Noos

You are working with him to create a solution and should ask questions from a shared point of view. Your questions instead sound like you are doubting him.

"How can this make our checkout page better?" "What benefits do other companies get from using React?" "Is it feasible to change technology at this time?" "There might be implications if we switch, like..."

You are not understanding why they should consider it; you are subtly asking them to justify why they are bothering you.

I speak under correction here, but you won't have teams; you will just do it yourself. Like cad/cam software got rid of a LOT of machine drafters and the designers just became responsible for outputting the finished drawings. You'll be the entire team.

you remember the concept of dumping, i.e., flooding a market with below cost product to drive out competing businesses? This is dumping for creatives.

editing: not that it's intentional, but these things will have the same effect; way too much product even for creative works. No one will be able to make money off the product but the tools.

It's hilarious that the point of technology was to save us time from drudgery to pursue leisure or meaningful work, and the engineers are going all the way to make sure technology does even that for us. Who ever thought we had too many children's book authors or that we needed to be freed from the burden from writing them?

It's like a hydra that eats everything and keeps growing more heads.

The thing is, you may dislike the takes but they are in response to a real problem normies don't think about or would have any advice to give.

The solutions may be seen as bad or the takes as not good, but the problem still is very real, and for many people bad solutions are better than no solutions or the advice people give that doesn't work at all. Things like this should alert you to the fact something is wrong, not make you recoil from all the bad people.

there is inflation with everything since we are connected to everyone in the world. All programmers work at FAANG, all artists are superhumanly taleneted, all business owners make million dollar unicorns and look like actors, etc. Average is slowly being filtered out

Why do you even compare the two?

The death penalty is done to a tiny portion of criminals, is subject to very strict procedures and rules, has plenty of time to appeal, and is generally not "murder" by any description necessary. It can be misused of course, and there's plenty of arguments it is unnecessary, but we abort 800k alone per year in the USA and there's significant debate about the humanity of what the procedure is inflicted on. We have killed 1550 people this year for the death penalty.

They are two different things. You might as well say all prolife people should be anti-war and all prochoice people be pro-war for that rationale. I never see why people think this is a gotcha of hypocrisy.

But on the flip side, i can walk to a bubbling stream that's right in my back yard. I have never gotten mugged, never had to worry about shitty neighbors yelling loud enough to hear through the walls of my house, never needed to thread my way through panhandlers or beggars, never had shit stolen from me, and can see deer and wildlife sometimes even walk through the streets at night.

People seem to think a lack of privacy, quiet, and safety is this massive benefit.

people here are not talking small raises. Like what job can match a 30-50% raise in compensation? That's absurd. Do you think they can sustain that over time?

On the flip side, headphone jacks can wear out entirely. And one of the advances bluetooth has over normal jacks is that it's now possible for headphones to have mics on them capable of answering calls. Sort of similar to wireless charging, its possible to wear out ports from overuse.

Those movies were lying to make a point; they were trying to terrify people and succeeded, not trying to make them survive if it actually happened. It's rare that you would see a thoughtful film about surviving and rebuilding the world after it, because it is beyond the scope of film and doesn't have the hook that fear brings.

Don't take things too seriously. Remember all the movies about the internet in the 1990s.

Not sure why people are that hostile. I'm sure that identifying someone also can identify you if the circle around the person is small enough, and if said person is powerful enough, people choosing to believe them over him would end careers, yes. He'd have to say "well, i worked on this particular study with him, and the data was made up vs actually collected."

I think its more "how dare you hint scientists are corrupt!" that kind of drives the outrage.

the cheapskate consumer really doesn't have much power here, though. Not many people will develop primarily for xbox if all they can hope is to have gamepass level money. Thats why despite it, Xbox is still very much a 3rd in the console wars, and microsoft has to resort to buying popular IPs to have a chance.

The tesla isn't really common though; I've never even seen one, and my guess it's much more common in wealthy areas as a status symbol more than a widespread success.I don't even see electric vehicles as a whole where i live much, apart from the occasional prius or hybrid. I looked up the superchargers in my state, and they tend to be concentrated in the capital and the communities near new york state.

I think people kind of overemphasize the things the rich people do, and don't get how much a nonissue they are otherwise for everyone else. Like everyone talks about remote work constantly, but really only a minority of people can even hope to do it; many people got laid straight off during the pandemic instead.

Wouldn't people into these things be aware how fragile, clunky, or incomplete they are as solutions, and want to not always suggest them for every problem? Or be more critical than the average user, not less?

It feels like that people develop technology, and become totally surprised when 5-10 years down the road severe or significant issues happen that no one thought much about in the rush to get wealthy over it. You all on this site hate Facebook, but the potential for its abuses was always there and very few people seemed to think about it during a time when it might be possible to mitigate it.

Would you really want to risk this with finance? I think it's a fair question to be angry old men when you see what technology can do over long enough of a timeframe. Like even now people are sanguine about how the internet massively increased the attack vectors people could use on others to a national or world level, and empowered scams, malware, and more.

If you are serious about DeFi or other technologies, you HAVE to look beyond brrr money go up and le Fed bad. There's too much at stake.

Uh, this makes zero sense. This is just places that are inexpensive to get degrees from because many places now require college degrees for jobs that don't need them. They are not "the future of college education" in any real leadership sense, no more than Coursera is "the future of education."

...replace metaverse with Bitcoin.

