, and keep it turned off and in aeroplane mode when not in use. See my comments.