Competition is a core part of capitalist theory, that’s true. In practice, however capitalists have always sought to limit, neutralize or eliminate competition. In fact, capitalism has a strong tendency toward market concentration, not in spite of competition but because of it. Competition does not result in all competitors sharing the prize equally. Competition is inherently zero sum.

Think of sports competitions: do all teams take equal share of the trophy at the end of the season? No, one team, the team that outcompetes all the others, wins 100% of the trophy at the end. Market competition is no different. Winning companies take all the market share and losing companies go out of business or get taken over. Companies have always known this and that’s why they have always tried to rig the competition in their favor whenever possible.

The fact is, the only entity capable of keeping competition fair is the state, but the state is so easily captured by capital. But even when the state is able to maintain open competition, oligopolies, duopolies and monopolies still form, because, again, that’s just the nature of competition. Competition is inherently zero sum, winner-take-all. That’s why the state has always had to come in and break up monopolies periodically. But if the monopoly powers are able to capture state power, they can prevent that. It’s like the championship winning team taking over the league.

It’s true that these AI companies are starting to worry about losing. I think OpenAI especially is concerned because they are currently struggling against both Anthropic and some other emerging companies, including some Chinese companies. But I think even Anthropic is worried because while they might be winning, they’re winning a race to the bottom. These companies are not profitable, and there’s no path to profitability for them in the foreseeable future. So not only can OpenAI not compete, they can’t compete in an industry with no clear path to profitability. So, yeah, they’re all colluding to stop the game because right now, no one’s winning. But that kind of collusion does not exist outside the bounds of normal capitalist operations, it’s always been a feature of it.

Slowing the pace of AI development is not pausing capitalism.

I will vote for the people who represent me, and they are the people who believe that every human being deserves to have their material needs met.

Liberals only care about the rights of rich people. The right to their life, their liberty and all the property they can hoard. The rest of us have the right to be poor, the right to be hungry, the right to be sick, the right to be ignorant, the right to be homeless, the right to be destitute, the right to be exploited, the right to be misinformed, the right to be left behind, the right to suffer.

Under current policies, median projected global warming reaches around 2.6°C by 2100 (range 1.9–3.6°C).

This is what we need to focus on. What’s most likely based on where we are, and where we are likely to be in the near future, instead of some hypothetical scenario in which rapid, almost miraculous change happens for essentially no discernible reason.

Based on what is, instead of what could be, we see a projected range of between 1.9C and 3.6C. personally, I think we should be preparing for the upper end of that range, both because I think it’s generally best to prepare for the worst, but also because I wouldn’t be surprised if those projections ended up being somewhat conservative. We don’t want to prepare for 2C and get 4C, we want to prepare for 4C and hope for 3C. I would say hope for 2C, but, idk, I really think that ship has sailed.

Regardless, we need to be reducing GHG emissions as quickly as possible. The heating estimates are for mitigation and adaptation planning, but when it comes to GHG emissions reductions, we just need to be focused on cutting as much as possible as quickly as possible.

At the same time a liberal democracy can vote that a minority ethnic group should all become slaves.

That’s not what Hayek was talking about when he referenced a “democratic government lacking liberalism.” He was talking about Chile after the election of Salvador Allende, a socialist. Allende “sought to nationalize major industries, expand education, and improve the living standards of the working class.” No mention of mass enslavement. Although his replacement, Augusto Pinochet, who was supported by Hayek and the US, tortured and/or murdered tens of thousands.

That’s true. Does that mean you agree with Hayek?

Ask a liberal which is worse, fascism or socialism and you might be surprised how many would say socialism is worse, if they were being honest. Not that they like fascism. Not at all, they hate it. They just hate socialism more. To them, fascism is the lesser of the two evils. And I’m not just making this up, a prominent liberal economist of the 20th century said it explicitly:

As you will understand, it is possible for a dictator to govern in a liberal way. And it is also possible for a democracy to govern with a total lack of liberalism. Personally I prefer a liberal dictator to democratic government lacking liberalism.

• Friedrich Hayek

Where’s the rest of 'em?

Over 77 million Americans voted for this. They looked at Donald god damned Trump and said, “yeah, that’s my guy.” TWICE! Albeit it was non-consecutively, but I don’t know if that makes it better or worse.

We live in a shit hole country, y’all. Shit-hole.

I’ve got a nice bottle of champagne I’m really looking forward to popping open…

History ended sometime around 1990. It was determined at that time that civilization could not substantially change any further, for better or worse. No Mad Max or Terminator dystopias, but also no Star Trek type societies in which both social systems and technology become highly advanced. No, just a Sisyphean nightmare in which nothing meaningfully changes and an infinite, perpetual constant is maintained and managed, forever and ever, until the heat death of the universe. Instead of either dystopia or utopia we have an ever present, oppressive malaise that only the sweet release of death can liberate us from.

You could have been the greatest president of all

No, he couldn’t have

You betrayed us, the Israelis.

I realize I don’t necessarily speak for all of my fellow Americans when I say this, but I could not possibly care less if Israelis feel betrayed by Trump. He’s not your president, it’s not your government, go fuck yourselves.

No, I wouldn’t like it. No country should bomb another to force regime change. I don’t care how shitty the leader being replaced is. I want Trump gone, but not like that. I know this is a joke, but I feel like this needs to be explicitly stated.