Redeemed, husband, father of 4, antiwar Navy veteran & economist, sharing analysis on @StocksNJocks 8-9 AM EST Tuesdays No debate? It's a religion, not science
Burlington, NC
Joined April 2022
- Tweets8.4K
- Following235
- Followers761
- Likes1.1K
Hal Snarr retweeted
As government grows and people on most sides of the political debates demand government punish their political enemies, we are seeing an increase in political violence. Government cannot prevent this violence; government is the violence. | @DrMarkThornton
mises.org/mises-wire/what-le…
Hal Snarr retweeted
The Brewers are being celebrated like they invented baseball.
They are doing things that have become unusual.
They have an old school tough manager who players love playing for.
They focus on basic easy to understand basic fundamentals.
They have a hitting coach that was an overachieving player for skill that played in the big leagues.
They hit the ball the other way.
They value putting the ball in play.
They adjust their approach based on situation and count.
They are not addicted to exit velocity and launch angle bullshit.
They bunt and steal bases.
They do not have selfish superstars that need to be treated like celebrities.
The Brewers simply play the game how it was meant to be played.
Hal Snarr retweeted
马斯克在聊到超级智能到底会不会统治人类时，用短短 42 秒，彻底推翻了所有人看了几十年的科幻电影设定，
他说：我们根本不配被统治。
很多人对超级智能的终极恐惧，是终结者、黑客帝国，或者被一个冷酷的机器独裁者关进赛博牢笼里发号施令。
但马斯克点破了一个极度刺骨、但也极度通透的现实：
在任何一个智慧悬殊的系统里，统治本身就是一种毫无价值的高能耗浪费。
面对一个比人类聪明几千倍、甚至几百万倍的超级智能，我们妄想去控制它、给它立规矩，无异于痴人说梦。
但它反过来也不会对统治人类产生哪怕一秒钟的兴趣。
他拿人类和黑猩猩打了个极度清醒的比方：
人类比黑猩猩聪明得多，但我们今天会专门制定一套复杂的法律，去丛林里事无巨细地管理每一只黑猩猩吗？
不会。
我们基本是随它们去，在边上划一道保护区，只要它们不妨碍现代文明的扩张，人类甚至连看都懒得看它们一眼。
统治的前提，是双方还在同一个能力维度上，需要靠权力来分配稀缺资源。
当智力差距被拉大到百万倍的断层时，人类社会的金钱、领土、政治和意识形态，在超级智能眼里连微尘都算不上。
它有它自己要去探索的星辰大海和底层物理，根本不屑于在泥潭里当猴王。
人类未来真正的风险，从来不是被恶意统治，而是被系统性无视。
就像人类修高速公路穿过森林时，铲平一个蚁穴从来不是出于仇恨，只是因为那条路刚好要从那里经过。
所以，我们需要放下做宇宙主角的虚荣心，未来的超级智能既不会恨你，也不会爱管你，如何证明自己不是那条高速公路下的蚁穴，才是人类唯一要思考的课题。
马斯克第一次公开正面回应了跟@OpenAI 诉讼案的核心实质以及跟@sama Altman的爱恨情仇，
在福布斯最新访谈里Elon聊到 OpenAI 诉讼案时，没有纠结个人恩怨，而是把整个硅谷最不敢摊开讲的一张底牌直接掀开了，
老马说：OpenAI 从非营利强行转为全面营利，正在开创一个极其危险的先例。
很多人看这场官司，以为只是创始人之间的利益撕扯，或者是马斯克因为错过千亿估值而产生的酸葡萄心理。
但马斯克在 2 分多钟里点破的核心，其实是一场动摇整个现代商业慈善根基的特洛伊木马：
如果一家由全免税、免监管的慈善捐赠催化出来、今天估值逼近 8000 亿美元的超级巨头，可以把公益外衣随手脱掉直接装进私人腰包，那么全美甚至全球现有的慈善捐赠契约，就全部从根子上死掉了。
当年 OpenAI 成立时拉着所有人入局的承诺，是一份极度崇高的使命书：
我们是非营利组织，我们为了全人类的利益研发 AGI，防止超级技术被谷歌等商业寡头私有化。
马斯克和其他捐赠人真金白银掏了几千万美元的无偿捐赠，图的不是股权分红，而是公共利益的底线。
后来为了融资买算力，Sam Altman 搞出了一个上限利润的折中结构。
当时各方妥协的关键条款写得清清楚楚：营利实体只负责赚钱还债，一旦真正的通用人工智能（AGI）实现，所有的股权和控制权必须毫无保留地退还给非营利慈善机构。
而最近所有人看到的事实是：
这个曾经用来安抚监管、安抚捐赠人的归还条款，被他们悄无声息地单方面删掉了。
以前慈善信托和免税基金之所以能存在上百年，是因为社会达成了共识：你用免税换取公益，你的成果就永远属于公众。
现在 OpenAI 示范了一条全新的暴富流水线：
先用拯救人类的非营利口号吃尽免税红利、吸纳顶级科学家的奉献和社会的无偿捐款，
等技术突破、商业壁垒铸成之后，反手修改章程，把原本属于公共财产的无价资产，合规洗成几个管理层和华尔街资本瓜分的私产。
如果这一单最终能全身而退，以后世界上就再也没有真正意义上的慈善投资了。
所有的科技巨头都会学着用非营利的幌子孵化核心资产，把研发风险留给纳税人和捐助者，把终局红利留给私人股东，
所以，这早就不是马斯克和 Sam Altman 两个人的战争了，
更像是一场关于公众信任、契约精神与硅谷资本贪婪底线的终极对决。
Hal Snarr retweeted
APOLOGIES IN ADVANCE TO ANY TENANTS READING THIS, BUT I’M NOT STAYING QUIET.
