Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
"Shook the US markets" is that last dip in the chart. Nothing happened and we're losing our minds over it. There's been 5 bigger drops over the last 3 months than what happened on monday.
Investors are obviously stupid fucking people spooked by any old horseshit and who buy into any old horseshit.
Unless there's AI magic going on behind the scenes we're not being told about, autonomous AI agents are nowhere near a reality and won't be because LLMs are a dead-end in regards to that.
Seriously our world is run by the people least fucking fit to do so. I'm just some random asshat who knows fuck-all. I'm not smart enough for the people who run the world to be this fucking stupid in comparison.
Like, here's a quote from beginning of this Substack post:
The sole intent of this piece is modeling a scenario that’s been relatively underexplored.
But has it though?? Can't anyone with a fucking brain extrapolate that if AI replaced all workers that we wouldn't have an economy, we would have the people who control the AI owning all that's left in the world and the huddled teeming starving masses ready to build gallows in the streets for the people who caused all this? How is this new and shocking to these people? How have none of them ever considered the endgame before?
You had me at "gallows in the streets".
Their plan is to own everything so that the economy is irrelevant. What they want is to go back to the days where you worked for the mining company but got paid in company currency that could only be redeemed at company stores.
Instead of using DoorDash, developers – and civilians – code up their own food delivery apps, all of which compete, fragment the market, and destroy the margins of legacy businesses. Business for Uber and other ride-sharing apps also evaporates. Instead of using Visa and Mastercard, AI agents decide to do all business in cryptocurrency, because transaction costs are cheaper. This guts traditional payment providers.
To Citrini, this is a logical endpoint for tireless AI agents that have the time and capability to optimise everything. “Habitual app loyalty, the entire basis of the business model, simply didn’t exist for a machine,” it writes.
Seems plausible /s
What I am seeing is algorithms price people out of housing, mortgages and rent; employers claiming AI does this and that, but is actually outsourcing and offshoring jobs to humans in places where Western wages can't compete, despite being unlivable, from programming to customer service to "self-driving" vehicles, to art.
But also forensics, DNA mapping and gene editing.
I mean certain parts of this article indeed seem stupid, but some minor statements give away the game in ways I wish were more clear to every day people.
Over the past fifty years, the U.S. economy built a giant rent-extraction layer on top of human limitations: things take time, patience runs out, brand familiarity substitutes for diligence, and most people are willing to accept a bad price to avoid more clicks. Trillions of dollars of enterprise value depended on those constraints persisting.
We had overestimated the value of “human relationships”. Turns out that a lot of what people called relationships was simply friction with a friendly face.
This shit should be shouted from the fucking rooftops even without AI in the picture. Our entire economy is a house of cards built on rent-extracting through introduction of pain points that may not have previously existed. Creating a problem and selling a solution.
It's honestly laughable because it means on some level the investors reading this are absolutely aware that this is what they do and they are fucking fine with it. They think making things harder and extracting money from people for it is a good thing. Fucking ghouls.
Doordash isn't rent extraction though, and is a system that benefits from a singular platform. That doesn't mean Doordash is the best implementation of that service, but the example isn't good.
Doordash absolutely is rent seeking, though. Restaurant operators are paying the rent—for being furnished with SaaS services that used to just entail calling the restaurant and placing a takeout/delivery order. Nevermind the SaaS platforms restaurants have to pay for in order to integrate their SCM software with the ordering apps.
We used to call to order a pizza. Now, both the restaurant and we—the consumers—pay various abstracted-away "fees" to have a middle man do the same fucking thing.
The restaurant doesn't "own" the software, and it doesn't "own" the data produced by its day-to-day operations. They pay to have third parties warehouse and manage their sales data for them, and sometimes even sell that data back to them for additional fees.
Delivering food has a cost and is a service. Before things like doordash you could only get delivery from select locations, by creating a network of drivers you can now get delivery from most restaurants.
Does doordash exploit people and restaurants, yes. However, providing a delivery service is not rent seeking there is something being offered.
What fucking stupid, late stage capitalist, Pollyanna codswallop. Wow.
DoorDash doesn't provide a delivery service. They don't pay delivery drivers to deliver, they don't provide vehicles, benefits, or even consider drivers employees. People pay DoorDash for access to use their software/platform to receive requests from customers for delivery services. DoorDash offers a series of contract plans in which a driver pays fees for various tiers of DoorDash acting as a payment processor, can opt for a per-job rate reductions to guarantee a "base job rate" (without any guarantee of jobs assigned), and are otherwise uncompensated for "non-active" time.
The exploitation comes in the form of a monopolized rentier platform. In the same way that you might pay a landlord for access to a space to rest your pretty little head at night, restaurants and drivers pay premiums for access to a digital space to market services to one another. DoorDash doesn't make anything other than software, and you can't even "buy" DoorDash's software.
Instead of creating value through the production of goods, DoorDash acts as a digital landlord that extracts surplus value (rent) from both restaurants and laborers by controlling the digital infrastructure necessary for exchange.
Just like a landlord, DoorDash owns the digital "land" (i.e. the application, algorithm, and user interface) connecting customers, merchants, and workers.By controlling this infrastructure, DoorDash acts as a tollbooth. It charges restaurants a high commission fee (ranging from 15% to 30%+) for every order. This fee is a form of monopoly rent, where DoorDash takes a portion of the restaurant's profits simply for allowing them to access customers, similar to a landlord extracting rent.
DoorDash does not cook the food or directly employ the delivery workers as staff (again, they're "contractors", which DD has lobbied heavily to ensure). The restaurant produces the value (the food), and the driver performs the labor of delivery. They are a glorified phone service, however convenient or "neato" you might think they are.
Right, I agree that DoorDash is a bad example, I was just pointing out that the article makes some clear points about how our economy is organized and the investor class panicked not because they realized our economy is a house of cards built on unnecessary friction, but rather that they might have that house of cards taken from them.
It's rent seeking from their own agents by having them take care of the depreciation on their vehicles instead of the corporation. Still not a perfect example, but it's still a type of exploitation
The "feedback without any breaks" dynamic certainly is what the AI industry is capable of, but it isn't because of how powerful AI is, it is because the humans working in the AI industry have brainworms that inhibit the suppression of runaway feedback loops around their near spiritual beliefs about the capability of AI.
It isn't the runaway capability of AI that is terrifying, rather what is terrifying are the runaway rationalizations of AI cultists who can't admit they chose a shitty horse to get behind and it is never going to go anywhere faster than it is already failing to do.
AI fanboys will do ANYTHING to avoid facing that reality, they have given their ego no choice by building their entire identities and worldviews around it and that is what should terrify us.
The second thing here that should terrify us is how much of a Cargo Cult the financial industry is that these kinds of emotional fever dream panics actually dominate the price determination of major companies even though it isn't that hard to do the research yourself and come to the conclusion all of this AI stuff is 99.99% bullshit.
Stop investing in AI, it is unbelievably dumb, invest in the local landscaping company around you, invest in ANYTHING else at all so long as there is real value to it unlike AI, you will end up with far more in the end.