GP here. I use AI all day. I love Claude.

But it's objectively true that if the market crashes tomorrow, lots of normal people lose money. This hits extra hard – which happened back in 2007/8 – if that's the day your life-long savings are converted from stocks to cash.

Are you arguing that because those pensioners can now get a frontier model cheaper than they can today that this is a net benefit?

> This comment shows the exact problem with the incoherent ideology prevalent in some bubbles.

You're shadowboxing a strawman you've built, my friend.

> You fundamentally believe that AI is useless and that it wastes energy and hardware.

That is not what I believe. I believe that AI is useful at concentrating power in the oligarchy and that increasing energy and hardware cost is a nice side effect that further helps that goal.

> Shouldn't you then want the bubble to burst even faster? If not, you are just delaying the bubble.. but to what end? So that you personally won't be affected? This is a morally bankrupt stance to take.

That is in fact what I want. You're projecting your preference for the bubble to continue onto me, when I have never said such a thing. Only from the ashes of the old can we build the new.

> I think AI is useful, and AI being cheaper for the masses is good for them rather than the value being captured by a few companies.

I believe this is naive. If it's controlled by a few companies, they can end the cheapness at any point. I believe that is part of the plan, once they've made the masses sufficiently dependent.