I’ve housed you for four years at $1,750 a month. You’ve never been late. You’ve never trashed it. You’ve been a solid tenant. Then I sent the renewal: rent’s going up $275.
YES.
You’ve paid me almost $84,000 over four years. That money covered the mortgage (which I’m still on the hook for if anything goes wrong), property taxes that keep rising, insurance premiums that have jumped hard, maintenance and repairs that cost more every year, and all the other costs of keeping the place habitable and legal.
The equity and any portfolio growth come from the capital I put in, the risk I took, and the fact that I own the asset, not from the rent check itself.
You’re the one writing the check every month for the right to live there. At the end of it, you own nothing because you didn’t buy it, finance it, or take on the ownership risks. I did. If the roof fails, the HVAC dies, a pipe bursts, taxes go up again, insurance spikes, or you leave and it sits vacant, that’s on me.
A $275 increase isn’t “because the market lets me.” It’s because the costs of providing the housing have gone up, insurance, taxes, labor, materials, compliance.
Recent data shows typical homeowners paying ~$1,380 a month just in maintenance, taxes, and insurance on top of the mortgage, with insurance up sharply over the last several years.
Apartment owners have been keeping only about 11 cents of every rent dollar after debt service, operations, taxes, and the rest.
Expenses have often risen faster than rents.
Stop treating landlords like a free housing subscription that never has rising costs. The rent pays for the use of the property and the service of ownership. The equity belongs to the person who bought it and bears the risk.
If you want a version where some of the money eventually becomes yours, buy your own home.
APOLOGIES IN ADVANCE TO ANY LANDLORDS READING THIS, BUT I'M NOT STAYING QUIET.
I just sent $1,750 in rent for a place I've lived in for four years. Never late. Never trashed it. Never once missed a payment.
Then the renewal email landed: rent's going up another $275 a month.
NO.
You've pulled almost $84,000 out of me over four years. That money paid your mortgage down, built your equity, funded your portfolio. And my reward for being the reliable tenant you never had to chase for rent is a bigger bill, simply because the market lets you charge one.
I'm the one writing the check every month, and at the end of all of it, I own nothing. Not a square foot of it.
If I'm covering your mortgage payment and then some, every single month, there should be a version of this where some of that money eventually becomes mine.
Stop treating good tenants like a subscription service you get to raise the price on whenever you feel like it.
Hal Snarr retweeted
Then they will have them wear helmets and pads, and install trampolines around the basket.
Hal Snarr retweeted
Nobody is in charge of making sure your grocery store has milk tomorrow.
There is no national milk coordinator calculating how many gallons your neighborhood needs.
Just millions of people responding to prices, profits, and incentives.
Hal Snarr retweeted
Milton Friedman argued that the welfare system can strip people of independence and dignity by making them dependent on government decisions.
He warned that people may become afraid to take a job if losing it means risking the benefits they rely on.
His concern was that a system meant to provide temporary assistance could end up trapping people in a cycle of dependency instead of helping them regain independence.
Hal Snarr retweeted
Last time we played this one, it was 2008. Did you miss it? 😈 #Metallica #Sphere
Hal Snarr retweeted
“Disposable Heroes” is one of the longest, most aggressive songs Metallica ever wrote, an eight-minute anti-war assault.
This is Germany, 1985, the night they debuted it live, months before Master of Puppets even came out. And it’s one of only three times Cliff Burton ever played it. He’d be gone a year later.
Hal Snarr retweeted
Norm Macdonald was fired from Weekend Update in 1997 after NBC executives decided he wasn’t funny. A year and a half later they asked him to host the show.
He didn’t open with gratitude or a comeback story. He opened with a logical problem:
How does someone go from “not funny enough to be allowed in the building” to “funny enough to host” in eighteen months?
The monologue that follows treats the invitation itself as the setup.
Hal Snarr retweeted
The SEC stacked its league with brands and money. Its fans now have to live with the losses while the Big 12 keeps getting stronger.
Hal Snarr retweeted
ART IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN POLITICS
From Swift to Moliere to Dostoyevsky artists have been warning for ages that being Very Sure to the point of claiming to know how other people should behave is a 100% predictor of jackassery:
open.substack.com/pub/taibbi…
Hal Snarr retweeted
Apparently, wanting to keep your own money is greed, but wanting to spend everyone else’s is compassion.
