Pichai’s comments come as other tech CEOs have also predicted the coming of a new era of chief executive automations. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman previously said AI will someday do his job better than him, adding, “I will be nothing but enthusiastic the day that happens.” Sebastian Siemiatkowski, CEO of buy-now-pay-later firm Klarna, also said in a post on X earlier this year that “AI is capable of doing all our jobs, my own included.”

Yeah, I’m not surprised the wealthy person who owns the output of the AI tools and company is enthusiastic about his job being “replaced,” since - as the owner and therefore spout of the AI value funnel - he now has to work even less to extract the value of hundreds or thousands of human lives.

It’s clearly the right column, second from bottom row.

Step 1: Think of some numbers.

Step 2: …

Step 3: Global economic supremacy.

…apparently.

“You know what’s driving me nuts? It could literally be any one of us.”

I’m feeling more and more that they will release something that scrubs any damage to the GOP, and certainly zero chance they release anything that damages Trump. If there is a fix in - scrubbed names or false “complete” files - that would explain why GOP now feels they can vote for it, and why Trump gave them permission by flip-flopping to support the release.

Isn’t the second best time 2999 years ago?

Chad Gilmartin, a Justice Department spokesperson, said the “website was updated after a technical error where one of the signatures President Trump personally signed was mistakenly uploaded multiple times due to staffing issues caused by the Democrat shutdown.”

Too funny. Not only is nothing republicans’ fault, even when they are totally in control of a situation, but it must also be the fault of democrats.

Happiness is value, and value must only be captured by the IP holder.

Yes, all well and good, and upvoted for the rational response of course.

I understand there are standards. But the enemy of the good is the perfect, and if journalistic standards require perfect evidence and won’t otherwise represent the best-fit explanation, then they are easily exploited by bad actors like Trump who will intentionally withhold perfect evidence. The public good is served by reporting from a reasonable person’s perspective what the most likely explanation is, including the terminology that goes with it. Here, that is a “lie.”

I’d also argue their concern in this case isn’t standards, but legal liability for defamation. At least from a legal perspective, reporters and publications have clear defenses at this point to saying “lie” since regardless of subjective momentary intent, the preponderance of people / jurors should accept contextual evidence of intent like his prior statements.

And even journalistic standards should be addressable by calling it something like an “apparent” lie to allow the possibility of other explanations, while still calling it what it almost certainly is.

I mean, let’s just sit back and observe the stupidly obvious fact that Trump is lowering tariffs to lower grocery store prices, which necessarily confirms Trump knows that creating tariffs raised the grocery store prices, despite that he has said the exact opposite.

So tell me, mainstream media: Did we do it? Did we catch Trump in a lie so logically incontestable that your reporters would feel empowered to finally report it as a “lie”?

[Scans article]

…sigh.

Ooooh, update just dropped!

But that’s…the live action movie?

Tech bro startups.

The issue isn’t about ownership, per se. It’s about acquisition of principle value which you carry with you when you sell the house.

The example halfway down the post of a $400K loan fixed at 6% is a good example: A 15-year loan would have a $3,375.74 monthly payment but pay off $305,364 principle after 12 years. A 30-year would have a $2,398.20 monthly payment, but have only $134,978 paid off. A 50-year has a $2,063.74 payment only pays off $66,251 principle.

This is why it’s a particularly bad debt trap. The 15 or 30-year mortgage allows the homeowner to move and have acquired significant principle value, which makes the costs of moving much lower.

And the monthly payment in substance are costlier when you add “interest” (rent into a black hole) and lower “principle” (long-term loan to the bank which is repaid back at sale). When the house is sold, the principle value returns to the seller via the sale and remaining loan payoff. So when you are paying off, say, $1,000 a month, if $600 is principle and $400 is interest, your true (final, after-the-sale-returns-principle-to-you) payment is $400. If you lower the total to $900 a month, but it breaks down as $400 principle and $500 interest, the true payment is $500.

So again, debt trap.

4 cats? In this economy?

The ICP group is anti-Trump and as silly as the ICP aesthetic is, juggalos seem like generally a positive community. They just want to get high and make friends. They are basically hippies in face paint.

So yeah, I get the connection but seems like this is doing them dirty.

I think the commenter’s point was that the 2025 elections show that voters want to elect people who stand up to Trump.

He is a malignant narcissist. He wants people to admire him, but doesn’t actually see them as people with rights or have the slightest actual sympathy or empathy. Thus he’s incapable of acting altruistically because everything he does is to elevate himself, and altruism requires an act of selflessness.

This is no different, because it’s meant to get people taking about how generous he is. He’s using public money to buy one-directional love.

I’m using “own” to mean “take ownership of,” “take responsibility for,” or here most expressly, “take blame for.”

Yeah, no, I meant “democrats.” The reason why I think democrats will “own” the shutdown is that they gained nothing of value, and contradicted themselves by defecting without getting what they said they were fighting for.

If they had just held the line and trusted opinion polling that said people were blaming republicans for this, republicans would have had to own it. Now, democrats look like the ones who wouldn’t compromise for 40 days but eventually were forced to.

As secondary effects, there are also two negative narratives democrats created: (a) what they were fighting for wasn’t that important (so democrats are at fault for shutting down the government for something unimportant), or (b) what they were fighting for was important and they folded without getting it (so democrats are at fault for being feckless or incompetent). There’s a strong likelihood one or both of these will take hold and undermine democrats’ positions further leading to December.