There is a very strange totally coincidental correlation where if you are smart and NOT trying to raise money for an AI start-up, you think AGI is far away, and if you are smart and actively raising money for an AI start-up, then AGI is right around the corner. One of those odd coincidences of modern life
Mind you, such a correlation can be reasonable—the Yesses work for something because they believe it, while the Noes don’t because they don’t. (In this instance, I’m firmly a No, and I don’t say such a correlation is reasonable, due to the corrupting influence of money plus hype sweeping people along, which I think are much more common. But there will still be at least some that are True Believers, and it does make sense that they would then try to raise money to achieve their vision.)
True! But the launchd style of socket activation integrating into the dependency graph of service startup is what's novel and alleviates some significant challenges to concurrent starting of interdependent services...
It's easy when you spend other people's money to buy something, extract value from the purchased company, and then have the company declare backruptcy.
The other people give you their money voluntarily, and you buy the company fair and square from the previous owners. Seems all legit to me, and I still don't see where the ravaging comes in?
Depends on your view of companies. If you believe they exist solely to enrich their owners, then your above statement is reasonable. If you believe they're economic engines which should gainfully employ people, then stripping away assets with an eye towards ultimately declaring bankruptcy (and/or dissolving the company) is pillaging.
As a social function, companies as an _institution_ are there to benefit lots of people (like owners, employees, customers, investors, etc).
But individual _companies_ are under the controls of their owners (modulo applicable laws). That's because we empirically figured out that this model works well, and also because we want to incentivize people to start and run companies in the first place.
Also keep in mind that in some sense companies are just legal shells. If you strip assets like eg machine tools, in order to make money you actually need to sell them. But if you do that, someone else has them to use them. They don't just disappear.
Yet another thing: not all companies should be kept around. It's good for less inefficient companies to go bankrupt, and for people to change jobs. (Especially as long as the overall unemployment rate is low enough. But you don't keep that rate low by making it harder to fire or harder to 'pillage' companies. Just the opposite, you get more job creation the easier you make it for people to benefit from creating companies and jobs.)
Due to the ongoing events in the eastern Europe area, there's quite a lot of people who might have energy they'd like to sell/use for something, but can't necessarily sell it to whom they might like to.
If there's a way they can sell it to the Bitcoiners, even at a price they might not like to, they might do that.
