Jerry_Atrick

@Marty_d - I am at best, a very average programmer. Which is probably why formally I am no longer one. But do you not see an upside of AI being improved and early diagnostics of medical conditions leading to better health outcomes? I see that as a definite upside (at my age, anyway). What about better engineering to lower environmental impacts? Or better investment decision making so you reach your goals earlier? I see it these as positives of AI Even as a programmer, do you not see an advantage of AI doing a lot of the menial work I would normally do. We would still have controls to ensure the programmers review the code that is cut, but when I use AI at home it really tidies up a lot of the code that I write and sometimes cleans up the core logic... I find that great..

I don't think it is realistic.either. Even with a stacked SCOTUS, it would he very hard for them to rule any law passed to do it as constitutional (hence my notwithstanding the illegality of it, above). That is the other reason it is clever. He doesn't need to blame it on the socialists - he knows he can't if the republicans win congress (both houses). He can then blame it on those judges that are a threat to America. Not that he knew it was illegal and wouldn't pass muster when he promised it. But should he get it passed, the rich won't stop him. More government debt ultimately equals more money for them even if it travels through the broader economy first.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666990024000132 Is one example. Of course, this may be biased because AI answered it but:

I understand - I was one that advocated that the desktop PC and normal automation won't because the jobs they create will cover the job losses. AI will become so pervasive, the only way I see it happening is that almosy everyone becomes a business. Running what we call today, side hustles.

Re eligibility - all we have is every American adult.. That would imply that non documented migrants would not be eligible, that is it. There was no Republican voting, white, straight church going caveats. So, that is all we have to go for. In theory, that would include those American adults living abroad, but they are dedicated from the count - that that it makes a material difference anyway. If the Rich sense it is a likely outcome, there will be inflation swaps being written for them to get rich against. Also, most of the uber Rich have welath managers and treasury teams, and they will be working hard to make money off the rising inflation and interest rates. Say property prices crash again.. bargains to be had when it picks up. The rich rarely think just the current financial year.

There are many industries where job losses will be huge. No longer need camera operators, editors, directors, etc. A creative writer can generate something all by themselves. That motorbike club patch took me all of 2 - 3 mins to get to how I wanted it. An that was a general LLM/Generative AI tool. Imagine specialist ones. I can see the day you need a scan - walk into the radiogrpahers (or whatever they are called today), lay down; the machine automaticaly through AI determines the correct scanning angles, takes the shot, analyses the results are of sufficient quality to pass to the consutlant AI, that examines them and provides a diagnosis and treatment plan.. all before you get home.. Yeah, there will be the odd case where they have to have a nurse., radiographer, and consultant, but the vast majority will not be required. Copwriters, solicitors, accountants and may of these types of roles and supporting roles will all but evaporate (you still will need a few). If we are getting 15 - 20 times productivity increase, that means around 5 - 7% of the workforce needed. AI is not generating enough alternate jobs to pick up the slack. That is maths. Obviously, some roles will not be replaceable for some time yet - until robotics and AI are more advanced that what they already are. Trades, ambos, etc. Basically anything that needs physical capacity coupled with dexterity roles (watch maker/repair - although with electronics, I would say that has already died). But that time will come, too. And AI is helping.

What does wiping out humanity actually mean? Does it mean killing every human (and possibly other living thing) on earth? Or does it mean so extremely disrupting the fabric and order of society that we will turn on ourselves in some Mad Max like civil war type thing (I have never seen Mad Max)? And what are the real chances of that happening? At the moment, they are saying 10%.. but if humanity is wiped out, so too goes the profits of the AI companies - and they are included in the wipe out anyway. My guess is then different AI models will turn on others and wipe each other out. In fact, a simple prompt to convince an AI the other AI is a human may well save humanity! Is it possible - yes... whatever the definition is.. Is it likely.. Not sure.

Yeah, but a very clever one, notwithstanding the illegality of it. Everyone will see $5K in their eyes... many will see $10K (or more) to the household. It is not an amount to be sneezed out. Many people aren't taught basic economics (otherwise Chump would not have got in in the first place), so all they see is money money money - the stuff the very fabric of USA culture is made from. Even if the purchasing power of the USD halved overnight, 2.5K or 5K or more in today's money may well be quite an enticement to those on the bread line.. and the future is looking very bleak anyway, so looking bleaker is neither here nor there to them. That is why governments like keeping the masses poor.

