I work in commercial real estate, grew up in San Diego and work in the SoCal market. I am not joking that the MAIN problem is Prop 13, which came into effect 5 years after this video was made.
I deal with these owners EVERY DAY who would rather sit on crappy buildings and land because why not, it costs them nothing. They've owned forever. Literally TODAY I had an offer rejected from a Seller that would have yielded 80 units of affordable housing in an area with $150k median income, delivering completion in 2028-2029.
If I lease out a property to a tenant (apartment, retail, industrial use, whatever) and that tenant is committing an illegal activity on the property. Would the landlord be liable for knowing it? Or not?
"Sorry FBI, the tenant renting my warehouse out to manufacturing cocaine is not my responsibility. I won't do anything about it. You deal with them."
Nope, that's a failure of a duty to act and aiding and abetting a criminal activity if you hace constructive knowledge.
Anthropic measures your usage based on token consumption
We are paying for a certain amount of token consumption
Why then, is this an outsized strain on your system Anthropic?
It's like buying gasoline from Shell, and then Shell's terms of services forcing you to use that gas in a Hummer that does 5 MPG, while everyone else wants to drive any other vehicle.
omg thanks. Went to a bachelor party recently and think I spent like $100 on a pack of 12 balls. Outrageous, I was so pissed I had to do it. And then knocked most of them off course!
So I work in commercial real estate, obviously a large private equity influenced industry. I've worked in REPE and in other capacities.
There's degrees of PE. Some good, fine, and some worse.
Take real estate development. It's probably one of the suckiest businesses to be in. I know 3 developers who have committed suicide because when things go wrong, your entire life collapses (you put up all your assets in order to obtain construction loans). The litigation, brain damage, and risks are enormous. Increasingly, the payoff is awful (due to worsening legislation and NIMBYism and worse market condiditions)
However, private equity in development I think is a good thing. When there are investors willing to put this money at risk, we get much needed construction of housing (see Austin, TX where rents are falling off a cliff due to over building).
Now look at Los Angeles, which new permits are literally almost non-existent because LA is one of the most hostile places for developers. You can't make money in LA, so there's no capital available.
Then you end up with "affordable" housing developers adding the only supply at $600-900k/unit costs vs the market rate developer at $300-600k/unit.
----
On the other hand, "value add" private equity is much more suspicious. It's more cut throat, easier to end up in crony capitalist situations by operating with a "cut expenses, provide less, make big bucks" model. The people in this world are the kind of guys who have never done anything hard with their hands other than gotten a sore thumb from pounding too hard on their keyboards to adjust their excel model ("Mr. The Model is Always Right") too hard all night long.
This is how we end up with old properties who get flipped 4x each being sold with "upside the seller was too stupid to take advantage of" and ending up in situations where tenants get priced out due to private equity seeking infinite growing returns. Oh and by the way, every previous owner did "lipstick on the pig" jobs because why not try to save costs and make your levered IRR 16% instead of 12%? You cannot show that kind of return when you promised 18%... then it'll make it harder to fundraise your next deal!
This isn't to say that "value add" is a dirty business. We certainly need to balance the incentive to modernize and renovate properties. An d developers overbuilding isn't always a good thing.
So its nuanced. I think people need to fairly give credit that there are both good and bad. The capital efficiency is real and produces real world outcomes since there is a strong financial incentive at the end of the door.
But financial incentives sometimes bump up to issues causing harm in real life, which need to be recognized and called out.
I buy into this conspiracy theory, it's genius. It's literally a boiling the frog kind of strategy against users. Eventually, everyone will get too lazy to go through the mental reasoning of judging every increasingly piece of content as "is this AI" as you mentally spend energy trying to find clues.
And over time the AI content will improve enough where it becomes impossible and then the Great AI Swappening will occur.
But they’re literally not free. If it was “war”, with infinite money to throw at destruction of USA AI industry, then why would you be charging and reducing such an outcome
This is awesome. I was looking for exactly this last week. A tool I could prompt AI to come up with an architecture and then be able to pick up manually, but visually not editing the code.
Being able to express a workflow or diagram and then have AI implement would be awesome to have a tight loop.
Anyone know when to expect the M5 Pros? I am on a base 16gb M1 and struggling hard in daily workloads. I am often running at 20gb of swap memory usage.
I don't really use local LLMs but think 32GB RAM would be good for me... but I am so ready to upgrade but trying to figure out how much longer we need to wait.
Who at Waymo can I speak to about using Waymo’s as an affordable housing solution? I work in commercial real estate and have a handful of affordable projects I am involved in and believe this to be a very interesting solution no one is talking about.
I work in commercial real estate, mostly in the apartment industry. I'm about as YIMBY as they come. AirBnBs and short term rentals are terrible for housing costs. STRs incrementally take supply of housing off the market where the owner can received the same or more income by renting at 1/2 or 1/3 the occupancy of a long-term tenant. Some people have mentioned housing was "pre-screwed" or zoning is the issue, but this actually is a big contributing factor to higher costs.
With STRs, an investor can pay a significant amount more than a 2nd home investor, whom that 2nd home investor could pay more than a homeowner.
STRs can be a great investment for someone, but it comes at the expense of housing costs in the area.
I love staying in cool AirBnBs, but it's the reality.
Fortunately, AirBnB launched a new product where they revenue-share with apartment landlords where tenants can Airbnb their apartments out. This is a much less distorting to the market, and even can be good for the housing market if the financial community can rely on this extra income.
If more buildings can pencil (due to high construction costs) because there's now a 10% increase in revenue from Airbnb apartment STRs, and lenders/investors are comfortable with this, then that's a good thing.
I deal with these owners EVERY DAY who would rather sit on crappy buildings and land because why not, it costs them nothing. They've owned forever. Literally TODAY I had an offer rejected from a Seller that would have yielded 80 units of affordable housing in an area with $150k median income, delivering completion in 2028-2029.