B4CKlash

I enjoyed reading this article but I think the author overlooked that "low-level" languages aren't just less supported, they're also character-dense. You can accomplish more with less, simply because it's a higher level abstraction. If you choose to abstract through this problem, aren't you creating a high-level language?

I agree with you. I'd go further and suggest that candidates should get anonymized information about applicants in the pool. Nothing like negotiating with yourself for a job...

What's interesting is that broadly speaking, people acknowledge that negotiating with asymmetric information is immortal or wrong. Take the stock market for example, insider trading is illegal and you don't often hear calls to reverse these laws.

But when it comes to private markets and semi-private negotiations that same sentiment doesn't easily transfer. Does society benefit in some unique way for allowing asymmetries in labor negotiations, private markets like Uber, or B2C relations like Robinhood (1,2)?

1. https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2020-321 2. Note, Robinhood was fined not for front-runniny customers, just for falsely claiming customers received quality orders. I suspect theyve only stopped the latter behavior.

There's also another angle. During the call with Lex last week, Dario seemed to imply that future models would run on amazon chips from Annapurna Labs (Amazon's 2015 fabless purchase). Amazon is all about the flywheel + picks and shovels and I, personally, see this as the endgame. Create demand for your hardware to reduce the per unit cost and speed up the dev cycle. Add the AWS interplay and it's a money printing machine.

Let's not confuse correlation with causation.

Is the organizational pressure that seeks conformity filtering out tattoos based on tattoos or the lack of conformity? It's tough to understand whether you're saying more about self-perpetuating hierarchies or tattoos.

I'm aligned with your base point. I'm not seeking to extend my rational to anyone other than people who make their opinions well known.

Yes.

Ironically, we use tattoos for opposite reasons.

If you're quick to judge someone's character based on their tattoos, it suggests a tendency toward superficial assessments. I find it difficult to trust critical decisions made by someone who relies on such surface-level judgments. In my experience, those with narrow, dogmatic worldviews are often less interested in finding real solutions and more preoccupied with adhering to authority and bureaucratic norms.

Eric Schmidt advocated for this exact thing in an Op-ed piece in the latest MIT Technology Review.

[1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/05/13/1092322/why-amer...

High tech manufacturing at scale is often equally as challenging as development work. Starting with a proven design let's teams focus on leveling up their manufacturing capabilities prior to introducing the double complexity of manufacturing a part that just made it out of CDR.

A bit of a tangent, but this is the genius of Musk's Merlin engine. Simple design utilizing RP9 allows the manufacturing staff to hit their stride before introducing the raptor (methalox).

Against the Gods by Peter L. Bernstein is a fantastic book that has a few chapters about this family. It's worth the read if you're interested in the history probability and risk

I think your point is fair, but the point I'm making is that we should applaud when private industry is willing to shoulder a large proportion of the risk (vs. the traditional externalize risk, internalized profit).

Also relevant and stated publicly by John, Blue Origin expects to cover more than 50% of the total cost.

To put this into perspective the DoD will happily invest north of $1 Trillion for a single fighter pilot development program (F-35) and I doubt Lockheed is willing to front any of that...

There's something deeply ironic about a person commenting from a highly-engineered device, operating on a highly-engineered network, sitting inside of a highly-engineered building, in a highly-engineered city debating the merits of progress.

There actually is precedence to this, albeit not in transportation. If you own a superfund site, the owner or operator of each facility must establish financial assurance for closure of the facility. Many times that assurance comes in the form of a surety bond.

Here's a link to a random website that I have no dealings or affiliation -> https://suretybondsagency.com/surety-bonds/contract-bonds/en...

There are few books by the American Statistician Edward Tufte worth checking out. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Envisioning Information, and Visual Explanations, all exceptional works of art. The books act as both a teaching guide and a compendium of beautiful historical infographical-artifacts.

I've thought deeply about the problem and I think the solution is fairly simple; account for the cost. Businesses are simple and will react in kind. Either shift the burden of proof - aka, force incorrect billings to face steep penalties or charge for the time it takes to resolve problems.

Technically, every minute I'm on hold is a benefit to the corporation. I'm not wasting their resources. Imagine if you were paid, something like minimum wage, to wait on hold. Suddenly there's a real incentive to quickly resolve problems.

