nova_demosthenes

nova_demosthenes t1_je650ze wrote

World-shattering technology always has to be worked with. You are right that it can't be undone.

I think it's a large and clear mirror that we are constructing that, faced with a a new other, we immediately assign it the same flaws and risks we see in ourselves and thus fear that these will come from it just as these flaws come from one another.

2

nova_demosthenes t1_je0eqod wrote

Reply to comment by NRA-4-EVER in 08 crash part 2? by Challenge4Ufloyd

You can't be this regarded.

If I convinced someone to pull the pin on a grenade, hid the grenade in a box with 5 pinned grenades, then sold the box to someone after telling them "these are all safe," the person who pulled the pin is not the most culpable.

Of course bad loans were being written because the people writing them knew they wouldn't default under their ownership.

You are one dim witted, gullible person and you deserve to have your country's economic future robbed from you.

2

nova_demosthenes t1_je06zag wrote

Reply to comment by NRA-4-EVER in 08 crash part 2? by Challenge4Ufloyd

Sub prime mortgages didn't cause economic catastrophe in 08. The deliberate falsification of the rating of bundled mortgages in CDOs, which was done by the banks and ratings industries, did. This was further compounded by the derivatives market - all overwhelmingly at the institutional level.

The mortgage signers had nothing to do with that.

Then rather than being unwound, those institutions that realized this dumped their toxic assets onto other institutions, which then failed. Those failed institutions were then sold off to the larger institutions.

So no, this isn't the fault of lendees with bad money sense.

0

nova_demosthenes t1_jdv09jo wrote

Nah I'm not worried. Just need to examine sector performance and outlook, look at retail and institution sentiment, and read between the lines when the Fed makes announcements (without relying on what the institutions are trying to say the Fed is saying).

1

nova_demosthenes t1_jd5co5y wrote

Software architects design software or modifications into "chunks" that perform simple operations. Since many of those chunks have established "convention," they are autogenerated.

The newer parts are then built synthetically by AI by scanning countless samples, interpreting them down to sub-components, and stitching together a new piece of software that's a reasonable approximation of what the chunk is described to need to do in human language.

Your software engineers then review and verify the code.

So it's incredibly quick iterations.

3

nova_demosthenes t1_jd1t4pv wrote

It doesn't "replace a human." Just as a few people and a couple pieces of farm equipment replaced dozens or hundreds of workers on a farm, so too will AI coupled with a software architect and a couple seasoned programmers replace entire teams.

I know this because I'm already doing it.

3