Councile rates - unlikely - that is a monopoly. That has nothing to do with technology - that is economics and politics. Car Rego - same.. Especially if you live in Vic as potholes need fixing. Groceries - hard to say.. so many factors. AI can greatly assist with all sorts of things to minimise the cost, but if you have a diminishing habitat, increasing input fueld costs, etc. then any gain of AI will be offset by those. Rent - almost entirely an economic question of supply and demand. Maybe the question is not if AI will reduce the cost - but what is the difference between the cost with or without AI? I would expect software costs to materially depreciate over time for example as a) more suppliers will come to market through necessity and b) it will be cheaper. Demand should remain relatively constant. If we use AI in demand predication, medical diagnosis, treatment specification and monitoring and even rostering optimisation, then it should. Again, other economics come into play. We still need all of the tech (scanners, etc) which is very expensive. Will AI help bring down those costs? We still have remote v urban considerations etc. That is an inecitability because it depends on human deployment. The cost with our without AI should be a better gauge. We have many such projects where the cost benefit analysis is called into question during or at the end of delivery. And the comparison is not quite analogous. If I build a road, it is a product to allow vehicles to travel with safely. It has a specific use, and by itself it does not guarantee safety. It is up to those governing us to put in place the necessary laws and enforcement to ensure practical safety, to stump up the money to maintain the roads, etc. It could be considered a tool for travel, but it is more akin to an end product in itself. AI is a tool.. it is not the end product in itself. It can be an incredibly general purpose tool such as Chat or Claude or Mistral; or it can be very specific (e.g. autonomous driving AI). Autonomous driving and specific AIs are more like end products in the same way as roads are. And, assume they work, they will bring a massive benefit to the masses.. in easier, safer driving, more efficient driving and hopefully lower ecological costs through that. The generic AI models are purely tools, list like, I dunno, a jigsaw. In skilled, competent, and conscientious tradespeople, they can produce great things. Sadly, in the hands of cowboys, they can make life quite miserable.

In my case, not quite. I am the last to request hiring more people. I am not a natural manager/coach of people and I prefer to do more with less. I was never captain of a team nor raise to any heights at school, etc. I am the literal version of falling upwards. We genuinely have a lot of work to do. And I am still interviewing people this morning for open roles we need to fill to get work done. Believe my, I would rather be using AI.. problem is our organisation is extremely risk averse and we are prohibited from using it in an agentic or generative sense for anything other than presentations and the like. But that will not last forever. Also, much of our workforce is sub contract - one this massive program is over, if it goes to plan, many of the contractors will not be renewed and the sustainable head count will reduce to something like 20 - 30 for ongoing support and maintenance - assuming no AI. Like all tech, there are advantages and disadvantages. In theory, once profiteering has been done and firms try to outcompete each other, assuming there is enough competition in the AI space, prices for many items will reduce - and if they are virtual services, massively. Of course, no competition in the AI space will simply drive up AI prices as an input and those cost savings will not flow down. There are already benefits. I used AI to help with the motorbike - I had to end up sending it to the shop for lack of tools and workshop space (and time), but it did save me quite a bit on labour and also helped me learn more about the bike. I am a terrible artist, but with a simple prompt was able to get AI to design for me exactly what I imagined in my mind for the Halse Angels motorcycle "club": I could not even come close to producing something like this, even if I had all of my remaining time to do it. Technological advances in all fields will improve massively - we are seeing early cancer diagnosis that human doctors struggle to spot, remote assisted surgery in remote regions, etc. leading to much better outcomes than previously defined.. All achieved only with the help of AI (or more accurately, much better achieved with the help of AI). This is a massive benefit to the masses, well except in the USA where universal health care isn't a right. Once autonomous driving kicks in properly, roads will be a lot safer and you will still be able to have your personal bit of real estate on the road when driving. But of course, there are downsides. AI, as has been seen in the Ukraine war, can result in cheap and super effective lethal force. My view is that the jobs it will create will not be absorbed by the jobs it will displace. And of course, there will have to be a living wage or similar coming from the coffers of somewhere or else there will be civil war. We have seen AI being able to go rogue, but have to remind ourselves these are in !carefully controlled" situations.. i.e. they are not generally the models that are released to the public (even if while the experiment - or more accurately testing is taking place, they may break out of their cages and ho rogue). Like everything, it is up to humanity to reap the rewards of it. Sadly, the bulk of the "good" humanity is passive and compliant... so when the rogue elements of humanity get in as leadership (look at what we have today and worse, how people will still elect them), AI becomes a dangerous weapon. It is a bit like "Guns don't kill people; people kill people" Even my daughter is now thinking about moving to Aus... somewhere like Finke to get away from it all. (Well, not Finke... but you get the idea).

