The exception is that the Big Tech companies (Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, although importantly not Facebook, seriously f*** Facebook) have essentially unlimited cash, and their funding situation changes little (if at all) based on their stock price.
I'm not sure if this is true right now. It seems like the entire tech industry is more cash-constrained than usual, given the high interest rates, layoffs throughout the industry, and fears of a coming recession.
This econ paper about personal finance was featured in a recent Freakonomics Radio episode. It compares the financial advice in popular personal finance books with what economics research says is optimal financial behavior.
Some of the most surprising (to me) recommendations in the paper:
Hi, I'm the user who asked this question. Thank you for responding!
I see your point about how an AGI would intentionally destroy humanity versus engineered bugs that only wipe us out "by accident", but that's conditional on the AGI having "destroy humanity" as a subgoal. Most likely, a typical AGI will have some mundane, neutral-to-benevolent goal like "maximize profit by running this steel factory and selling steel". Maybe the AGI can achieve that by taking over an iron mine somewhere, or taking over a country (or the world) and enslaving its citizens, or even wiping out humanity. In general, my guess is that the AGI will try to do the least costly/risky... (read more)
I can't see the original comment, but this response seems really disconnected from what most people mean by "trans rights". In my experience, "trans rights" typically refers to a constellation of rights like:
It does not imply the right to murder other people, as doing so violates their rights to life and bodily autonomy. The harm principle limits how people can exercise their rights.