But we’ve fixed the life expectancy since then. Nowadays cities actually have higher life expectancy.

A big portion of that is the greatly restricted access to healthcare. Federal law changes caused a large number of rural hospitals and other medical facilities to shut down over the last decade. This delayed access to diagnostic care, and slowed down golden hour treatment have greatly impacted average age of death for rural communities.

Another way to look at it: Congress has demanded document preservation about their exports to China. As of now, there’s a very public justification for that oversight, not just some revenue and tariff shenanigans.

These programs are pitched along with statistics, so maybe it’s on us to demand the methods of those statistics continue with the program.

What sentiment does rebeltechalliance have about AI? It barely mentions it, and is clearly focused on the modes of mass surveillance.

To that end, there are two different discussions:

Does AI technology itself facilitate mass surveillance, any more than smartphone adoption has?

Does the financing structure of data centers facilitate mass surveillance; more than it facilitates advancements in AI?

They started originally to help people move away from Big Tech, but they do say early on the homepage:

> And now AI is making all that much worse...

As for your questions, I agree those are different and related discussions that I'm not looking to bring here, as I'm not sure it'll be necessarily productive, but I'm happy to be proven wrong!

I think of these as independent:

Advances in small models, on-device. This feels closest to your question.

The rare CEO who is maybe bearish on AI, but preparing for a bubble to burst. Asset managers, for instance. Paid to be early, but also to survive being early.

The actual purpose of hyperscalar data centers. Are they all guilty of advancing some mass surveillance? Or do we call it model training, which is only sometimes pointed at mass surveillance?

Nearing 10 years since last modification.

Well put. Comparing the CFTC and the SEC, we see equities enjoying some consumer protection. How would you answer your own question? Do under-defined bets on prediction markets necessitate a third regulator?

The formula came from an 18th century America, in which some states had relatively high voter participation, and others were slave colonies. The formula for electors was simply a compromise which picked 3/5 as the factor for counting a slaveowners extra representation.

The disenfranchisement argument would probably reach the Supreme Court, along with the Compact Clause argument.

No, it’s more like: who is lying, Jared Kushner or Vanity Fair? The stakes are large for both, but we’re better off compared to how the regime prefers to suppress that.

Well the 2017 prize (one year before) was for the Panama papers. No dramatic consequences for that, either.