That does not depend on AI.. that depends on those who govern us. And history shows that pollies wait until the problems are well entrenched before they deal with them. But also, even if the governments finally swallowed the need to tax the corporates to fund more and more people with nothing to do.. what is the impact on those people effectively on the scrap heap. Yep, some enterprising souls will thrive, but we are mainly conditioned to go to school, get a job, work and then retire. So, the way we educate future generations will have to change, too. A friend of mine in a more senior position at another bank is telling me they have gone all in on AI for software development and it is giving them between 15 and 20 x the productivity. So he will end up implementing a decent swathe of cuts but hold enough to significantly improve rate of output. I have been saying for a couple of years that in the next now 8 - 13 years, there won't be many software programming languages left. People will type in their prompts and the run time will be generated directly from it. Yes, some of the lower level languages will still be around, but there will come a time where they are no longer needed as well. Certainly in software development - ironically the industry that gave birth to AI - there isn't much for the common software developer - they will need to be English (or other human language) graduates

Nope.. It is c. 245m adults x $5k = c. $1.33tn. On the assumption he would follow through (apparently, previously promised money including DOGE cheques for those who effectively took voluntary redundancy haven't been paid - but I have not researched it so it could just be a rumour), and assume it would take around 3 months to permeate through the economy, it would represent a c. 3.7% of GDP stimulus to the economy, with a lot of people who will spend it. What happens when you add to the M3 money supply? Inflation. And putting that much more in - in a short period - would bring back visions of people in Germany in the 30s.. Well, maybe not as bad, but inflation will hit hard, interest rates will rise to try and stem it and that $5K is not quite worth what they think it is. The US debt is at historical highs and yields are rising now (still YoY slightly down). The world economy is starting to feel the onset of a nasty flu. If Chumpo is true to his word and the Republicans win, you do not want to have or hold anyone else's debt.

Developing and implementing all risk systems for our whole European business.

I wish.. AI agents aren't (outwardly) so temperamental.. and they get the issues.

There is an article in The Age on the subject matter today: https://www.theage.com.au/technology/kids-playing-with-a-nuclear-warhead-why-we-must-heed-ai-warnings-20260910-p60w2j.html I think the extinction thing is a little overkill (pardon the pun) unless robotics makes incredible strides over a short period of time. However, it won't be as Holywooders and Youtubers would suggest that roboits go rogue or swarms of drones. It will be their ability to crack the systems; of course, there would be real problems if they crack military systems and start guiding nuclear weapons, for example. But, if the world is going to end in 3.5 years for us, may as well take out a 10 year loan on that Ferrari, with a deferred payment for 5 years and live a little 😉

Is this in reference to the Honda or Beemer? The engine on the Honda is a pleasure.. No more discernable vibration than any other bike I rode (I found the little single to be the worst) and smooth through the power range. I may be being biased, but the twins I rode don't seem to have been any better. If it didn't make a noise, I would have thought it was electrically powered 😉 (for avoidance of doubt, that was a joke). I have never ridden a Beemer, so can't comment on it. Will be test riding a Tenere GT9 soon, which is a three cylinder (following Triumph's ideas). Will compare the difference, although to be fair, a new motor against a well ridden in one will be a bit springier.

Got my bike back yesterday... I was bracing myself for a big bill haveing burned out one regulator and potentially damaged the shop's bench regulator... The total price, including VAT (20%) was £477.. This included 4 hours of labour at £70/hr (which is a little on the high side, but dealers charge £90). They only charged me one regulator and there was a few assorted other parts. It was mainly corroded connectors throughout. The regulator company credited me the burned out regulator that my bike caused. And to boot, the regulator was cheaper through the bike shop than direct - by £50. Who said customer service is dead. The bike is due its MOT (RWC) on 18th December... They are already booked out to the end of November... Shows how a good shop makes money.

I have grown my team from 3 to just on 100 over the last year. Well, I couldn't have done it alone and have had help. I have been in at least 100 interviews and it is gruelling. Some use AI to filter CVs; I tried, but found it was not much quicker than reading the CVs myself. But what I have found is, these days where every interview we conduct is over video conferencing, the candidates are using it real time. Initially the first interviews, which are technical in nature, were smashed by the candidates but the second interviews which are more exploratory were failed abysmally by at least 80% of the of the candidates. We worked out pretty quickly AI was being used in both interviews, but even voice recognition models were too slow to compose the answers for the candidates to read out. However, this morning, I conducted a third interview on someone. And they aced it - a little too good for my liking. So I paid closer attention and I would say the candidate used a teleprompter. So, I did a little research: https://www.lockedinai.com/ai-copilot?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=21848747952&gclid=CjwKCAjwqonVBhA4EiwA9wYJ3Si5Hzj8rgagiXonKERUqArUhFkh9iprq5xbhOkNtAQJ3xNC_D6VRRoCMysQAvD_BwE And there is a plethora more, with teleprompters to boot. So, I find myself paying closer attention to their eyeballs than the actual answer now. I am sure there is one for interviewers as well.

