Are your subsequent inventions better than the art they create?
Do we really need double the widgets?
I mean, the top post on this site yesterday was a self-balancing cube someone invented. This is precisely the community that should understand that inventions for inventions’ sake aren’t necessarily improving anything.
Bing Copilot can’t even answer simple questions about businesses in a particular city without lying. When confronted, it will apologize and then repeat the same text verbatim.
The logarithmic decay could be more about more and more people hitting their satisfaction level, than about what the wealth can purchase. In other words, very few people actually want to be billionaires.
I’d argue that even declaring ‘c’ is against the spirit though. To say nothing of the eldritch shadow cast there (no disrespect, I think we’re both enjoying playing around here)
I would have paid double my taxes over my career if the US would spend it on elevating the poor. But asking me to not retire, to give away my savings to very few people? What, that’s not ethical.
What if I made a lot, but spend very little? Shouldn’t that weigh in, if your issue is consumption level?
What if in my early retirement, I go around lifting people up in non-monetary ways?
What if my job earned me a lot of money but was ultimately doing something I found socially harmful? I should continue working to the detriment of my mental health and against my principles?
We can elevate the poorest and decrease the amount of work the median/average person must do.
My personal pet peeve is how every retirement calculator bakes in an assumption like “you’ll NEED 75% of your current income as living expenses when you retire.”
Like your salary won’t change over your career. Like you’re just an impulse buyer. Like there’s anything but a distant correlation between these numbers.
I think there’s a conspiracy or a (USA) cultural aversion to not working.
Have you written much Prolog?
I was thinking about in Prolog terms and I think it’s the hardest paradigm to avoid the scoping problem in