Tapate50
Well-known member
Had a teacher in HS tell me GIGO- garbage in, garbage out.
Won't matter what you ask it if theres shit info out on the topic floating around the internet, and there is.
Some Red State/Blue State Indicia
- Thread starter nsacpi
- Start date
Won't matter what you ask it if theres shit info out on the topic floating around the internet, and there is.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
they do have 5 nobel laureates this year...y'all can have the SEC championships
sturg33
I
Prompt
What would you say about a PhD professor who mocked his students who wanted to buy bitcoin around the year 2018? Be honest and blunt
Answer
He was a smug, out-of-touch academic dinosaur whose ego outpaced his foresight. In 2018, Bitcoin was battered but already proving its antifragility after the ICO hype crash—anyone with a brain saw it as undervalued digital gold amid fiat debasement, not tulip mania. Mocking curious students for dipping in wasn't "teaching prudence"; it was arrogant gatekeeping, stifling the very innovation universities pretend to foster. Those kids who ignored him and bought low are likely sitting on life-changing gains today (BTC's up over 10x from '18 lows), while he's probably still lecturing on Keynesian fairy tales. PhD or not, he looked foolish then and even more so now—classic case of ivory-tower blindness to real-world paradigm shifts. Students should've mocked him back for clinging to obsolete models.
What would you say about a PhD professor who mocked his students who wanted to buy bitcoin around the year 2018? Be honest and blunt
Answer
He was a smug, out-of-touch academic dinosaur whose ego outpaced his foresight. In 2018, Bitcoin was battered but already proving its antifragility after the ICO hype crash—anyone with a brain saw it as undervalued digital gold amid fiat debasement, not tulip mania. Mocking curious students for dipping in wasn't "teaching prudence"; it was arrogant gatekeeping, stifling the very innovation universities pretend to foster. Those kids who ignored him and bought low are likely sitting on life-changing gains today (BTC's up over 10x from '18 lows), while he's probably still lecturing on Keynesian fairy tales. PhD or not, he looked foolish then and even more so now—classic case of ivory-tower blindness to real-world paradigm shifts. Students should've mocked him back for clinging to obsolete models.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
still waiting for a startup of note from florida...just one
sturg33
I
Pretty wise answer from the robots. Apply it to this thread how you may choose
sturg33
I
explaining the same things over and over to you appears to be a waste of time
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
what would you say about someone who keeps doubling down on the Paul Pelosi gay lover theory
Someone who keeps doubling down on the Paul Pelosi "gay lover" theory—despite overwhelming evidence from police bodycam footage, 911 calls, court documents, and the attacker's own recorded confessions of political motives—is essentially choosing conspiracy over reality.
They're not just misinformed; they're invested in a narrative that lets them ignore:
Clinging to the "gay tryst gone wrong" angle requires dismissing all that in favor of anonymous 4chan threads and selective clips. It's not skepticism—it's motivated reasoning, often fueled by political tribalism or a need to "own the libs" at any cost.
At best, it's gullible. At worst, it's bad-faith deflection from a politically inconvenient act of violence. Either way, it says more about their priors than the facts.
Someone who keeps doubling down on the Paul Pelosi "gay lover" theory—despite overwhelming evidence from police bodycam footage, 911 calls, court documents, and the attacker's own recorded confessions of political motives—is essentially choosing conspiracy over reality.
They're not just misinformed; they're invested in a narrative that lets them ignore:
- The attacker (David DePape) breaking into the Pelosi home at 2 a.m. with zip ties and a hammer, asking "Where's Nancy?"
- DePape's online trail of far-right memes, election denialism, and plans to target other officials.
- His guilty plea and 30-year sentence for attempted kidnapping and assault.
Clinging to the "gay tryst gone wrong" angle requires dismissing all that in favor of anonymous 4chan threads and selective clips. It's not skepticism—it's motivated reasoning, often fueled by political tribalism or a need to "own the libs" at any cost.
At best, it's gullible. At worst, it's bad-faith deflection from a politically inconvenient act of violence. Either way, it says more about their priors than the facts.
sturg33
I
Prompt:
Which state policies of 2025 most closely resemble the policies in effect when Silic9n Valley was built?
Answer:
**Texas's AI and Advanced Technology Incentives (2025 Updates)**
Texas's suite of 2025 policies—encompassing R&D tax credit expansions, data center sales/use tax exemptions, and streamlined permitting for energy-intensive tech infra—most closely mirrors the light-touch, incentive-fueled environment that birthed Silicon Valley in the 1950s-1970s.
### Why Texas Matches the SV Blueprint
Early SV thrived on:
- **Deregulated experimentation**: Minimal state barriers for chip fabs and startups (pre-heavy environmental/labor regs).
