looking forward to see websites for $uicideboy$, C-Note, 2 Chainz, maybe Lil $1
(In case you can't see the official link for firewall purposes.)
I see what they did there.
It reminds me of another great interactive rapper graph: "rappers, sorted by the size of their vocabulary":
Also I wonder if this is including proper nouns and other references. (I'd think it should, but it's hard to account for the fact that referencing seven different Chris's would be counted as one token used seven times. Similarly, many words have many meanings, and those are all being lumped together as well, so no accounting here can probably ever be perfect).
If you had all the lyrics for all the rappers I think I'd - aggregate word counts - combine variations - remove most commonly used words in each language (I, I'm, You, You're, etc)
Then see who came out ahead. You shouldn't get penalized for releasing more.
You could probably do a bunch of cool analysis with that data.
edit: Oh no, there's actually a Genius API isn't there. No no no no. I have no time!
https://genius.com/Aesop-rock-time-moves-differently-here-ly...
Brother boys, Yolŋu boys, all the way from Arnhem Land
räwakpuy yindi djäl napurr dhuwal giritjinyaraw
Yolŋu balanda buŋgul go
dhumurr'yurra ŋanya marrtji go
napurr ga djälthirr
napurr dhu wiripukum walalaŋ maŋutji
marr ga manapanmirr wiripu wiripu miṯtji go
babu'yurrnha ŋanya marrtji goOne thing to note, you don't need every word on the planet to convey amazing lessons with lyrics, some of the more profound lyrics (I can't remember, but it certainly felt that way to me 15+ years ago) were by artists somewhere in the middle of your graph for me.
Just looked up Tech N9ne on there, really surprised he's in the middle. Immortal Technique more to the right with the list of people who really use an insane amount of words in their lyrics, not surprised honestly.
Edit: Just realized its the first 35,000 words... Man... this needs to do its best to get all of them. Unfortunately, there's songs by artists I can't find on ANY lyrics sites, so I fear this list will never be 100% but a close enough ballpark.
88 cent in 2025.
Not great, not terrible.
Which, undeniable, is an * all-time banger * that substantially increased the valuation of 50 Cent to something far surpassing US dollar inflation.
Seriously, go listen that that album again; total game changer. Top cut: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D3crqpClPY
I gotta go contemplate 'where we're at' again it seems. If that is truly a straight generative audio diffusion model.... wait, how did they get the same verse by verse chord progressions to match? this has to be professionally post-produced, right? AI models aren't able to do this end-to-end yet, right?
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_88Qg8FGrqY [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gFKREP3gPg
I'm ashamed to say I prefer these to the originals so much so that its difficult for me to listen to them any more. Make of that what you will...
Usually these AI covers don't use AI for the whole thing, but rather specifically for melding the to-be-impersonated voice into some given melody. That's been possible for a couple years now with decent results; one of my favorite examples is that of Plankton from Spongebob singing Disturbed's cover of “Sound of Silence”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eLRsw9mkmY
Possible that these newer ones are also using AI to generate other musical elements, but it's probably all being combined after-the-fact rather than being generated all at once.
Or, you know, something about rap and the Antichrist.
unfortunately due to the government shutdown, the BLS inflation data for September 2025 is delayed from October 15 (as it normally is) until October 24[1], so please check back then to see if he is >109 Cent.
assuming future stability, the site will automatically update on the 15th of every month.
[1] https://www.bls.gov/bls/092025-cpi-reschedule-notice.htm
Keepin It Riyal
2. Copy and paste this into your browser location bar: javascript:void(document.getElementsByTagName("video")[0].playbackRate = 50/prompt("Inflation-adjusted 50 Cent value:"))
3. Enter the inflation-adjusted 50 Cent value, which as we are talking about this today, is 109.
Et voila, inflation-adjusted 50 Cent music, and anyone finding this later can adjust it to their current inflation-adjusted value.
I believe there are limits on how slow the browsers will playback video. This code is not guaranteed to work past any possible hyperinflations or massive deflations that may occur in the future.
If you're curious how that may sound with a more careful job done then the browsers will do with stretching, consider Beethoven's 9th symphony stretched to 24 hours: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSJ9Bkhb1Q4&list=PLMEcbs3sHQ... Some of you may well legitimately love this. Obviously the frequency profile of doing this to a 50 Cent piece will be quite different but it at least gives the idea.
[1]: It is sheer coincidence that this video ID ends in "Ass". This is "50 Cent - In Da Club (Official Music Video)" for those wondering.
cron: '0 13 15 * *'
I think the area should be scaled proportionally, so the new width and height should be multiplied by sqrt(cents/50)
EG, 109.453452 cent or 109 113363/250000 or some such.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2024/apr/how-big-m...
