thinking aloud here - so it seems like 2 things are taken as intuitive here:
a) energy is conserved in any frame of reference.
b) energy can vary in 2 frame of references.
but then what it feels like is that when you reference the energy as mE(v), the v is actually not the only variable, and it will be more like mE(v, v_moving_reference)?
so we also must take intuitive that c) E(v, v_moving_reference) == E(v - v_moving_reference)
it's not regulatory capture, because they are not regulating what customers can use - it's limiting what some companies can serve. it's way less impactful to the market as a whole.
u seem to be the only one who used it here - how did it compare to opus and gpt5.5? in theory it should be at least on par if not better at times right.
don't agree with your logic at all - agree with your conclusion.
your logic is deeply flawed - a) you've to justify mediocre engineers not been necessary, the mechanism they are pushed out by LLM matters. b) relative ranking is useless - it's the difference between absolute ability and that is close for say top 50% most likely. This might mean half of us will lose jobs, and half see compensation pressured but it's not as certain as your argument make it out to be.