Braggadocious

Yeah your motives are so pure. You're a real WK Kellogg. A real Lewis Terman.

The entire point of prison is to remove them from society. Why are we spending more resources on prisoners than people who've never commited a crime?

There is no separation between corporations from government.

You're effectively describing trickle-down economics. "Help out rich people so they pay more taxes which will trickle down to poor people" That's not a real thing. The economy is trickle-up. Income inequality is widening. San francisco has the worst income inequality of any city in a developed country: top 1% earn 44x more than bottom 99%. The number of home owners has actually decreased in the last ten years. Cost of living have increased in line with what the top 1% are making. The recession hurt low income far more than the top and yet we subsidized the shit out of the top by giving tax breaks to tech and wallstreet. We basically created a drag race between a ferrari and a civic, gave the ferrari a head start, and then sat around waiting for the civic to catch up.

I love how inmates get a better education and more support from tech companies than the adults who live in the bay area. The bay area has the worst income inequality of anywhere in any developed country. Bootcamps are a scam and cost tens of thousands of dollars and yet inmates, people convicted of severe crimes, are treated to free education. From a business standpoint this makes more sense because inmates have no bargaining power and can flood the coding labor pool, thus lowering wages for businesses. How is a boot camp graduate supposed to compete with modern-day slaves?

By the way the W.K. Kellogg Foundation is a eugenics group. What are they doing here? This program is so fishy.

Today I learned there was a giant balloon cow god that existed 44000 years ago.

If you didnt like the ISP market in the USA wouldnt you want to be able to open a portal to an alternate ISP markets?

The brutality of the dark ages has been debunked. The timeline I just gave you about illiteracy, the printing press, the enlightenment, and our 400 year old education system remains in tact. Neil postman's a good source for the history of education (see "The Disappearance of Childhood") or you can simply wikipedia it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography) There's some graphs that show how the enlightenment coincides an exponential growth in mass publication.

As far as protestantism and the printing press being invented prior to the enlightenment, yeah. Without widespread use of both you don't get the enlightenment for reasons I mentioned previously. And neither were really new ideas, either. Ancient greece had the printing press, high rates of literacy and a belief in interpreting texts for yourself, but these ideas were lost during the dark ages.

That's sortof what the enlightenment was about... The enlightenment period was a decentralization of information caused by the reinvention and widespread use of the printing press in europe. During the dark ages europe's literacy rate was comparable to pre-mesopotamia. The fall of the roman empire lead to a fracturing of european civilization, the near-total loss of literacy, latin fractured into a dozen languages because priests wrote and read at a first grade level, misspelling words, reading with one finger slowly scrolling the text, mouthing each word phonetically...Ancient Greek texts were completely lost for a time...

Because nobody could read and copies the bible were sparse the catholic church was the single source of word of god. The printing press changed things. The bible became widespread and people read the bible for themselves. With that came an important shift, that one's own interpretation of a text was a valid interpretation. Tons of important literary works became widespread. The middle class valued literacy and saw it as a ticket to wealth and began teaching their kids to read and write competitively at younger and younger ages. They invented the education system we have today; the entire idea of a sequential learning system based around books, and becoming an adult when you could read at a certain level (as opposed to the catholic belief that you were an adult when you were old enough to fight at age ten), that was also the enlightenment and romantic period. Protestantism came about because people valued individual interpretations of the bible, which the catholic church had serious qualms with since that was their entire claim to authority...

So the fact that you grew up in a family which valued literacy, which sent you to a university where you spent four years reading books, and then came out of that with your own valid and rational ideas about what those texts mean, and your rite of passage into adulthood is based on your ability to read and write at a university level, that is still very much framed in the values of the enlightenment.

Off topic but that still sounds like it's framed within the enlightenment period. If you're reading books and valuing literacy, (ie individual interpretations of texts, as opposed to being told what a book means) then you're still framed within the "enlightenment view of reality."

I like how a liberal arts education is "divergent from the norm" now. The primary function of university is to make people read for four years. Business degrees, CS degrees, essentially job training programs are a bastardization of the institution.

Yeah no i see what you're goin for. Maybe comparing public roads to air travel would be a better analogy? Idk im just being a nudge.

I think side projects over 30 will be more common pretty soon. Income inequality is getting worse and worse, other industry incomes are falling like crazy and lots of people are career changing to tech.

You ever think about how much we subsidize businesses by paying for college ourselves? The older I get the more I think the university to corporation pipeline is a fucking racket. It also sucks for employees because here comes these kids who were allowed to learn about all the new technologies you wish you knew with zero distractions and other obligations, now comin' in hot on your heels to take yer jobs en masse, and because of the larger labor pool they all undercut one another's bargaining ability, lowering wages. If I owned a company and I was lookin to hire I'd be callin that a twofer: free employee training and hiring discounts!

not really a faster road as anyone stuck in an expresslane behind a prius will tell you, but a less congested road free of peasants. Not really sure how this analogy syncs up but just throwing in my $0.02.

If you want net neutrality you should be excited by companies building private networks because it means there's a competitive market that no one ISP or government can control.

No-one (at least I don't think anyone) is suggesting that knowledge, experience and skills belong to your employer.