Things being priced in is such horse shit. Momentum trading works specifically because the market fails to price in information.
And to be more precise, 25 years to halve is actually less inflation than the historical average of 3.29% from 1914-2025. At that rate it would take 21-22 years to halve.
Actually there is a surprisingly good trick to be able to calculate this called the rule of 72. Take the inflation percentage (2, 3 %) and divide 72 by it. Thats how many years it will take to halve. Not completing accurate but actually very close.
But yeah, inflation is a bitch over long time horizons. It makes me laugh when people say stocks are risky. Say you are 20 years old and want to save $2M USD for your retirement by 65. Expect that to be more like $470k.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Dollar_v...
In the first 130 years of the US, the value of the dollar didn't change, as far as I can tell, more than 50% from the starting point.
From 1913 to 2025, the dollar lost 96+% of its value. The difference between a ratio of 2:1 and a ratio of more like 30:1.
I'm not arguing it didn't. But I think in kind the US's global economic position didn't change substantially between full independence in 1783 and 1913. It grew during that period, but the idea of the US as a peer (and then dominant) economic world power is a distinctly post-WWI one.
> As the market becomes more efficient at producing goods and services, we should expect prices to decrease, not inflate.
Yes, that’s why the cost of clothes has decreased in real terms.
The point is that even after the central bank was introduced, the US remained on a literal or defacto gold standard, of varying sorts, until 1971. That's when Bretton Woods ended and the value of the USD became based on absolutely nothing and the government granted themselves the power to 'print' arbitrary amounts at their discretion.
No, it was much less stable (higher volatility), but the long term trend was neutral.
If currency halves in purchasing power in 25 yrs, that means inflation is 100% in 25 years, so
(1 + r)^25 = 2
r = 2^(1/25) - 1 ~ 2.8%"For the pre-Fed period (1790-1913), the average annual inflation was 0.4 percent with a coefficient of variation of 13.2. During the period 1941-2016, these figures changed to 3.5 percent and 0.8, respectively. If we look at the post-Volcker era (1988-2016), annual inflation was 2.2 percent on average with a coefficient of variation of 0.4." -
Source: https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/s...
Also recommend Debt: The First 5000 Years (David Graeber) and Capital in the Twenty-First Century (Thomas Piketty) which cover this and more on how current concepts of finance and capital post-1914 are incredibly different from the majority of human civilization.
I think a broader historical/anthropological approach is helpful here to understand why those tradeoffs were made.
Citing an average number is misleading since the chart of the value of a dollar during that time looks like a zig-zag with some massive swings in both directions. This means periods of severe deflation, too, which can be very bad for people.
It definitely was not flat or consistently near zero, though citing an average number is a great way to give that impression.
Not when you are also citing the coefficient of variation it isn’t.
> since the chart of the value of a dollar during that time looks like a zig-zag with some massive swings in both directions.
Uh, exactly the claim made, “we have accepted higher inflation in order to achieve stable inflation that is predictable.” (emphasis added)
Characterizing this as a bad thing is, IMO, quite bonkers, but so is denying that it is exactly what has happened.
Why not look at 1000-1500? That's a much longer time period.
I agree 100% with your thought.
However, I've come with an explanation: people save $100k and the amount in itself will not budge unless they use that money. This, of course, is a flawed argument as the amount doesn't matter; what you can buy with it does. With stocks—I prefer ETFs but I digress—you do not know the amount you will have in 40 years (even if, historically, you would have made money in absolutely all cases).
This uncertainty, coupled with lack of economics knowledge, is why people qualify stocks as "risky". However, instead of "risky", I think they mean "volatile". Cash is absolutely the riskiest of assets as it loses value in 100% of cases despite being more stable than stocks.
And my cynic mind tells me that the banking industry has all to gain from telling people that "stocks are very risky", instilling fear and, instead, selling them over-complicated products where the bank is guaranteed to make a profit on the back of their clients. Of course, they tell them it's "100% safe".
Pretty genius because it can be framed as taxing greedy capitalists when literally they're just taxing fractional inflation.
That said, I feel like this number is way off, personally, based on changes in housing and food prices between the two times.
Groceries are one of the more discretionary items. Your mortgage is fixed, demand for gas is inelastic, etc. But groceries you respond to the price. And so many staples have become 2,3,4X times more expensive compared to pre-covid. I remember the cheap beef (chuck roast) was about $4/lb and decent steak (ribeye) was about $9/lb. Now its about $10/lb and $22/lb.
So psychologically, now your "splurging" just gets you the "cheap" stuff.
