u/LittleYo

What's the IB?

People still use the cards... I think.

are you a bot?

lol, gj

I think the most likely outcome isn't some sudden economic collapse caused by 30% unemployment. It's an increasingly extreme K-shaped economy.

We've already been moving in that direction for the past 50 years. Asset owners have been accumulating wealth at a vastly different rate than people who primarily depend on selling their labor. AI could put that trend on steroids.

If you own the compute, robots, energy infrastructure, real estate, and equity, you benefit enormously from the productivity explosion. If your main economic asset is your ability to work, you're increasingly competing with machines that can do your job faster and cheaper.

And here's the thing: GDP can keep growing. Corporate profits can reach record highs. Stock markets can keep hitting all-time highs. We could even experience massive deflation in certain goods and services. None of that guarantees that ordinary people will gain any meaningful economic power.

Eventually, governments might redistribute just enough wealth to maintain consumption and social stability. But that's not necessarily some post-scarcity utopia. It could just as easily become a society where the vast majority depend on transfers while a tiny minority owns virtually all productive assets.

The economy doesn't necessarily have to collapse. It could function spectacularly well for the people who own it.

AI wouldn't create this divide. It would simply accelerate a process that's already been underway for decades.

always has been

Because they're researchers. That's what they do. It's like asking a chain-smoker why they don't quit.

The beauty of WSB. Slap three charts, some RSI, Fibonacci levels, and a 40-page PDF on that analysis, and you could easily charge $499 a month for it.

In Poland, you pay 19% capital gains tax on your total net realized gains for the year, not on each individual trade. Profits and losses offset each other, and you can reinvest the full proceeds throughout the year. You only settle the tax when filing your annual return the following year.

But that's exactly my point. You're using an unrealistic scenario where trading offers literally zero upside, only a tax penalty, and then drawing a general conclusion about how difficult it is to beat the market by trading.

And there's another problem with your example: capital gains tax isn't necessarily paid immediately upon selling. You can generally reinvest the full $200 and settle the tax liability later. So your assumption that the trader only has $180 available to reinvest isn't even accurate.

I understand what you're trying to illustrate, but it's a completely unrealistic scenario. Why would anyone sell a stock just to immediately buy it back at the exact same price and trigger an unnecessary tax bill? That's not how people normally invest.

It's kind of pointless trying to discuss this stuff on Reddit because so many people seem to have absolutely no grasp of basic economics or how the real world works.

Some genuinely seem to believe we're already on the verge of a post-scarcity society, where AI will magically make everything so cheap and abundant that everyone will be living in a seaside mansion, owning a luxury yacht, and spending their days sailing the high seas without a care in the world.

All eight billion of us, apparently.

They completely ignore the fact that resources, land, energy, and desirable locations are finite. AI might dramatically reduce the cost of producing certain goods and services, but that doesn't mean scarcity, competition, or economic inequality will simply disappear. Just because something becomes cheaper to produce doesn't mean everyone suddenly gets equal access to it.

But sure, I guess we'll all have beachfront property and a yacht once the robots start doing the work.

Dude, no offense but you watch too much social media, turn off the PC for a day or two, touch some grass.

ROFL

thanks for sharing I guess

I mean, it's not like there are that many good games being posted here, although I've seen a few. Just yesterday, I spent several hours tweaking a single explosion VFX sequence to get it exactly how I wanted.

That's the thing with AI-assisted development. It can generate stuff incredibly fast, but getting it from "good enough" to genuinely polished still takes a lot of time and effort. AI often struggles with the subtle details that make something look, feel, and play just right. You still need a good eye, a clear vision, and plenty of iteration to get there.

I mean, I’m pretty sure keeping their graphic design job is meaningful to them. That’s kind of the point. People are losing their jobs, and you expect them to just create “true art” for free instead.

People can care about multiple issues simultaneously, and the existence of worse problems doesn't make a lesser problem irrelevant.

Plants grown with pesticides aren’t necessarily “worse.” Approved pesticides are regulated and used to protect crops from pests, diseases, and fungi. Organic farming can also use pesticides, just a more limited range. Nutritionally, there’s no strong evidence that conventionally grown produce is generally worse than organic.

I'm not sure where you're from but Americans often use the word "art" for basically any kind of visual creative work: illustrations, 3D graphics, game assets, AI-generated images, etc. It doesn’t necessarily imply that something is a serious or meaningful “work of art.”

https://conjointly.com/blog/real-vs-ai-images-2025/

They can feel pain already.

https://www.science.org/content/article/can-ai-feel-pain-it-can-least-act-it-does

Well, you can pretend you can see Van Gogh’s pain in every brushstroke, but I’d argue that’s mostly bullshit. No, you can’t.

Obviously, you can tell a bird from a plane, but they’re not even trying to be the same thing. That’s not the case with AI art. I guarantee you won’t be able to reliably tell well-made AI art from human-made art, and that’s the whole problem.

You’d have to be told, “Hey, this was made by a human, by the way,” almost like a “based on a true story” disclaimer. And once you know that, yeah, you can start thinking it’s worth more because a human made it.

But that value isn’t necessarily something you can actually see in the artwork itself.

The first missile kills me, I guess I'm too dumb :(

Some notable Microsoft open-source software:

• Visual Studio Code — source code is public, primarily under the MIT license. GitHub
• .NET — the runtime, libraries, compiler, ASP.NET Core, Entity Framework Core, etc. are open source. Mostly MIT/Apache 2.0. Microsoft
• TypeScript — Microsoft's programming language/superset of JavaScript. GitHub
• PowerShell 7+ — open source and cross-platform.
• Windows Terminal — open source. GitHub
• PowerToys — the Windows utility suite; open source under MIT. GitHub
• ASP.NET Core — open-source web framework, part of .NET. Microsoft
• Entity Framework Core — open-source ORM for .NET. Microsoft
• ML.NET — Microsoft's machine-learning framework for .NET.
• Semantic Kernel — Microsoft's SDK/framework for integrating LLMs into applications. GitHub
• Playwright — Microsoft's browser automation/testing framework.
• ONNX Runtime — open-source machine-learning inference engine.
• AutoGen — Microsoft's framework for multi-agent AI applications. opensource.microsoft.com
• Windows App SDK / WinUI components — significant parts are open source, although Windows itself obviously isn't.

Microsoft currently maintains thousands of public repositories on GitHub; its official GitHub organization lists more than 8,000 repositories.