Turn implicit problems into explicit ones and you'll be amazed at how quickly the explicit problems disappear.

The prisoner's dilemma strikes again.

To be fair, any billion-dollar multinational will have an organizational chart that looks very similar to this. Companies like EY exist, almost purely, to create 'tax effective' structures with hybrid debt instruments and service agreements.

It partially dictates how the company communicated with its’ employees. A remote first company is going to engage with its employee base differently, invest in benefits that respect that population more and create channels that enable an optimization of that environment. A non-first organization doesn’t need to necessitate any of that. Oftentimes remote work is the lesser of two evils; the other evil being less competitive in the job market place.

Paying less in taxes doesn't have to be nefarious.

When you put money into a 401K you're shielding income from taxation. A 401K is an explicit tradeoff the government has created; individuals saving more today will hopefully translate into less reliance on the safety net in the future.

Reusable rockets with massive cargo capacity is just one example. SpaceX equipped rockets will soon be able to carry around 100 tons of cargo to any place on earth in less than an hour; massive implications for disaster response.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40865/rocket-delivery-...

Your whole perspective is a bit jarring. At any point in history - on the precipice of technological innovation - someone could have said 'Why go further, what's the point?' And that's just it, your limited ability to see the positive implications shouldn't define where progress goes. If we stopped at the horse-drawn carriage we would have missed the fire truck. If we stopped at Arpanet we would have missed every unforeseen positive associated with the internet today.

This is an incredibly small minded perspective. Difficult challenges require new technologies, new processes and new ways of thinking. More specifically, technologies developed through the race to land on the moon (and space flight generally) are integral to almost every aspect of 'your' life and define what most of us consider human flourishing.

Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spinoff_technologies#:~:t....

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/20-inventions-we-would...

This is a bit of a strawman. There are a lot of factors influencing the decision on both sides. That $2500 will leave a gap in your resume, both literally and from an experience perspective. The $3000 on the other hand ignores a ton of externalities: Cost of commuting, childcare, etc. plus the associated hours. In a real sense it could be $2500 a month raising your kids, or $1500 a month in real income after childcare/commuting for 50 hours all in.

A business has a number of levers to pull if they want to suppress wages; outsourcing (nationally and internationally) is usually the primary means. How do you suggest we increase the value of people's time without the Government setting the floor? (not to say the Government is the only way - just 'A' way).

There are two aspects of 'your' credit score that could be effected by the shutting down exisiting credit lines. The credit score system is certainly not perfect, but I don't believe these are nonsensical metrics.

1). Average age of credit - If this is your oldest dated credit it could have a sizeable impact on the average. 2). Credit utilization - The total amount of credit extended to you divided by the total amount used. $5000 across $50,000 of extended credit (3 credit cards, auto loan, line of credit) is 10% utilization. If WF closes your $25,000 your utilization just doubled without any change on your side (plus a potential ding for average age).

I was actually under the impression that what Pinterest does was against the ToS of Google. I can't find the link or reference, but I believe it was along the lines of 'You can't post images just to farm user account creation on your services' which is exactly what Pinterest does.

I would love if we could do away with these sites and those websites that insist I use their 'app' to view simple text data.

I believe there are plenty of examples of profitable news organizations. They all generally sit in the 'patronage' category as you described/ala The Guardian.

The New York Times is the first one that comes to mind: https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/NYT/company-people

The economist is very profitable: https://www.economistgroup.com/pdfs/Annual_Report_2021.pdf

And lastly, (while I'm sure there are more), I believe Conde Nast has said the New Yorker is also profitable.

You realize Tyler Cowen posted three quarters of this piece on his website: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/06/wh...

I will happily pay for quality content - Bloomberg is not one of those sources. You're defending a company that will happily use it's monopolistic edge to charge 24,000 a year for an API. Get off your high horse.

Paywalls with workarounds are the only type of paywalls allowed on HN. Asking for a workaround is an acceptable practice.

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=paywalls%20by:dang&dateRange=a...

Is there a workaround for this paywall?

If you're looking for more information about reverse repos and this action generally, I found this piece incredibly useful: https://fed.tips/sico4-1/

Long but worth the education (if you're interested)