For all the hate HN has for the latter, it still exists, and defies its constantly predicted death. At this point if HN says something is bullshit its actually time to start looking at it critically because apparently bullshit survives much longer than what HN actually likes, lol RSS for example.

The metaphysical BS is the problem, architects treat buildings like sculptures, novels, and stories; as vehicles to say something as much or more than livable places. I don't know why we have the idea that structures need to be an artistic representation of ideals like sculpture when they are designed to be used primarily by people to live in and customize as they see fit.

It would be like designing hammers that are commentary on the homelessness problem in the world today but are strikingly ineffective to actually hammer nails; its fine if the only result is to be part of a museum exhibit but the architects force us to use the hammers.

The eisenmann snippet of the second page has him try to defend his work because it is supposed to say something, a commentary on modern dislocation. But that's a message designed for people to not escape, and most arcihtecture in that sense is the tyranny of the artist or government trying to immortalize feelings in books which you can only close the cover of by moving away.

They have to prioritize work because your kid gets sick, or gets out of school early, or you have to go to their event. Kids have much more time to disrupt your life, and parents need more accommodation than single people for flexible scheduling. It's single people who pick up the slack for you, the whole "negotiating" thing is BS because its rarely the disruptions are on a fixed schedule.

The breaking of the rules here is not for the driver's benefit, though. Its the owners greed pushing serious costs on their employees. Disruptive innovation doesn't always make things better.

No, its kind of obvious they are trying to make the compairson:

"What Winston Plywood is doing defies almost everything we have been told about wages in Mississippi — that raising the minimum wage would cripple profits, throw company pay structures into chaos, create inflation and ultimately wreck the economy. Besides, we are told, Mississippi’s low cost of living makes a raise in the minimum wage unnecessary.

Yet a recent study provided to Congress on hearing about raising the federal minimum wage showed half of Mississippians are ALICE (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed) and that a minimum wage that would cover essential costs of living would need to be $10.94 per hour for a single person and $14 per hour for two-income families with two children.

That a sawmill in a rural Mississippi town would go far beyond that is startling — and definitely something to keep an eye on."

It's not fixing facebook. No one was saying "fix facebook" when Barack Obama was praised for using it and it was part of his strategy to win. For example:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/17/obama-digital-...

The "facebook is bad" started happening when Trump won, imo. Essentially the establishment on both sides realized that it could also be used against them as much as for them. It feels similar to AM radio, which conservatives successfully used and you started to see cries for the Fairness Doctrine to be reinstated.

I agree with the post that this wont solve anything.

except that the small grocery stores have poor selection, expensive prices, and are more inconvenient since you have to spend more time every day to get your things instead of shopping for the month. Some of us work long hours and don't have a wife who can spend the time to do things like that.

Some of us know about both options, and a car is much better. People like cars because they are freedom; you are free to go where you want without relying on public transit schedules or the realization you have maybe a five mile radius of places you can walk to in an hour.

The problem with learning advanced math is that math is isolated.

Like if I learn accounting, I know why I'm learning it; to learn how to create, audit, or read the financial statements of a business. If I learn math, it comes across more as "here are these arcane puzzles you need to solve." Like no one does double entry bookkeeping in the abstract; you learn the history, the methods, etc in the confines of an express purpose.

But trying to learn precalc as an adult (which i do get), what's striking is how little purpose or context there is to it. Why do I need to know how to factor imaginary numbers, or know the slope of something?

I think math when isolated is a big reason why its so hard to learn. They teach the toolset but people don't have the need to use the tools unless they go into a separate subject.

Yeah, considering the actual day to day life of all people, Michael Phelps's genetic advantages are pointless. They confer advantage only in a specifically designed field that society has created and that is really a tremendous waste of time all things considered; it's just a performance.

But the aim of all this genetic stuff is not saying "well, Kenyans can make better marathon runners if we stick them into a sports contest." It's usually a lot more pernicious than that, and involves intelligence. And ordering society in some manner around genetic expressions in a way a lot more dangerous than recognizing some people are better at public performance than others.

...in 40 years. This is indistinguishable from random people being nutcases imo; you use the numbers to try and make them scarier than they are.

The only thing worse than engineers trying to use algorithims to make us eat junk food is them using them to try and make us healthy. This is because at least the junk food part no one will be able to seriously defend is morally right. The best way to tyranize others is to claim to be working for their own good.

Netflix is fine.

And they tell you that they went there but the parking lot is too big, the carriages are too hard to push, they can't really stand in line a lot because their knee hurts them, and more.

I don't think people understand that sometimes your body makes savings not a savings. You don't miss good health till its gone, or the ability to do things with it.

No, NPR is the Ikea of radio. It should be roundly mocked a lot more than it is.

When he actually was broadcasting, he was never considered "one of the most beloved educators." That was recent hagiography, and I watched him as a child growing up in the 70s. He was one of several. Bob Keehan/Captain Kangaroo was another personality for very young kids. I can say as a child at that time we outgrew him fairly quickly and didn't really hang around him much. If anything, most of the content of that time was similar; Gumby, David and Goliath, Bozo the Clown, and more were discarded as soon as better came along. It was that odd time of transition.

He was the definition of pablum; formula you gave to babies. He was outdated compared to Sesame Street and Electric Company, and was almost kitsch just like Bob Ross was. I believe he was lionized more because millenials and zoomers are so overstimulated they crave the opposite now; blandness to the point of sedation.