Mind you there's a hefty tax surcharge on Diesel that could easily be lowered if the trucking economy was that important to states like California. Two years ago Diesel was at 8$ when it was 4 everywhere else, last year 9$, 5-6 in most other states. Now 10$? Haven't been there lately but it's still at 6 in MO/AR. It's not the oil price that's the problem with the Diesel price.

F peoples health and the environment. We need profits now! No incentive to get off diesel, just lower the price!

> vote for getting the subsidized funds to where you actually send your kids

…which is what happens today with public schools. Your case only makes sense if you’re sending your kid to private school and would like public funds to help pay for it.

School vouchers allow richer families to go to private school while preventing lower income folks from doing so, exacerbating problems with educational achievement.

School vouchers are the only fair way to do schooling. Rich people paying for more expensive things isn’t bad. They just shouldn’t be forced to pay for the more expensive thing that they use as well as the less expensive thing they don’t use

Surely that depends entirely on your definition of the word “fair”. Is it fair that a lower income child is deprived of an opportunity to improve their life through education because their parents can’t afford it?

Ultimately the debate here is “should richer people have to contribute back to society to help the lives of the poorer people”? Of course you can say no to that. But the majority of society doesn’t agree.

At least in America aren’t school taxes extremely local? I’m not sure what you are suggesting actually happens, or at least you are exaggerating quite a bit.

Poor people typically don’t live in the same neighborhoods as wealthy people in America. Wealthy neighborhood public schools tend to have lavish facilities from the tax base, so it’s more like “wealthy guy X doesn’t want to pay for the very fancy facilities he isn’t even using”, not “wealthy guy X doesn’t want to pay to send his poor neighbor’s kid to school at all”.

Where I live all the districts in the metro area pool the money and divide it so the poor student is worth just as much as the rich student in a different district. (Assuming you don't go to a private school)

There are still schools rated much worse than others.

One of the best things about America is how highschools mix children from all backgrounds.

In my country your life is already decided at age 12- go to the wrong school and it's over.

Don't worry, they can afford it. They're rich right?

I mean they may not use their local library or parks either, but they ain't getting a refund for that.

I would like a refund on all public services I don't use. My house didn't burn down yesterday -- where's my fire department refund check?

I'm happy to offer to one. However check with your insurance company as they will have to pay put a much high rate for services should your house burn. This case who subscribe yearly to fire protection get a much better deal than those who don't.

If you opt out and want your house to burn that is only fine so long as you ensure the fire doesn't spread, if there is signs it might spread out have to pay inflated rates for fire service to protect the other houses that you can't burn down with yours.

“School choice” is just marketing language to disguise “funneling general tax dollars into private schools so wealthy people don’t have to pay for the privilege.”

Wealthy people don't want more students going to their children's schools. School choice is about funneling public funds to evangelical (aka extremist) Christian churches.

I disagree

Co-Authored By: Haiku 4.5

Elasticity 0.8-2.2 means there are/were cases (<1) where an increase of H2b would mean lost 20% US jobs per additional visa or do I read that wrong? I didn't read anything about average or median elasticity or how those figures are ranged in the article.

Yes, it would be helpful to have more guidance on how to interpret estimates of "elasticity".

It's not that it doesn't make sense, you just said it, they regret - well maybe not regret since they'd never made it without, but they now want to reverse a decision they feel needs to be overhauled. I always thought they'll replace Linux with Fuchsia but that hasn't happened and it's not like they couldn't have done it.

Maybe the victor will be whoever doesn't fall into the trap of believing that a next word predictor optimized through RLHF to sound convincing to the average human [1] is in any way intelligent, and restructuring their entire economy and military around doing whatever the magic oracle machine says.

If the entire "free world" goes all-in, the history books will likely be written by Iran, Russia and North Korea.

[1] possibly to the point of presenting a superstimulus that bypasses any facilities for critical thinking. This might be easier to solve than many other problems that are used for evaluating A"I" performance, and very likely doesn't require genuine intelligence, just brute-force search + evolution

AI's power and water requirements are at odds with what is required to address climate change, so it really isn't a given that it's either inevitable or a permanent addition to society.

Water? What’s that got to do with anything?

Might want to look into it.

I admire your optimism. The only thing I see stopping AI is widespread nuclear war, or if we’re lucky widespread destruction of the electric grid leading to a collapse in gas’s and oil supply for only a billion or two dead.

You're deeply mistaken if you think my view on AI is rooted in optimism.

You seem to be implying that mankind will decide to scale back AI in favour of tackling climate change, or that it won’t happen but AI will not destroy at least the economy which powers AI long before unrecoverable climate change will occur.

If AI kills us all, doesn’t matter about climate change - some species will adapt and thrive, some will die out

If AI destroys jobs, there will be no demand for energy so oil will no longer be burnt at the scale currently causing so much problem

Your view seems to be AI will continue in approximately the current state for the next 20 years? I don’t see how that happens. Best case scenario to me is a 2001/2008/2020 style crash coupled with an actual limit to LLM capacity so countries pesss exposed to capitalist systems will draw back from current AI for a few decades.

Or am I missing something? How do you foresee the next 20 years?

> If AI destroys jobs, there will be no demand for energy

Quite the leap there. Are you imagining billions dying off with no food and no further consumption while the AI overlords cruise about in their yachts between bunkers while zooming into Davos to cosplay as Davros and chuckle about the fate of the poors?

That aside, the earth land / sea layer is still lagging in its reaction the gigatonnes of CO2 already aloft .. which isn't going to magically disappear for some generations.

Even if AI destroys jobs there will still be fossil fuel consumption adding to the CO2 already there.

> Are you imagining billions dying off with food and no further consumption while the AI overlords cruise about in their yachts between bunkers while zooming into Davos to cosplay as Davros and chuckle about the fate of the poors?

Well that’s certainly one scenario. And that scenario would decimate co2 emissions. Sure things will continue to get worse, but as most of humanity will be dead they won’t be concerned.

So your view of billions not dying is somewhat optimistic for the future

My view is more local than global - and we're all in for another few millennia, one way or another.

Interesting project. How does it compare to GSD (opengsd.net)? Just from the command set it seems a lot lighter but also less expressive.

GSD is quite OK but very token hungry (~4x but it buys traceability and has quite a powerful autonomous mode) I use gsd-meta-manager to manage multiple GSD projects in parallel without having to use a skill to query each project individually to see where they're at. Does openspec have something like that too?

You'd have to make it a positive statement to give it more weight since negatives leave too many options open. Instead of "don't..." try "as far as possible, always try to reinforce sentences and assumptions rather than contradicting them" - worth a try. Worst case you just get more reinforcement gibberish before it plugs back into the contradictions but that's just a guess.

Indeed but it will use the same language when talking to subagents so humans are no different to LLMs in Claude's world view (model). One trait that I've seen more with the newer 5er model series is ", but it's actually worse..." or "I said to do this and it did that instead but it was right and I was wrong." - so I assume that a larger part of what they call thinking complexity is (not to much surprise) inherently related to questioning incoming assumptions.