This is truly the biggest radical 180 in the shortest amount of time ever at any level even 5% of this.

and trump is playing into it whether he is intentional about it or not.

CascadiaAg said:

---

and trump is playing into it whether he is intentional about it or not.

---

At this point I wouldn't be surprised. Nothing shocks me anymore.

We have a former Congressman named Weiner who got busted for sending dick pics to random women. And that is no big deal compared to the **** we see nowadays.

Thanks staff for updating my thread title for clarity. Truly my bad.

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

go to about the 15th minute...David Friedberg nails it. This is Copilot's summary of his take.

Quote:

---

Here's a succinct, precise summary of David Friedberg's comments about historical failures of government oversight:

Friedberg's core argument
Friedberg says history shows governments often misjudge emerging risks, respond with fear-driven overreach, and end up causing large, long-term societal harm. He frames today's AI "doomerism" as another cycle of this same pattern.

Key historical failures he cites

• Climate policy (Al Gore / IPCC forecasts) He argues that dire climate predictions used to justify sweeping policy actions were later shown to rely on incorrect assumptions.
• COVID-era government response (Fauci / lockdowns) He says officials claimed COVID "would kill us all," leading to extreme lockdowns, massive government spending, and downstream consequences like inflation and spiraling national debt.
• Nuclear energy panic (Three Mile Island) After the accident, the U.S. reacted hysterically, effectively halting nuclear development. Meanwhile, France and China advanced, leaving the U.S. with far higher nuclear costs and lost technological leadership.

The pattern he's highlighting
Friedberg argues these episodes share a common structure:
[ol]

Experts declare an existential threat.

Government centralizes power to "protect" the public.

Fear-based policy becomes the default social narrative.

The resulting restrictions cause more harm than the underlying risk.

[/ol]
He says this same dynamic is now being used to justify centralized control of AI, including potential bans on open-source models.

His bottom line
Friedberg believes AI doomerism is another historical panic, and that empowering government to "control" AI will repeat past mistakesstifling innovation, concentrating power, and leaving the U.S. vulnerable while other nations advance.

If you want, I can also extract direct quotes, contrast his view with Sachs and Chamath, or summarize the entire segment more broadly.

---

Muy said:

---

This is truly the biggest radical 180 in the shortest amount of time ever at any level even 5% of this.

---

Agree with this. I'm just not convinced the motive yet.

fullback44 said:

---

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

---

Usually by the time something is super hot, it's time to get the other way.

fullback44 said:

---

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

---

Ignore it. Your life will be fine without any of this drama.

Ducks4brkfast said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

---

Throw some money from every paycheck into the S&P for 45 years and retire at 65. That formula hasn't changed.

---

Exactly this. Never stop investing. That is what worked for me.
Do index funds so you don't have to pick winners and losers. I don't GAF if NVidia wins or loses, I know there will be another winner and I will be in on it.

fullback44 said:

---

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

---

Go on with your life like normal? Don't worry about the things you can't control has always been great advice.

Muy said:

---

Usually by the time something is super hot, it's time to get the other way.

---

also applies to women.

Great advice guys…. I'll just keep doing my normal investments.. I did not invest in any AI stuff.

All of these tech CEOs are psychopathic liars.

The reality is these LLM companies are losing tons of money and may go bankrupt. Tech companies are net negative cash flow for the first time in decades with their AI build outs. LLMs can't reason or birth AGI just by layering them or multiplying the number of agents.

Go on Youtube and listen to Cal Newport and Ed Zitron to get the counter argument to the AI-doomer tech bros.

Internet of Bugs and Pivot to AI are also fun channels to learn about the realities vs myths of the AI industry.

Internet of Bugs recently started a podcast with a philosopher and they spend a lot of time talking about the nature of intelligence

Muy said:

---

This whole "we have to stop AI and data centers" movement is (to me at this point) just proof that all of us are being manipulated so that the real people in charge of globalism can control the stock market and shorted AI companies well before this movement started.

---

And we're always stupid enough to fall for it. Guarenteed the people against data centers have no idea what they actually do and what they mean to the culture and our country.

ts5641 said:

---

Muy said:

---

This whole "we have to stop AI and data centers" movement is (to me at this point) just proof that all of us are being manipulated so that the real people in charge of globalism can control the stock market and shorted AI companies well before this movement started.

---

And we're always stupid enough to fall for it. Guarenteed the people against data centers have no idea what they actually do and what they mean to the culture and our country.

---

They are also stuck on 10 year old technology that hardly applies to current construction and operations. But facebook sez...

OP is 100% right! We are manipulated and then money and power is extracted from us by the manipulators on CNBC and other networks and the Federal Government. The worst of them is George Soros.

All of us can identify with the Global Warming scam, but when Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta et al needed lots of power for their data centers to win the AI race and make the most money, Global Warming disappeared!!! And Bezos and Zuckerberg boat around in personnel yachts 3 football fields long. And Al Core and Obama have multiple mansions by the sea!!! Liars and manipulators all!!

And basically the crooks running the federal government just steal our money and future while they destroy the value of the dollar!

Honestly, at this point, I think Americans would be better off with no federal gov. and just enough income tax to service the debt. Washington DC isn't the solution to the problem, they are the problem..

Here's my $0.02 that I read a couple of days ago.

These companies can contain/limit AI right now if they want. No government needed.

What they are doing by asking the government to intervene is to use their giant lobbying slush funds to create a restricted, regulated market dynamic in which only these big players have the funds to play in. They're trying to kill competition from startups and disruptors by eliminating them through government regulation.

Sounds very plausible and this line of thinking really needs some more mainstream exposure.

I was pleasantly surprised to hear Anne-Marie Hodern ask the question this morning on Bloomberg, " why can't these companies just regulate themselves now?" Unfortunately, I was unable to hear the rest of the discussion, but I'm glad it got out there.

