I’ve started picking up a new language with the help of LLMs (not the only source, but it helps me make flashcards using Leipzig Glossings) and it’s helped me read through math textbooks on my free time much faster/more thoroughly (ambiguous concepts/proofs that used to require a TA or professor for help now I can sort through on my own without having to laboriously cross reference two other textbooks). I also created a prototype app that creates flashcards automatically for a distributed systems book I am currently working through, making concepts stick longer through active recall. I’ll also use LLMs to learn more about the tangental figures in the history books I am reading that I couldn’t have just learned from the book itself and would have been too much of a hassle to look online or in other books.
These are just a few examples of how I use LLMs to learn faster.
LLMs are a tool and I have seen massive gains from them personally
Manhattan is filled with consultant-brained professionals and trust fund babies: I’m not surprised the business selection pressure is thusly catering to the lowest common denominator.
Hopefully Flushing — NYC’s real Chinatown — is far enough away and has enough immigrant clustering to keep its charm.
Chomsky's hierarchy makes sense as a theoretical basis. His theory is poor at describing how people actually learn languages and lazily conjectures preprogrammed language in the human brain to explain phenomena that other mechanisms could more plausibly explain.
However, showing that naive computer models can simulate language is a nice finding, as then, when the "more correct" theory comes along, we can show that the latter can simulate language just as well as Chomsky's theory, while also providing additional psychological explanatory power: implying the new theory is strictly better than the last. Chomsky's hierarchy thus provides a nice benchmark. This is how a lot of contemporary empirical research is done (especially today with neural networks and machine learning), and saying that these benchmarks or previous, imperfect research "is a lie" seems to misunderstand how research fields often develop. Moreover, the video's thesis ignores the value of explaining to students how a field has developed and grown, including by teaching previously imperfect/defunct ideas. Granted, maybe his professors at UPenn did not express clearly how the Chomsky hierarchy is imperfect/defunct, but then the solution is to just have them emphasize that more, not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Property taxes already exist. There is no obvious reason why this particular property tax would be legally problematic.
The tax is also likely politically difficult to counter. Consider how limited in scope these taxes are, how the tax revenue benefits residents who live in NYC through providing more revenue for services without taxing residents at all, and how the only constituent the taxes negatively affects are non-residents (aka it’s non-trivial to argue that these people should even be considered constituents) who benefit from the services the city offers through stable apartment prices that nicely store their wealth yet provide little value in return.
The only rebuttal one could conceive is the value these high-net-worth individuals altruistically provide the city through developing office space and giving jobs to the city is not worth risking, but that is like saying the tail wags the dog. The reason these CEOs go to NYC is because that is where the talent and economic clustering is: if these high-net-worth individuals could get the talent they need to run their firms in Miami and Austin, they would have done so already. They have tried and they have failed up until this point.
Regardless, a claim into the future in such a complex system such as the markets and the judicial system (especially a common law system) always relies on induction which is never going to be deterministic. However, this tax is just another property tax meaning it likely will stand in court. Additionally, given that the opposition has very weak rebuttals against a well-versed counterparty implies the legislature or other political machinery won’t have a strong enough incentive to fight this tax.
>The reason these CEOs go to NYC is because that is where the talent and economic clustering is: if these high-net-worth individuals could get the talent they need to run their firms in Miami and Austin, they would have done so already. They have tried and they have failed up until this point.
This needs to be shouted from the rooftops.
I am from NYC and live in Miami.
I have seen hedge funds try and fail to bring talent down here, and paying talent through the nose to convince them. It has failed, because 1. local private schools won't let Ken Griffin buy his way to the front of the line; and 2. there's no local talent pipelines to recruit from that come even remotely close to what is found in the Northeast, or in the Bay Area.
UM pales in comparison to the fact that almost every Ivy League school is within a 3 hour drive of NYC, not counting other strong school (NYU, NEASC colleges, MIT, etc). FIU or UF isn't even in the same stratosphere.
Taxes pay for the establishment of a strong educational foundation so that even local public schools can send kids to Ivies or top colleges. Taxes pay to keep that going.
Part of the problem is that there are fake “pragmatists” who claim that nothing ever comes from greed or market consolidation, making laymen who can’t mechanistically and empirically think through the markets skeptical of all “pragmatist” claims.
