China is playing the long game. They can go spend a trillion bucks and hire/steal the tech and they could destroy Taiwan's competitive advantage, and they could just economically crush them.
People go where the money is. It is capitalism. SV is where the money is so people are going to go there. Same as wall street before it. You want the best talent you pay the most money. With Europe paying so little compared to the US I don't know if Crotia or anywhere in europe will be a real tech hotbed.
People have different priorities than just money.
I for one would never move to SV even if I get 3 times the salary there.
There are a lot of other factors that make life great than just money.
Also when those very rich people start buying properties/coast/islands from people who "had different priorities" in couple of decades, the latter will have to rethink their strategy of letting go and not developing their biggest talents. But its going to be too late for that by then.
NN/ai concepts have been around for a while. It is just computers had not been fast enough to make it practical. It was also harder to get capital back then. Those guys put the silicon in silicon valley.
If robots are doing all the work how will people make money to buy the stuff the robots make? Is Jeff Bezos going to own the whole world or are we going to have another French revolution?
We should really endeavor to build collectively owned institutions that can purchase and operate the robots (and physical space) we depend on.
EDIT: Imagine the "credit unions" I mention in the following linked comment, but holding homes and manufacturing space to be used by members.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27860696
In general its a dirty process. There are a lot of toxic chemicals involved. People might get sick. Margins aren't as good as software and its very capital intensive so investors would rather invest in software. Lots of booms and bust in the semiconductor industry.
That's a web blocking software using inflated, completely unsourced numbers to sell a product. The Forbes article I linked called out this exact thing:
>Web filtering companies used to always release competing figures on the number of porn sites they blocked, but these numbers were almost certainly boosted to get sensationalist headlines and to seem competitive with other filtering companies that filtered "less" adult sites. For example, N2H2 claimed there were 260 millionpornsites (ed. correction: pages) --haha, one for every American citizen! :) Conservative groups are always coming up with porn figures that are crazy high, too, especially with regard to children's exposure to porn.
That says 35% of downloads, which might mean as you say. But it may also be using the word as it is commonly used by the general public; referring specifically to browsers placing a file in the user's '~/Downloads' directory. That page doesn't seem to clarify. It's unclear if 'streaming' is counted as 'downloading.'
I guess you are right, but to me even streaming videos are downloaded to your computer. I also have seen the 30% number of other sites so I thought it looked reasonable.
A vast majority of advisors (90%) aren't going to beat an index fund. You are just giving money away money by hiring an advisors.
Unless you want to pull offshore tax shelters or Real estate depreciation schemes its not super complicated to do taxes. Invest long-term and you are getting capital gains tax.
Interestingly, some well-intentioned “ban the box” policies backfired in terms of racial justice in hiring. These campaigns managed to outlaw the “are you a felon?” question on job applications in an attempt to make it easier for felons, many of whom belong to racial minorities, to get a fair shot at employment based on their skills. Unfortunately this caused employers to hire even fewer members of those minority groups. Apparently without the box, employers see minority hires as an unacceptable risk.
If you forbid direct measurement of something, then people will use proxies, which is generally harmful to everyone involved.
If you want to minimize the extent to which people use demographics as a proxy for qualities they want to select for, then make it as cheap and reliable as possible to measure those qualities directly.
That only ends when you make it easier to figure out whether someone is going to actually harm your business in the future, rather than finding out whether they have ever been a felon.