Well, the Founders intended the Federal government to be small and limited. A bit ironic how bad things have gotten since the nation abandoned that principle.

fullback44 said:

---

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

---

They will be asked to throw out our form of government in favor of a world government. The average person will be fearmongered into doing so. It won't start out that way. As Vance says this is a Trojan Horse.

First it will be agreements between governments to regulate AI. Then cross-country agencies enforcing it. Then as AI becomes more and more powerful, replacing more and more of the workforce these cross-country agencies will have enormous control over the world. There's your world government.

There is no doubt that this is being played by both sides like ANY topic nowadays -- It keeps people divided.

As someone that is using AI all the time and sees how powerful it is, I also know it can be extremely dangerous eventually.

That being said, we are in a race to AGI no matter what. Will that AGI decided to make all bank accounts Zero one random morning? Will it cause some country to panic and attack another out of fear? The "AI kills us all" doesn't necessarily have to be AI doing the work.......

What kind of chaos can I dream up that AI might decide to use against us one day? I promise you, it will dream up something so elaborate that humans could never see it coming.

Another article on these slimy AI CEOs. I even saw an 80 year old women in my team say all our work was useless since we are all going to die pretty soon anyway.

One chart reveals how much Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman have scared people about AI
https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/article/one-chart-reveals-how-much-anthropic-ceo-dario-amodei-and-openai-ceo-sam-altman-have-scared-people-about-ai-094302719.html

Quote:

---

Billionaire AI bosses have done a great job of getting their point across to the general public on the possible future risks of letting the increasingly powerful technology run amok.
AI searches on Google this year have shifted from SaaSpocalypse (AI would dismantle software-as-a-service companies) to job apocalypse to AI extinction, a Deutsche Bank strategist pointed out in a new note.

---

Quote:

---

Anthropic (ANTH.PVT) CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI (OPAI.PVT) CEO Sam Altman have managed to scare investors and the average person about the powerful technology they created and have pushed their teams to supercharge it.
"Over the last few months, I have become convinced that fully addressing the risks requires even more prudence not just investing in risk prevention, but pacing the rate of capabilities advancement so that risk prevention has time to keep up," Amodei stated in a 3,800-word essay on Saturday. "We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of A.I. models. Progress will still seem fast, and we must make wise use of the time we gain."

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

go to about the 15th minute...David Friedberg nails it. This is Copilot's summary of his take.

Quote:

---

Here's a succinct, precise summary of David Friedberg's comments about historical failures of government oversight:

Friedberg's core argument
Friedberg says history shows governments often misjudge emerging risks, respond with fear-driven overreach, and end up causing large, long-term societal harm. He frames today's AI "doomerism" as another cycle of this same pattern.

Key historical failures he cites

• Climate policy (Al Gore / IPCC forecasts) He argues that dire climate predictions used to justify sweeping policy actions were later shown to rely on incorrect assumptions.
• COVID-era government response (Fauci / lockdowns) He says officials claimed COVID "would kill us all," leading to extreme lockdowns, massive government spending, and downstream consequences like inflation and spiraling national debt.
• Nuclear energy panic (Three Mile Island) After the accident, the U.S. reacted hysterically, effectively halting nuclear development. Meanwhile, France and China advanced, leaving the U.S. with far higher nuclear costs and lost technological leadership.

The pattern he's highlighting
Friedberg argues these episodes share a common structure:
[ol]

Experts declare an existential threat.

Government centralizes power to "protect" the public.

Fear-based policy becomes the default social narrative.

The resulting restrictions cause more harm than the underlying risk.

[/ol]
He says this same dynamic is now being used to justify centralized control of AI, including potential bans on open-source models.

His bottom line
Friedberg believes AI doomerism is another historical panic, and that empowering government to "control" AI will repeat past mistakesstifling innovation, concentrating power, and leaving the U.S. vulnerable while other nations advance.

If you want, I can also extract direct quotes, contrast his view with Sachs and Chamath, or summarize the entire segment more broadly.

---

---

A slightly different take worth considering. The first movers want to utilize the government to protect them from competition:

https://www.zerohedge.com/ai/ai-leaders-cunning-plan-exposed

Two birds, one stone: 'Fearmaxxing so The Feds rescue us' blocks-out startup competitors (regulatory cost, training limits, innovation squeezed) and implicitly blocking 'open-source' models ('unregulated' but far cheaper total cost of ownership wrecks the big boys' exponential revenue projections).
Put more bluntly, it is the perfect moat to preach to investors as their trillion-dollar IPOs loom.


As Adam Sharp concluded, there may need to be some sort of regulation around AI at some point. But we must not let the leaders of this industry dictate the rules. There are countless examples of why this is a horrible idea... Any AI regulation needs to allow startups to compete with the big boys. It needs to allow the use of open-source models, so small companies aren't stuck paying gobs of money to an oligopoly...

Yes, I already said that.....just not nearly as well with links and such.

fullback44 said:

---

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

---

Buckle up for the stock market crash? JK, I Honestly haven't the slightest clue. I'm just going to keep living my life, but also stacking G&A in case SHTF at some pt.

Hardcore Greg said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

So what is the normal person who doesn't pay much attention to AI or any of this supposed to do?

---

Buckle up for the stock market crash? JK, I Honestly haven't the slightest clue. I'm just going to keep living my life, but also stacking G&A in case SHTF at some pt.

---

I've taken out 2 years living expenses in cash.
The rest is in the market. So I am good riding any crash through.
No debt. Zero.


It took me a LOOONG TIME to get here though.

this is all just like COVID, a big power play using doomsday scenarios

It's also the current AI companies trying to get grandfathered into any prohibitive laws they want enacted, just so they lock in their part of the market and limit competition.