From the workshop --> home... Electrical gremlin fixed; sunny day, light breeze, cooling weather (about 18)... traffic reasonable. Smile back on face.

And I have just realised, even my quick response may give rise to doubt. Am I talking about your most recent comment being perfectly good or the comment you most recent comment pertains to? For the record, your original comment is perfectly good.. IMHO Should be no ambiguity now. But let me know if there is.

Perfectly good comment...

As I said, it depends on the context of the use of the word major.. In the purely written form, we only have the words (and the very occasional emoji) to go with. We don#t have inflection nor body language, which usually make up the lion's share of communicating meaning and nuance. Here are the quotes: and then and then and then And i will stop there as the rest adds little value. The very top quote appears (in my perception) in the context of OME's comments which were implying (again, as it is pure written, my perception) that the global demand for nickel will drop and the mining companies value will therefore drop. The way I read the top quote of this post is nickel has other uses... and readers of that could imply all manner of other implications - that those uses can possibly pick up the slack and not impact the valuations of mining companies (which is how I read it). Or, readers may have taken it as it is written - simply there is other uses for nickel, which appears how SISO has taken it, as his post is yeah - in nuclear power plants. But, if someone else's context remained at the global consumption level, then while SISO's statement is not factually incorrect, within the context of global consumption, it is currently minimal. This is where the disconnect seems to start. The next post to me clearly read doubting NPPs used much nickel at all.. That is how I read it.. so now, my context shifted the conversation from global demand to it's use in an NPP. Others may have perceived it differently. And, due to to use of stainless steel, it is at least currently used extensively in NPPs.. And on a scaled basis disproportionately so. (well, except for stainless steel pots and pans I guess). We all seem to get caught up in these perceived context shifts and it is probably a function of only having the written word in front of us. I know i have often bashed out a response based on my perception and on re-reading posts can see how the context it was meant may not be the context in which I perceived it to be. So, this: I cannot disagree with.. it is back to the context of global demand and current projections. I think it would be a brave person or a Putin wannabe that would challenge that. Maybe we all can improve things by rather than doggedly standing our ground, reiterating in our post the background from which our comments are made. I don't believe we are here to fight or prove we know better than the other member - we are here to share ideas, debate positions, and learn from each other. And hopefully enjoy each others company. To be clear - this is not aimed at anyone specifically... We all can do better.

Nickel is used in the production of stainless steel - so theoretically, it is stainless steel that has the lion's share of usage of nickel. Stainless steel is used in all sorts of products - including components of a nuclear plant - particularly - well most of the critical components of the plant really - and of course, beyond the critical components. The stainless steel has to be high grade from a durability and longevity basis - I have no idea of the Nickel volume but around 10% seems to be in my memory for some reason. So, a lot of a nuclear plant is stainless steel - in that sense nickel is a significant component (not the most - but a "major") of a nuclear plant based on the use of stainless steel. Is the nuclear power generation industry a major consumer of nickel worldwide? That depends on how you look at it. On a pure volume basis, no. That would probably go to manufacture of consumer and industrial goods. But on a relative to scale basis - yes it is a major consumer.. not the biggest I would guess - when the plants are being built. If the world decided to do a new build program of, I dunno, 50 nuclear power stations, the projected demand of nickel for stainless steel production would increase the futures price of nickel. I am not going to do the modelling, but it would have significant future demand to immediately impact the futures prices - especially longer dated futures contracts if the announcement was made today. As the demand picks up during the builds, the spot price will increase. But once built, they consume surprisingly little in the maintenance/operate cycle of the plant - because most of it is high grade and lasts.. So, unlike consumer/industrial goods manufacture which more or less has an ongoing constant demand, nuclear power stations - once built (or past a stage in their building) - are not huge consumers of the stuff. It all depends on the context in which people mean "major" user, etc.

Interesting: https://www.theage.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/the-shift-is-now-absolute-china-s-byd-says-australia-just-passed-its-ev-tipping-point-20260905-p60urd.html

Actually, I am the lowest paid director in my department. There are people working for me that get paid more. But that is the story of another gripe - of my own doing..