That's the whole argument. There's literally no other argument. There is no separation between "previous body of work" and "experience, skills, or knowledge." I think you missed the, "Prince had to change his name to Artist formerly known as prince just so he could continue making music," analogy. That's exactly what's going on here.

But if I'm a video game developer, and I invent a new shading technique for video game graphics while I'm employed at BigGameCo (whether at home or at work)...

If you're a pioneer in shaders, it's because you've spent years of time and effort trying to understand the problems associated with this one specialized field. You are going to continue being a pioneer in shaders long after you leave your current employer, because that's where you are the most competitive, because that's where all of your knowledge, experience and skills are. To change fields now would be career suicide. You would no longer be a specialist. Your years of knowledge and experience in shaders would lose all value if you decided to dig ditches/whatever alt line of work you go into, and that's what these contracts are forcing you to do: brave a job market where you have no advantage for your time spent at your previous company.

Under these types of contracts, you're not allowed to move forward with your career trajectory after leaving a company. You would be building off your previous work that you did with them, and you're approaching problems with the same solutions you already came up with. That means your old employer owns the rights to all of your subsequent work. Same thing happens to musicians. Since every song they write is an iteration of their previous body of work, if musicians try to leave their record label and can be sued for the rights to every subsequent song they write. Prince had this happen and changed his name to "Artist formerly known as prince." to skirt around the contract. Ridiculous solution to a ridiculous problem. At the time I just thought Prince was being crazy. Apparently not.

I'm also not talking about what types of contracts have been enforced in the past, obviously these companies keep trying to use these contracts because there is precedent, but there's precedent for fucking everything in this country and I could write a historiography of court-ordered fuckery if need be. What im trying to say is that these types of contracts have been thrown out in the past for being unreasonable, and should all be thrown out in the future. This was not the intended spirit of any law allowing people to own "intellectual property."

"I make some furniture from home" is a completely different analogy from the one i just made. Either you didn't get it or that's willful contextomy.

Every company started by someone uses experience they've generated at a previous job. These contracts effectively make anyone starting a company a breach of contract. And just because it's in a contract, doesn't mean it can't be thrown out by a judge if the terms are too unreasonable. These terms are too unreasonable.

Also the concept of "intellectual property" is so misunderstood and abused by the legal system. Originally it was meant to prevent people from writing books that tail on the success of another person's work, like trying to get paid for harry potter fan fiction. It doesnt mean that after being a fiction writer for one publisher the publisher subsequently owns all fictional writing you do for the rest of your life. Prince should've had to change his name to Artist just so he could write music again. Maybe Nuvia's CEO needs to needs to change his name too just so he can continue making microchips.

Are side projects really that big of a deal? This is tech. Everybody has side projects. Can you imagine if a herman miller furniture designer was sued for making chairs on the side?

How many algorithms are there in chrome alone? I remember when people realized that they could game Facebook shares for higher rankings on chrome and for a while buzzfeed top ten lists outranked Wikipedia every fucking time. I guess that’s still going on. What a clusterfuck search results are nowadays.

If anyone builds anything, please make it so algorithms or queries are archived. I hate how I can’t find anything on the internet that I searched for and found years ago. Its like the history of the internet evaporates every year. I don’t even know if some websites still exist or if I simply can’t find them because rankings are terrible.

I’m to the point that I haven’t been on a new website in years. How do you find new websites in this day and age when the same websites are ranked at the top every time?

it's literally the same engine as chrome. the only reason i use chrome is for the dev tools.

That's pretty absurd considering the average american has a screen in front of their face 8-10 hours a day. You're basically saying what people do for 8-10 hours a day, every day, for their entire lives isnt useful information to AI.

teeny tiny use case for general AI, yes.

targeting ads is only one teeny tiny use case for user data. Building general AI is a race and the more user data you have the faster your AI will learn. You definitely want to limit the amount of data your competitors have.

I've done a lot of reading on this, from neil postman, to nicholas carr, sherry turkle, jaron lanier, tim wu, to plato's allegory of the cave. We've been worried about these issues for eternity. As a consumer of information, how do you tell what is real and what isnt? As a publisher, what role do you have to tell people what is real and what isnt? As a content provider, how do you separate the wheat from the chaff?

As a software developer myself I'm always looking to discuss this topic with layman and other software developers since we're always looking to develop a new architecture/a new paradigm for conveying better and more concise data to clients. Even without the business model, how would you create a scalable model for all of humanity, regardless of culture or creed, that displays the information people need to do what they need to do? And what does that even mean, "information people need to do what they need to do?" The toughest part of programming is designing scalable architecture. It's so complicated and difficult that we've all but given up on trying to figure this shit out and now we're just building AI hoping something computationally faster and less human can possibly do it better.

More data is more data.

1. User/Business Data

2. They have the computing and engineering power to optimize pretty much anything beyond where it is today.

3. User/Business Data

The lack of explanation is intentional because they dont want people gaming the system and getting around the filters. That's the idea anyway.

I fear all of this will be used as part of a prediction program to find the best employees based on performance metrics. Imagine if before you even gave an applicant a callback you could see if they've ever had a bout of depression, insomnia, anything that may affect their job performance or the performance of their team. That would be standard part of any background check if that information was available.

Right. can't say taxation created something that existed before taxation. If I had to guess, most marijuana users simply dont want to pay club prices, and don't want to support the government.