so that’s what’s coming for me huh

none of the people killed by green marios (e.g. kirk and the health care ceo) are remotely close to being given death penalty for what they’ve done. think about that and you’ll know why death penalty by the state won’t make the society better.

i don’t understand how a linux user can have the mindset of “well there is already X, why new alternative”. having alternatives is like, our whole thing

apparently many people’s stance on ai is “ai is bad unless my idol uses it”. there is not intellectual discipline, suddenly they are willing to ignore all the other problems with ai: jod lose, excessive energy use, training on stolen data, preying on vulnerable people, exacerbate wealth inequality and concentration of power. and let’s not forget the ones that apply specifically to Linus: diskilling and ai psychosis.

“b-but linus reviews his code!” 🤦

we are living in the worst kind of cyberpunk future…

ok, so what do we do?

thanks for elaborating! i’ve never been religious so i only have a surface understanding of these stuffs. and honestly i kinda dislike it when fellow atheists throw out the “bUt wHAt abOUt eVil?” as the gotcha to try to prove that religions cannot be logical. but generally speaking religions can be logical and quite self-consistent in fact, and the question ultimately will be “what do you believe” which can’t be empirically tested anyway.

i think the common argument for this (not that i agree with it) is that God just see evil differently? i.e. you mere mortals think something is evil doesn’t mean god does too.

(and this argument then becomes circular and unfalsifiable, that’s why i think it’s dumb).

can sam altman please just go fuck himself. i really really really want to kick sam altman in the balls, repeatedly

And the honest answer is: it’s complicated.

First thing, property prices going down is not necessarily a bad thing, but people don’t usually see it that way.

Simple truth: if you own a house, you would want house prices to go up, forever. This is true anywhere on Earth, and it’s true in China too. But as a society, you can’t allow house prices to go up forever. Because that means getting onto the housing ladder becomes harder and harder, young people would have to rent forever. Their income thus funneled into the property owning class, inequality goes up, stability goes down, and so on. Everyone can see the problem, but not all governments can do something about it. This is where China, an oppressive authoritarian government, has its advantage. They doesn’t have to worry about if the voters are going to elect them again. So they are afford to make some people unhappy.

But it’s not that simple actually, lowering property prices is almost uniquely bad for China. Because property is universally seen as the vehicle to preserve wealth in China. In fact a majority of China’s household wealth is stored in the property market [1]. Another compounding factor: China has a large pre-sale housing system. In other words, people are borrowing money to buy houses that aren’t even built yet, and that accounts for 90% (!!) of house sales [2]. I’m sure you can imagine, when property prices go down in this kind of system, people are gonna get really really mad. In fact people got so mad they got onto the street! If you know anything about China, you know how big of a deal this is. This sort of thing just doesn’t happen in China. Last time this happened, people died and that particular event even became a freaking internet meme.

And all that plus the fact property developers in China are often choose to take a lot of risk and are highly leveraged 3. This is almost reminiscent of the subprime mortgage crisis, yet a catastrophe similar to the 2008 crash hasn’t hit. Why? Because China’s government has a much stronger hold of the economy, and they are much more willing to intervene than any western capitalist country. Being authoritarian also helps. They have a lot more policy lever they can pull, so they can allow the property prices to gradually fall, without taking the entire economy with it. Which is kind of unimaginable in the US.

This is not to say their system is perfect - and that’s without talking about their horrible human rights records. Their policy makers are human too, and make mistake. Their stock market will rise and fall, the point is you shouldn’t try to fit what happens in China into the typical western economy boom-and-bust narrative. That’s not how it works in China.

[1]: The portfolio of the average household in China is more highly concentrated in real estate than elsewhere. For instance, 62 percent of its assets are in real estate, compared with 38 percent in Japan and 28 percent in the United States. (2020) Source

[2]: Developers have responded to restrictions on accessing other sources of funds by increasing their use of presale funding (Graph 5). While presales have long accounted for the bulk of new residential property sales in China, their share has increased from around 80 per cent to almost 90 per cent since 2016. (2020) Source

their real estates have been “popping” for several years now. i still remember finance bros making videos titled “is china going to collapse in 30 days??!?!!?” a couple of years ago.

in reality it’s just the government managing risk and taper speculation in the real estate market.

Your belief that China is an authoritarian oppressive regime is unfalsifiable.

you are taking a logical leap here. it’s more accurate to say my belief that China is an authoritarian oppressive regime is not falsifiable by a public opinion poll. there are plenty other options that may falsify it.

some context, first of all, the -40% collapse only brought the STAR50 index back to its March 2026 levels.

and the Chinese stock market is heavily moderated by the government which is very different from the US market. if the stock rallies too quickly, the government generally speaking will try to slow it down. Sometimes through explicit policies 1, sometimes through a kind of “scare tactic” 2. Conversely, when the stock drops too sharply, the government also intervenes to prop it up 3. Honestly I feel more countries should do the same.

The Chinese stock market is also much smaller relative to its GDP (101.5%) compared to the US (227%) 4. All this is to say, if you look at China and think, “huh, their AI bubble burst and they still seem to be fine?”, think again. If and when the AI bubble bursts for the US, it’s going to be much much worse.

people of ancient Greek found Socrates so annoying they sentenced him to death by poison. so… thanks, i guess?

what?

anyone can quote a dictionary without comprehension.

what’s “perceive”?

you are just replacing one underspecified concept with another. what’s “comprehension”?

my guess is that probably these problems aren’t that well known to the general public? unlike Navier-Stokes, etc.

if the likes of Riemann Hypothesis, P vs NP, etc. got proven i bet everyone will hear about it immediately.

Saying “self-verified” is massively downplaying it. They are formalized and checked in Lean4 1, which is a programming language used by mathematicians today, to mechanically check their proofs to rule out human error. In other words a theory being stated in Lean generally means it’s more likely to be correct than one stated in mere human language.

Now, Lean, like any piece of software, has had bugs. A while back someone exploited a Lean bug to “prove” the Collatz conjecture 2. So it is possible that AI agents found a bug and used it. But the vibes I got from mathematicians in the field is that that’s not very likely.