Wages have risen a bit. But 1) not nearly as much as inflation 2) these are very asymetric and 3) the way they rise doesnt feel like wage inflation. Even those who saw wages rise due to inflation probably felt like it was other things. Such as simply changing jobs. Or just normal yearly review. Or maybe they havent switched jobs and have some "unrealized gains" awaiting them still. No one one saw their wages incrementally rise month by month.
Said another way, I think making 100k in 1995 would make one feel way, way richer than making 200k today.
The government published nationwide inflation measures are completely irrelevant to anyone who had a goal of buying land in a tier 1 metro, or in the higher end suburbs of tier 2 metros. And you will feel very different based on if you have kids or not.
Land, healthcare, and education pretty much eclipse everything else.
I feel like this is the real-life version of my favorite joke from Andy Kindler: "I know they said don't re-invent the wheel, but does it have to be so round?"
Edit: emphasis
People don't understand that money is a time and location bound object and pretend it is infinitely liquid and fungible when it isn't. Money is kind of like electricity. When you borrow it into existence and spend it, it travels a path through society, but it must then travel along a return path back to the source. Inflation could be thought of as a form of resistive loss, where current stays the same but voltage drops.
There's a reason why demurrage (or its ugly brother inflation) is a necessary bitter pill if you want a working money system. It forces money to travel down the return path sooner than later.
And deflation is much worse. So we target a small 2% yearly inflation so that if it's 1% or 3% it's not a big deal. Whereas if you target 0% and wind up with -1%, you've got problems.
Deflation is only bad for people who hold a lot of debt. For people who are cash positive, deflation means you're richer, you're being paid more to do the same job, etc. all while maintaining your freedom. Deflation actually being good is the central gamble behind bitcoin's design. If more people understood that then they'd probably stop using it for such frivolous purposes. Not everyone is privileged enough to even hold debt, so it's really an exclusionary system. And what do the people who the system trusts to have debt (e.g. private equity firms) do with it? They do leveraged buyouts to rip out the heart and soul of responsible American companies. The only thing inflation is good for is keeping folks running on the hamster wheel and bankrolling entitlements.
This seems backwards: I think the most salient debt in the average American consumer's life is student loans, car loans, credit card debts, mortgages, etc. These aren't hallmarks of privilege; not having any of them would be the hallmark.
(You might be right about corporate debt, I don't know. But I do think "deflation is only bad for people who hold a lot of debt" does a disservice in suggesting that that isn't a lot of ordinary people.)
(Notably, the credit industry has moved onto schemes like BNPL that target individuals who would otherwise be protected from predatory credit by consumer protection laws. Those people are exploited, and unambiguously benefit - albeit not much - from an inflationary instead of deflationary environment.)
Upthread poster is wrong about deflation (at least, who it is bad/good for, its not clear at all to me what they think it is.) But you are also wrong about what it is.
> Deflation is prices are going up and wages are stagnant or falling.
No, deflation is a decrease in the general price level, not an increase (which is inflation), no matter what else happens at the same time.
You just (approximately) described stagflation (the combination of inflation and economic stagnation/recession), which, like deflation is generally bad, but is a very different flavor of bad.
Inflation is annoying, but deflation is destructive. When that happens, people hold on to money as an investment and it doesn’t flow in the economy. The Great Depression was caused by deflation. (See Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz’s A Monetary History of the US.)
As a result, central banks try to have a little inflation, so that random mistakes don’t push us into deflation. The Fed’s target is 2%. I think it should be a little higher. (See Fischer Black’s “Interest Rates as Options” and the shadow short-term rate.)
No one should be holding inflating dollars over the long term. That money should be invested in loans (bonds, mortgages, …) or equity (stocks, real estate, …). We have good ways of comparing investments over time by removing the inflation. These are CPI or the GDP deflator.
edit: i see elsewhere in the comments the author explains this. github action indeed.
https://www.rateinflation.com/consumer-price-index/uk-histor...
https://www.rateinflation.com/consumer-price-index/usa-histo...
Both approx +110%
Yet over that time UK GDP per capita is up only 46% compared to the US which is up a massive +223%. Depressing.
At that time 50¢ was only worth about 75¢, making Ke$ha the clear queen of finally named music performers.
That looks like the "inflation" the government wants you to believe in.
Name one thing that only doubled in price over the last 30 years.
Even gold (which has its own inflation) went up in price 10 fold.
So fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByaBdXi77Zg
Although I guess buck-o-nine is now approx $2.37, which is also concerning.
2 bits = a quarter (25 cents), 4 bits = 50 cents
8 bits = byte, 4 bits = nibble
Therefore 50 Cent = Nibble.
2OEH8eoCRo0•3mo ago