HackerLangs
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

turtlesdown11

268 karmajoined 7 ปีที่แล้ว

comments

turtlesdown11
·เมื่อวานซืน·discuss
I'd encourage you to educate yourself.

Analysis of previous tariffs have found they cost a ton, drive prices up, and increase corporate profits.

The 2018 Trump washing machine tariff raised prices not just for washers but also dryers (12%), and cost $820,000 per job onshored.

A 2012 chinese tire tariff cost $900,000 per job onshored.

It's terrible business.

https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20190611
turtlesdown11
·13 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
The first Trump term tariffs on washing machines was studied, it resulted in jobs that cost ~820k each in higher prices to the consumer.

The important takeaway is not only did the consumer pay more, but corporate profits rose.

https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_201961-1....
turtlesdown11
·13 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
Personally, I think the takeaway is to not be a terrible human being wielding enormous power, but sure, the main problem is letting people learn more about how terrible of a person you are.
turtlesdown11
·23 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
and we've already moved on to the next snake oil - letting LLMs teach our kids!
turtlesdown11
·24 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
... you could just sell $10b in the bloated stock, and still have $50b of bloated stock to sell
turtlesdown11
·24 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
> daily mobile users down 15% year-over-year

So just to be clear, down 15% YoY is not "more or less the same or higher activity"

the platform is overwhelmingly bots, so those "users" are likely in a server farm somewhere

https://techcrunch.com/2025/07/10/as-x-loses-its-ceo-daily-u...

Also, they reported a 60% drop in advertising revenue from 2021-2026... yikes
turtlesdown11
·24 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
revenue ≠ future cashflows
turtlesdown11
·26 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
This is crackpot stuff - there's no scientific evidence of any of this, it's pure grifting. The individual cited above has a phd in educational psychology and runs a pseudoscience "institute"
turtlesdown11
·26 วันที่ผ่านมา·discuss
> (The gp's comment is an example of how chatbots hallucinate because they train on the text of people unintentionally hallucinating.)

We're now applying LLM anthromorphism back on people...sigh
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
That's pretty sad, because I was making the same point you still lack the rigor to comprehend... ah well
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
its funny bc anyone can just look at your submitted ads
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
Is it also not the tool's fault that cops keep using it to stalk people?

https://www.404media.co/cops-keep-getting-arrested-for-using...
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
Could you explain your analogy here, what does a moat have to do with a harness?
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
as I posted elsewhere, a tool that requires perfect human oversight to avoid harming innocent people is a problem
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
> They are even terrible at F1, having not one a title since 2008, despite having some of the best drivers racing for them

zero relevance to this discussion (but unsurprising you conflate), and if you don't understand F1 is a marketing exercise that Ferrari wins, I don't know what to tell you

> Would you call Rolex an innovative brand

Yes I would, the deep sea dweller was a stroke of genius, as was the Tudor renaissance, they are deeply connected to their customer base and innovate for their customers.

You seem unable to understand that for the market of demand that Ferrari and Rolex seek, they innovate perfectly. They innovate for the pool of customers, not for you or the public. They've been rewarded richly by creating new vehicles that their customers demand.

Again, you've provided zero evidence of your fact-free claims, no need to respond further

maybe learn the markets you're commenting on? also try learning what innovation means, it doesn't mean coming up with an imbecilic vehicle like the cyberdumpster
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
A tool that requires perfect human oversight to avoid harming innocent people is a problem
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
right, its the cops who decide "criminal culpability" all Flock did was lead them to the wrong person...poor innocent Flock
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
> long Gamestop 2019

So he really relies on zero fundamental analysis these days
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
Next time just go to the store, buy some items and ask them to split the charge between two payment methods, run the 4.84 then the remainder on another payment method, problem solved.
turtlesdown11
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
So the company that earns more per vehicle sold isn't "innovative". How do they command their deliberate high sales prices then? Magic? Why doesn't every car maker have a similar strategy? Why doesn't Porsche, Aston Martin, etc have the same success?

Ferrari is innovative and their brand is vibrant. As evidenced by their extreme success.

If you want to argue in the alternative, try submitting facts or evidence.