Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | lovecg's commentslogin

Do people do that? Can I e.g. borrow against my assets and not pay any taxes? Curious to learn more.

When you get a loan you don't pay taxes. You pay taxes on the income used to pay it back, or the gains when you sell an asset to pay it back.

Yeah I’m confused about this part. Is there some loophole where they never have to pay the loan back? Otherwise they’d be taxed at that point.

The loopholes are well known at this point. They keep renewing loans until they die, then it's tax-free after death. It's called Buy-Borrow-Die.

Buy-Borrow-Die resets the basis for capital gains tax, but then there's estate tax when the money gets passed on (exemption is only $15 million, trivial to billionaires).

Taxed on repaying a loan?

No, taxed when you earn the money that repays the loan. Income tax, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes, estate taxes, etc... However the money was acquired to repay the loan, a tax was applied.

Which is pendantically and functionally very different from the implied tax on repayment.

Maybe you didn't read it properly, I said taxed "on the income" then specified that's the money "used to pay it back".

Income has a specific definition if you want to be pedantic, and types of income are always taxed.


I read it properly but "the implied tax on repayment" was referring to lovecg's comment.

This strategy is not a traditional loan with interest and regular payments. If you try to live on regular loans it doesn't make any sense. It's a scheme mostly only available to HNW people where they repay upon death in certain tax loophole ways.

These loans still have interest and regular payments. They are not like your mortgage or credit cards, but interest and minimums still apply.

You won't pay taxes but you will pay interest. Most forms of value (real estate, gold, stocks, your car) you can borrow against in the USA, but the interest you pay almost always makes it a dumb idea.

Can I e.g. borrow against my assets and not pay any taxes?

If you have a 401(k), yes. It's a way to turn a 25% credit card debt into a 5% loan.

The hitch is that while you can pay the credit card company over 30 years, the 401(k) loan is less than a decade, resulting in higher payments short-term, but money saved in the long term.


I mean people get mortgages and carry credit card balances and do margin trading and get helocs. If those are taxable I might need to call the IRS.

For the uber rich it is called "buy-borrow-die".

And this is why the idea of a wealth tax has so many tres comas types up in arms.


Perhaps it’s a generational change? People who grew up with computers went on to be more productive with them, something like that might happen with AI too.

I’d give humans some credit, they’re an adaptable bunch. AI won’t replace humans in the same way humans did not replace cockroaches. It’s a non-sequitur.


We generally don’t allow cockroaches to thrive in the spaces we claim for ourselves. Question is how much space (economic or otherwise) will AI claim for itself and whether there will be any left for us.


By making it think for 100+ pages https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/1625eff6-5ac1-40d8-b1db-5d5cf925d... Regular ChatGPT users don’t have a way to do that, this is something they do internally only.

edit: apparently that’s only the _condensed summary_ of the chain of thought.


you can do this easily with the api or with codex


You can't really in this way. They have a parameter they control on the backend that can force how much time it thinks for


The problem is the amount of data with that cutoff is really minuscule to produce anything powerful. You might be able to generate a lot of 1700s sounding data, you’d have to be careful not to introduce newer concepts or ways of thinking in that synthetic data though. A lot of modern texts talk about rates of change and the like in ways that are probably influenced by preexisting knowledge of calculus.


Doesn't it prove GP's point then, that LLMs themselves simply aren't capable of creating/proving new theories and axioms?


Without passing opinion on GP's point, I think that just proves it's hard to establish a data set that doesn't bias toward the result you're hoping to find.


I’ve noticed some people with seemingly fulfilling hobbies stop doing them after quitting their job as well. It’s entirely possible all those hobbies are valuable precisely as something powerful to latch onto and disconnect from the day job, and seem pointless the day after quitting. Seems like you had a strong sense of identity outside of your job already before quitting. Building that could be a lot of hard work for other people (and it sometimes comes as a surprise that it even needs to be built).


This could have been written almost verbatim after the printing press came out and printed pamphlets became ubiquitous.


It would be hilarious if he intentionally or accidentally lost the key, and has been trying to cash out through those Bitcoin adjacent business ventures ever since.


Let’s just hope that the people in charge of the really important decisions that affect us all approach LLM generated advice with the same wisdom.



Thanks for sharing this. Subnautica is one of my favorite games so I was very excited for the sequel and very frustrated by this move by Krafton.

It’s even more maddening that this greedy maneuver was orchestrated based on LLM advice.

I’m glad the subnautica team won the lawsuit. Maybe I can play it now wothout feeling guilty


(2017)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: