ijaeger.bsky.social
18 posts
24 followers
286 following
Regular Contributor
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
@jessefarrar.com
comment in response to
post
👆
comment in response to
post
Dem messaging hinged on voters unsentimentally comparing a four year economic period sandwiching upheaval. It looks like it was easy to uncounterably convince those captured in the Ludwig™ Method® to reevaluate their standard of acceptable living and economic progress
comment in response to
post
explored in the article never thought to reinterpret it, or were not creative enough, or were not interested whatsoever in remediating it. As the labor force evolves, its interpretation should evolve.
comment in response to
post
Another thing failed to be taken into account here when grousing about '19 relative sentiment: that tens of millions of people have aged into the workforce, the shape of work and the distribution of wages have changed, and most importantly, the people interpreting the publicly available data
comment in response to
post
What should really embarrass the liberal economists is how easily Republicans succeeded at activating this 25% unemployed/working poor segment. All they had to do was acknowledge it where none of our leaders ever did.
comment in response to
post
The institute analysis is mid, but the point stands: you don't have to look to an exogenous human complication to see any number of reasons a huge cut of citizens do not believe the economy is "good". Prescribing "proper" sentiment relative to '19 based on the any of these stats alone is not enough.
comment in response to
post
Other indicators are also fails: poverty rate and the poverty line are laughable (pegged to which geographic area? The whole country). Median wages are down relative to prices, but juiced by economic prosperity of the second quartile enough to read the opposite. Precariousness is up.
comment in response to
post
These qualifiers have had ever-less relationship to CoL in America (rise of the gig economy, etc). The first serious economic populist will have access to 75 million highly motivated, pissed off working class voters.
comment in response to
post
I would prefer to live in an industrial society capable of negotiating a climate-based global economic detente. But it feels more likely we'd get this through technological centralization than through boycotts.
comment in response to
post
"Accountant" was a different category of labor before these existed.
You might be surprised to know how much energy it takes to produce one sheet of paper, natural enemy of the computer.
The energy capacities of medium-sized industrialized nations are often spent on...industry. Including software
comment in response to
post
Automated clearinghouses, financial markets, the Internet, etc., are algorithmically operated technologies employed by capitalists that are essential for communism. I don't know how much you gain by ceding these to the owner class.
comment in response to
post
No LLM reduces the amount of labor required to do anything? They all just create an exact equal amount of labor every time? And they never improve?
And they also all steal labor? Or is it intellectual property? How collective should our ownership laws be, exactly?
comment in response to
post
It is good to reduce the amount of labor required to do something. LLMs vary wildly in terms of sources, ownership, etc.. If a tool confers an advantage whatsoever, it needs to be wielded by your side. You can't boycott a 1000 terawatt industry, you need YOUR people to get in power and make choices.