AI economics

 "Money" is just a proxy for resources. 

"Jobs" is just a proxy for labor resources.

The resources and labor exist whether money or jobs exist or not. It is the distribution of said resources that necessitates a system of money and jobs. 

We should not confuse the measurement of something with the thing itself. Measurement stands only as proxy and when the concept fails, we should fall back on the ground truth.

For instance, for many, the fear of AI is based around the fact that it will automate away many jobs. But the focus on "jobs" as a measure of economic health and prosperity only holds under certain circumstances. And said circumstances may not hold under an AI-driven economy. The same human resources exist whether AI is adopted or not. So the real problem, which people inherently understand but don't necessarily express correctly, is that during the transition period AI will make certain skills less valuable to others, and there will be cost for re-skilling people, while at the same time the rest of society will benefit from lower cost. Also relevant is the risk of monopoly as AI companies subsume entire industries.

Relatinoship dynamics and "optionality"

Incomplete, just notes:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lad3sX6cPJo

"facts"
- women leave men at higher rates (2x)

- men mature slower

- men seek younger women regardless of their own age

- men live shorter lives

- age gap M > F

Consider: "viable dating age" for women vs men -- women have shorter timeframes, hence denser "time in a relationship"?

Optionality? Or is the real problem that younger men are competing against older men for a smaller pool of younger women? 

What about the fact that women leave more often, initiating breakups? Simply, competition
Yes, evo bio is a part of it. no, that doesn't make women (or men) "superficial" and self-serving. Women seek a partner who will support/love and is mature. That's all modeling on the micro-scale though. Given a dating time distribution, it could describe any kind of micro-level situation. The same picture happens even if men break off the relationship but have trouble finding the right person due to competition. 

How about we enhance our model to talk about the economics of optionality? Do women really have more options? Supply vs demand? 

In general, my goals are:

-Model the econometrics of dating such that it may possible explain popular observed phenomena such as "men are terrible" and "women have optionality" as either secondary inevitabilities of the mathematics, or more primarily motivated by the mathematics by some causal mechanism.  

    - Do women actually have optionality? In what sense?

    - Are men incentivized to be more awful? Are they? Or is there an inevitable reason why that sense would arise/become popular? 

    - Does this model give us any other insights? Explain other phenomena? (Crazy cat ladies, e.g. women left behind by the dating market, their number, divorce rates, etc)

https://medium.com/the-renaissance-economist/how-an-economist-sees-the-dating-market-eb3afe0c9e35