You’re getting downvoted because having children is a lifelong commitment, and health problems can come on fast. Raising children while dealing with parental health issues isn’t a choice people make, it’s something that life throws at them. Suggesting otherwise is deeply unempathetic.

I'm not even referring to that. I'm talking about basic stuff that anyone should research before having a kid like "childcare is too expensive" or "I don't get enough sleep"

I thought that was obvious

You should say this out loud to the people in your life who have kids!

The people in my life who have kids had them by accident, none were planning for it to actually happen.

You should do some basic research yourself. Childcare is too expensive for almost everyone. Is your idea that only the relatively wealthy should have children? You're not worried about the consequences of a .03 fertility rate?

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/child-care-expenses...

I think the solution is to make childcare affordable with government intervention. But that's not going to happen if people keep having kids. There needs to be an actual demographic crisis

That still seems to be the case, though. The AI is for user-driven modifications to the recipe, like substitutions.

I’m not sure I would trust AI modifications myself, or how I feel about the feature, but it sounds like the base recipes are still human-tested.

This isn't reddit. Please don't post cynical fantasies.

They’re in all likelihood right though.

I believe they’re saying that property taxes are making up for a gap in funding caused by lowered federal taxes. It’s not that property taxes are federal, it’s that lowering taxes in one area requires them to be raised in another, in order to achieve the same level of services.

> lowering taxes in one area requires them to be raised in another, in order to achieve the same level of services.

But where has that actually occurred?

But this is crazy! Property taxes have been around since the 1800s and are used today to fund local spending, the kind of stuff that the federal government is either averse to or constitutionally barred from.

The federal government wasn't spending money on schools and other services when the tax brackets were that high. That money was going to the military. Social security and Medicare/Medicaid came later, after income taxes had been reduced.

If we want to reform the federal tax system to make it more fair, there is one particularly low-hanging fruit that any politician with a brain avoids like the plague: end the separate treatment of capital gains from income. Bezos sells billions of stock each year and pays a little under 20% on all of it. The rich don't need to engage in tax evasion schemes, the system is already incredibly friendly to income from capital over income from labor.

This sort of cynical catastrophizing isn’t really helpful. If you have a concrete example that applies to this situation, please share it, instead of gesturing vaguely in the direction of “government bad.” (Buildings in prime locations aren’t equivalent.)

>This sort of cynical catastrophizing isn’t really helpful. If you have a concrete example that applies to this situation, please share it, instead of gesturing vaguely in the direction of “government bad.” (Buildings in prime locations aren’t equivalent.)

This has nothing to do with government and a lot more than nothing to do with sneering jerks who dismiss the potential for systemic failures and stupidity by handwaving it away as "catastrophizing" enabling the systems to produce exactly those sorts of failures. Any bureaucracy can screw up in the manner I'm describing, insurance, bankers, it's not just government.

Bad outcomes are very, very, very sticky because the people that rise to positions that could undo them don't get there by being disposed to such actions. Some non-standard organization (a bunch of monks who aren't pro RE developers) with a nonstandard situation are high on the list of places these failures will happen. They submit something to some agency and use the wrong words, some dude who doesn't see many of these cross his desk denies it on some grounds and you've just locked in a problem that's gonna cost a lot of money to undo and monasteries aren't typically engaging in the sort of high dollar economic activity where they can just fight through it knowing it'll be paid back later.

I'm not saying that's what happened here but this is exactly the kind of place it could happen.

>(Buildings in prime locations aren’t equivalent.)

There are old mills on the outskirts of town and then there are historic mills on the river on main street.

There are overgrown farmers fields and there are forests with waterfalls in them.

See what I'm getting at?

> But the creator doesn't care because

I’ve always found it annoying when people make declarations like this. You can speak criticize a work without attacking someone’s personality.

A person's intent leads to the quality of a final product.

They should care if it actually has errors.

They should care if it has claude-isms.

But it certaintly seems like they don't care, at this point in time, about those things.

I'll take your feedback on board. But I'm not calling them stupid, or a bad person. I'm saying their goals are not aligned with my idea of a finished product.

or some people don't care about claudeisms as long as it is to the point and correct.

A person's intent can be the problem though, we can criticise that. We're not factory bots here (yet), the community aspect is human in nature not just output focused.

Why do you believe that? The favicons seem like they’re generated by the UI, not the LLM.

On the other hand, I recently asked ChatGPT for some information about a group of people, and the headshots it put with each summary were very clearly not the people it was describing. So hallucinations do still occur even on the latest models, it just seems unlikely that the favicons would be LLM-generated.

3. A massive sustained oil crisis that can no longer be ignored

Your data is way out of date. Renewables, particularly solar+battery, are incredibly attractive from an economic perspective. That’s why the build-out has accelerated so much. It’s not government hippies (I wish—have you seen the state of world politics lately?), it’s cold hard capitalism.

My takeaway was that, just as paper hasn’t been obsolesced, neither will AI obsolete everything.