For example, you are right about rent freezes and protection of non-infant industry; however, there were studies showing that ~40% of inflation at the end of Biden’s term was due to “greedflation.” This should not be surprising to anyone who understands that massive consolidation in industry leads to less price competition. Moreover, there were CEOs on shareholder calls bragging how they could get away with price gouging, using inflation as an excuse to justify an order of magnitude more price hikes than inflation justified. We do not need to take their word though, as if inflation was the only cause of inflation, then firm profits should have stayed around the same book ratios, but during the time I discussed firm profits ratios increased dramatically.
So let me make a symmetry argument: why are you so angry at ignorant individuals who throw the baby out with the bath water and dismiss your valid “pragmatist” takes, when you yourself are ignorantly throwing the baby out with the bath water dismissing many valid “greed and consolidation” takes?
> there were studies showing that ~40% of inflation at the end of Biden’s term was due to “greedflation.”
Studies approved by the government show the government is not to blame for the economic situation it created, but the "greedy corporations" are to blame. OK, sure.
>This should not be surprising to anyone who understands that massive consolidation in industry leads to less price competition.
Consolidation which was only possible due to ZIRP era excessive government money printing and lack of anti-monopoly law enforcement, therefore it's the same government being the core issue as I was talking before.
> Moreover, there were CEOs on shareholder calls bragging how they could get away with price gouging, using inflation as an excuse to justify an order of magnitude more price hikes than inflation justified.
So? Of course companies would raise prices if they could. Same how employees would raise their wages, if they could consolidate their bargaining power via unions. Everyone is greedy and self serving when they can get away with it.
The government is the one paid by us who controls and enforces anti monopoly laws. Why didn't they?
>when you yourself are ignorantly throwing the baby out with the bath water dismissing many valid “greed and consolidation” takes?
Because greed is a universal human trait that applies to everyone from employees, to landlords, small business owners, doctors, car dealers, handymen and builders, etc not just corporations. They all want more money than their peers, to get ahead and provide a better future for their offspring, regardless of societal consequences to those below the pecking order.
All the issues you mentioned above, are just secondary order effect from the government's red tape and monetary policies and lack of anti monopoly enforcement. Blaming only the "greedy comparisons" as the root of all evil, is just reductionist scapegoat propaganda that's easily digestible by the simpleton midwits, supported by the government to deflect the societal consequences they're responsible of creating.
No corporation is stronger than the governments. Corporations only operate within the framework of rules created and enforced by the government. Governments control the laws, courts, police, jails and military. They can have the CEOs of the F500 up against the wall and shot for treason or locked up in jail if they wanted to. If F500 rob you and get away with it, then blame your government for enabling them to do it, because ultimately corporations are doing it legally with the approval of your government you pay taxes to.
The reason simpleton midwits always default to blaming the "greedy corporations" for everything is simple: When the government prints zero interest money and devalues your wage and purchasing power, banks and corporations are the smartest and first in line to use that free money for consolidation and stock buybacks, immediately pushing the price of assets up. But ultimately it's the government's fiscal policies enabling this. Corporations are just smarter and faster to taking advantage of the fiscal environment the government cretes. Savvy average people also take advantage of this too, by using that cheap money to go in debt to buy stocks and property to increase their net worth and then have the inflation reduce the value of their debt.
It's the working class who has no assets that gets left behind, but again, that's caused by the government devaluing their labor via money printing, not the corporations. Corporations are better and navigating the environment the government creates because they hire smart savvy well educated specialists to exploit this environment legally, whereas average people are too stupid to know how the system works, they just blame corporations and the rich.
Don't believe me? Just Google it, ChatGPT it, Gemini it, Grok it etc, they'll tell you the same thing I did.
“Pragmatists” (but really anti-pragmatist) like you always find creative ways to bring the blame back to government but then don’t take the next step of blaming the private interests that crafted those government policies.
Effectively, I could make a symmetrical argument and every time you blame the government, I can blame the private interests that primary influence government — especially since citizens united but even before then. Obviously this tactical trick you and other “pragmatists” rely on is therefore fallacious as it leads to a contradiction when you apply it evenhandedly.
I have respect for many libertarians but you are not one of them.
> I can blame the private interests that primary influence government
You always manage to say nothing of value, just accusations.
>I have respect for many libertarians but you are not one of them.
I'm not looking for your respect since you never once argued in good faith in this thread, you added no arguments to prove me wrong, just accusation in quotes. Ignore the truth, keep your head buried in the sand.
You can succeed at that level while staying a moral person, but it’s a much tighter rope to walk. The ones wise enough to be able to walk such a tight line are also wise enough to recognize that the reward for all the effort is sour grapes.
These are just a few examples of how I use LLMs to learn faster.
LLMs are a tool and I have seen massive gains from them personally
reply