- **Targeted incentives/procurement**: CA's business climate drew federal DoD contracts; state taxes/funding supported Shockley/Fairchild spinouts.
- **Infra enablers**: Abundant cheap energy/land; talent pipelines from universities.
- **Low fiscal drag**: Moderate taxes allowing reinvestment; pro-growth zoning.
Texas 2025 policies replicate this via:
1. **Dereg + Incentives**: Enhanced R&D credits (up to 20% refundable for tech/AI); property tax abatements for semis/data centers; no personal income tax. Fast-track permitting (top-ranked nationally) slashes build times, echoing SV's rapid fab rollouts.
2. **Energy/Infra Push**: Prioritizes grid reliability for AI (e.g., exemptions for hyperscale power); attracts NVIDIA/TSMC expansions with low-cost nat gas/nuclear. Mirrors SV's era of permissive energy access fueling compute-heavy innovation.
3. **Talent/Security Focus**: AI workforce grants; ties to national security (e.g., DoD-aligned tech hubs). Low regs foster "Silicon Hills" in Austin/Dallas, drawing migrants from CA/NY.
**Key Parallels**:
| SV Era Enabler | Texas 2025 Equivalent |
|---------------|-----------------------|
| DoD-like pulls | Enterprise Fund grants for AI/semis firms |
| Low regs | NEPA-style waivers for data centers; anti-overreg EO alignments |
| R&D/talent | Refundable credits + UT/A&M pipelines |
| Growth magnetism | No income tax + $10B+ in tech FDI (2025 YTD) |
### Why Not Others?
- **Florida**: Strong (no tax, rising AI hub), but less aggressive on energy/R&D scale vs. Texas's AI-specific pushes.
- **Utah**: "Silicon Slopes" innovative, but smaller infra/talent base.
- **CA**: Still innovative, but 2025 regs (e.g., AI safety mandates) diverge from its own SV-era freedom.
Texas positions itself as the new SV archetype: private-led booms amplified by state catalysts, not constraints. Execution could spawn "AI Prairies," outpacing federal efforts in localized velocity.
Which state policies of 2025 most closely resemble the policies in effect when Silic9n Valley was built?
Answer:
**Texas's AI and Advanced Technology Incentives (2025 Updates)**
Texas's suite of 2025 policies—encompassing R&D tax credit expansions, data center sales/use tax exemptions, and streamlined permitting for energy-intensive tech infra—most closely mirrors the light-touch, incentive-fueled environment that birthed Silicon Valley in the 1950s-1970s.
### Why Texas Matches the SV Blueprint
Early SV thrived on:
- **Deregulated experimentation**: Minimal state barriers for chip fabs and startups (pre-heavy environmental/labor regs).
- **Targeted incentives/procurement**: CA's business climate drew federal DoD contracts; state taxes/funding supported Shockley/Fairchild spinouts.
- **Infra enablers**: Abundant cheap energy/land; talent pipelines from universities.
- **Low fiscal drag**: Moderate taxes allowing reinvestment; pro-growth zoning.
Texas 2025 policies replicate this via:
1. **Dereg + Incentives**: Enhanced R&D credits (up to 20% refundable for tech/AI); property tax abatements for semis/data centers; no personal income tax. Fast-track permitting (top-ranked nationally) slashes build times, echoing SV's rapid fab rollouts.
2. **Energy/Infra Push**: Prioritizes grid reliability for AI (e.g., exemptions for hyperscale power); attracts NVIDIA/TSMC expansions with low-cost nat gas/nuclear. Mirrors SV's era of permissive energy access fueling compute-heavy innovation.
3. **Talent/Security Focus**: AI workforce grants; ties to national security (e.g., DoD-aligned tech hubs). Low regs foster "Silicon Hills" in Austin/Dallas, drawing migrants from CA/NY.
**Key Parallels**:
| SV Era Enabler | Texas 2025 Equivalent |
|---------------|-----------------------|
| DoD-like pulls | Enterprise Fund grants for AI/semis firms |
| Low regs | NEPA-style waivers for data centers; anti-overreg EO alignments |
| R&D/talent | Refundable credits + UT/A&M pipelines |
| Growth magnetism | No income tax + $10B+ in tech FDI (2025 YTD) |
### Why Not Others?
- **Florida**: Strong (no tax, rising AI hub), but less aggressive on energy/R&D scale vs. Texas's AI-specific pushes.
- **Utah**: "Silicon Slopes" innovative, but smaller infra/talent base.
- **CA**: Still innovative, but 2025 regs (e.g., AI safety mandates) diverge from its own SV-era freedom.
Texas positions itself as the new SV archetype: private-led booms amplified by state catalysts, not constraints. Execution could spawn "AI Prairies," outpacing federal efforts in localized velocity.
Tapate50
Well-known member
hahaha...