ccortes

Bad argument. All countries have laws yet criminality rates varies a lot from country to country. It’s all about the culture.

There’s a huge difference between “doing more of X” and “doing only X”

For someone arguing that “coding is conveying logic” seems like you need a refresher on propositional logic

Maybe it’s not a given, but it is part of the sales pitch for CEOs. A few others have announced layoffs due to AI being better and more efficient than humans.

How much truth there is to it we don’t know for sure. But it’s not something to be ignored.

in the long run those businesses fall to leaner competitors

This is not true at all. You can find plenty of examples going either way but it’s far from truth from being a universal reality

It was comparing to a hypothetical world where everything is perfectly organized, everyone is perfectly behaved, everything is perfectly ordered, and therefore we don't have to have certain jobs that only exist to counter other imperfect things in society.

Jobs that don't provide value for a company are cut, eventually.

Uhm, seems like Greaber is not the only one drawing conclusions from a hypothetical perfect world

People here seem to be conflating thinking hard and thinking a lot.

Most examples mentioned of “thinking hard” in the comments sound like they think about a lot of stuff superficially instead one particular problem deeply, which is what OP is referring to.

Oh wow, is that what you got from this?

It seems more like a non experienced guy asked the LLM to implement something and the LLM just output what and experienced guy did before, and it even gave him the credit

then you're doing the opposite of what the author proposes

No, it’s exactly what the author is writing about. Just check his example, it’s pretty clear what he means by “thinking in math”

Scientific conensus in math is Occam's Razor, or the principle of parsimony. In algebra, topology, logic and many other domains, this means that rather than having many computational steps (or a "simple mental model") to arrive to an answer, you introduce a concept that captures a class of problems and use that.

I don’t even know what you mean by this.

I really want to get into ocaml but the syntax is sooo ugly I feel like you need a great IDE set up to be able to be productive with it.

In this article, being "functional" is just serving as a proxy for code quality.

It is not, it is being very specific about what it means and what it is referring to

It doesn’t really matter why it’s not working.

It does, because it changes the strategy.

If you think the ads are working and have 10k potential customers then you start thinking about how to increase your conversion rate thinking you could get a chunk of those 10k, you might think distribution is solved.

But if it turns out only 2.5k are real humans then your conversion rate might not even be an issue and it’s just the marketing strategy that needs tweaking.

The whole point is that they are giving you fraudulent traffic which you use as real data to figure out the next steps. If you don’t know it’s fraudulent or how much of the clicks are fraudulent then you are taking decisions under the wrong assumptions.

You can’t stop fraudulent clicks just like you can’t stop your SuperBowl ad from playing while your viewers are in the bathroom

That’s not even a good analogy, we are taking clicks, not impressions.

That’s the point, without the fraudulent clicks you would just move on to some other strategy because the pricing would not be worth it.

Fake clicks give the illusion that ads are working and instead you have to optimize your funnel or whatever else.

Does it cease to be a good metric?

Yes if you run anything other than the 100m

Would we live with the same standards today if we had never printed any money?

Value “creation” and money supply have nothing to do with each other.

Earlier today I was scrolling at the “work at a startup” posts.

Seems like everyone is doing LLM stuff. We are back at the “uber for X” but now it is “ChatGPT for X”. I get it, but I’ve never felt more uninspired looking at what yc startups are working on today. For the first time they all feel incredibly generic

he just changed the shape of the problem into one that was familiar to him

that's a classic strategy to solve problems

Technological merits are not the product.

You can with text

I know a lot of people (including myself) that find blockchain/cryptocurrencies to be great for international money transfers and as a way of saving money using stablecoins with better rates than what we could get on a regular bank.

And yes we know about transferwise and such, it would be cool if it could be used in our countries.

No, de savings are not insured in crypto, but the insurance we get at local financial institutions aren’t that safe either, it only protects up to a certain amount and years can pass before they pay you back if they pay you at all.

It's a risk I'm willing to take. Besides you can earn interest with USDC or other stablecoins.

Remittances and interest generating saving accounts with rates superior to the ones banks offer

Not only that, but handling cash is expensive

Interesting. Not in my experience tho, I've sent money to 3 different countries and they all required the receiver ID

The receiver can pick up cash at any WU location without an ID

In which country does this happens? Makes no sense to me.

USDC

Generational mobility from poor to rich is easily possible, but you can only do it through hard work and education.

That doesn't sounds like "easily possible".

The promise of Bitcoin is the idea that individuals, not large financial concerns, have the power.

Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency out there.

Besides, the fact that coinbase just had an IPO doesn't mean they control bitcoin, I don't need them or anyone else to move around cryptocurrencies however I want.

Regular people right now use it through Paypal, Cash app, Venmo, Coinbase, etc.

I'm not American, but as far as I know you can't withdraw bitcoin from paypal, cash app or venmo.

which to me says that it's becoming the settlement layer as expected

To me it says that only rich whales get to transact in bitcoin.

Pretty sad that now regular people get excluded from something that was conceived as p2p internet cash.