“battle tested for decades” just lost a lot of its value with Mythos and the likes unfortunately. Rewriting in a different language became much faster with Coding agents at the same time.
I do agree that the second system effect is real, it’s just that the balance of benefits and drawbacks significantly shifted when it comes to “rewrite in Rust” (not limited to Rust though).
> “battle tested for decades” just lost a lot of its value with Mythos and the likes unfortunately
Isn't it a bit early to make predictions on the future of computer security and how we create good software based on something that's been out for 2 weeks?
Meanwhile the C version of coreutils has been in development for 36 years. There's no rush.
> The capabilities of AI models have improved with incredible speed over the past decade, and as the graph above shows, progress seems to be accelerating.
errr… no? Every discipline is clearly hitting a plateau so far. Some started recently and hence haven’t yet (competition maths) but based on past graph, they will all plateau.
According to the tables in that source, the top 0.001% pay about 25% income tax, which of course is income after they've had their accountants smooth over everything. The highest income tax percentage seems to be at the top 1% level. I assume this is due to higher income earners having better/more aggressive tax accountants.
If the people with 90% of the income pay less than 90% of the total income taxes, something is wrong. Every lower income should be paying less, as a percentage of their income.
I think we can debate on how progressive (in terms of as you earn more you pay more) the US tax brackets should be. They are already fairly progressive relative to peer nations.
However, I am skeptical that higher taxes or just taxing the rich or high earners more will solve the deficit or government efficiency issues.
Also I disagree with 90% of income should pay 90% of taxes. People who are better capital allocators than the government should be incentivized to allocate over paying taxes.
> Also I disagree with 90% of income should pay 90% of taxes. People who are better capital allocators than the government should be incentivized to allocate over paying taxes.
We've spent the past 50 years lowering the taxes on those who have the most income/wealth with only negative outcomes to show for it.
I think the mistake you're making is assuming that those best at accumulating capital are also the best at allocating it. If they were, I expect we'd see a lot more investment into new technologies and markets rather than the large increase in rent-seeking we have seen instead.
I live in Greece, technically under a continuous more or less hot war with all our neighbours since the last 5 f.. centuries. Coping with aggressivity at group level needs deep historical experience, delicate balance above words and lines and knowing that "the best defense is the attack". Ideally, "the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting", Sun Tzu, but it's difficult, even locally.
Leaders like the POTUS, the Chancellor or the "Czar" exert immense influence over the global stuff. Let's press all of them to behave sanely and throw out of their bed the weapon companies. In the 60's the USA had 60000 nuclear warheads, now 5000. Let's make them 60000 again so to stop all conventional wars overnight.
Agreed on all of this, they suck, especially the lobbyists pushing weapons. But shouldn’t we start we the likes of Putin? That would significantly lower the demand for weapons.
I feel it’s more realistic than getting rid of lobbyists unfortunately. (Still no clue as to how to achieve it though)
Russia is a very volatile region, politically and financially.
I believe Putin's aggressiveness is not real but due to pressure from Western dark powers. EVERY war Russia fought outside it's borders was lost. They don't need more land or a silly warm water port. It's the huge sum of power of global weaponry. If we fight them in the USA and Europe, Russia will follow.
Of course it's happening. I am not paranoid. But, the leaders win billions for themselves pushing people to fight. It's not a real intention of the Russian people but of the corrupt Polit-buro that is paid by Lockheed et al. I cannot say it more boldly.
ah, yeah, ok, I agree (no idea what russian poeple really think, but I can imagine they hate their leaders or at the very least are terrified of them) — but I don’t see how that helps to be honest.
If Russian troops attack, the options are “fight back” and “surrender”. Long term, there are other options in order to avoid being in the same position again (kill all arm lobbyists to start with =)
I do agree that the second system effect is real, it’s just that the balance of benefits and drawbacks significantly shifted when it comes to “rewrite in Rust” (not limited to Rust though).
reply