[jvanderbot]

Is this meant to say "I don't care because I'm not in USA"? Or "it's not a problem because it's only USA?" Or "don't speak of US-specific situations on this forum because it contains people of many nationalities?"

It's entirely possible for a world changing tech to be created and steered to match a unique problem inside one country, and for that to change job markets everywhere.

[eru]

Speaking of US-specific situations is fine. Or in general, speaking of any specific institutions.

I objected to the '[...] and nobody is financially invested in software from AI anymore.' That's a rather dubious claim of a universal consequence for a change that only affects the US.

If the comment was 'I can't wait until Section 174 changes are repealed and nobody in the US is financially invested in software from AI anymore.' I would have nothing to complain about.

To critique the content more specifically and explicitly, and not just the form: people and companies all around the world have plenty of incentives to invest in AI. A tax change in the US might change the incentives in the US slightly. But it won't have much of an impact on the incentives in Europe, China, etc.

And even in the US, even with that suggested tax change, I doubt it'll lead to 'nobody [in the US being] financially invested in software from AI anymore.'

Basically, the original comment was hyperbole at best and BS at worst.