HN user

tomdell

693 karma
Posts13
Comments147
View on HN

Industrialization relied heavily upon raw materials generated cheaply with slavery - cotton picked in the American South was exported and was a necessity to fuel the industrialization of textile production in England, for example. There is a reason that industrializing and industrialized countries that relied on slavery and other exploitative economic relationships have achieved greater wealth than more newly industrializing countries have. America's wealth is largely supported by cheap labor and raw materials in other countries, opened up for the use of international corporations by state-sponsored violence - see America's history of interfering in South American politics or Chiquita's recent guilty verdict for sponsoring paramilitary forces in Colombia.

I would be surprised if Suno is very disruptive to the music industry.

It has extremely impressive output for a music generator, and it is very fun to play with - but people will always want to hear something new, and something real.

I don't think that music fans are going to connect with completely AI-generated music without a real personality and story behind it - and good, original music will always be more impressive to people and likely more successful than an AI-generated amalgamation of what already exists.

You're right! The company is very openly continuing layoffs for the next 2 years, so I don't have much faith in the team I was moved to sticking around for much longer. I fixed up my resume and started applying elsewhere the week after everyone I work with was laid off. The job search is going well, fortunately.

I spent the past two and a half years building prototype features for a large internal application. One month ago, the CFO decided that as a part of organizational restructuring, the company will no longer invest in the application. New development on it is ending, and the entire application may potentially be deprecated at some point in the future in favor of cheap dashboards.

I am being moved to the team that builds the cheap dashboards (I'm not happy about it). Among all the prototype work I did, only one significant project has made it into production - the others were continually iterated on for a couple of years, and though some of them have a highly engaged and appreciative beta userbase within the company, I am not allowed to do much more development on them, and they will be taken out of my hands at some point and passed off to other teams.

It seems like Starbucks and a lot of other fast food chains are chasing short-term profits at the expense of long-term viability. A quick check shows Starbucks' gross profit has gone up 12% each year in the past 2 years - that's pretty significant for a stable business that isn't really changing much, and it doesn't seem sustainable. The profit of McDonald's is up 10%, 5%, and then 29% year-over-year, respectively, over the past 3 full years.

My question is - why? Isn't raising fast food prices so much to increase short-term profits an incredibly poor business decision? A major part of the appeal of fast food is low cost. If people fall out of the habit of going to McDonald's, Starbucks, etc. - which they will when they realize they can get higher-quality food/coffee/whatever at a local business for a lower cost - then I think it would be extremely difficult for these chains to win back their business.

My support is first-hand experience and major disappointment buying and reading his most popular book - Deep Work. It was a borderline insulting read in its lukewarm repackaging of common sense wisdom and other people's original research.

Do yourself a favor and don't buy any books by Cal Newport. They're glorified blog posts with a bunch of overblown common sense rebranded with marketable terminology. Read Flow by Mihály Csíkszentmihályi if you want something similar that has more substance.

Definitely similar in a lot of ways (going against the current, similar design language), but there are a couple of key differences to the point I wouldn't say Tesla is the Apple of cars -

Apple typically productizes mature technology and ensures that its products are designed well. Tesla is an early adopter and productizes immature technology which it overhypes and overpromises on (e.g. self-driving).

Apple's manufacturing quality control and attention to detail is also generally pretty impressive. Tesla products looks impressive on the outside but feel cheap on the inside, and there are a lot of issues with the quality of manufacturing. Apple uses nice materials and Tesla uses cheap materials.

Apple making a car always struck me as weird, though.

I would argue BMW or Mercedes are much closer to being the Apple of cars - they aren't early adopters of new technology, and their products are immaculately designed (though using a much different design language than Apple does) and are and feel expensive, unlike Tesla's cars, which look nice but feel like toys.

An impressive technical achievement, yes - but the presentation/marketing of this is absurd.

The generated videos are aesthetically horrendous. I don't know what kind of mental gymnastics are going on that they can confidently describe something where the body shapes are nonsensically in flux with every change of frame (look at the eagle's talons, or the dog's leg movements as it runs) as "high-quality video".

Is generative AI hype blinding them to how hideous these videos are, or do they know and they just pretend like it's something it isn't?

Some are happy for now because they largely aren't accounting for the deferred costs that are being pushed down the road - once you account for wear & tear on the car and associated maintenance and eventual new car purchases, their earnings are much less than what it seems in the short-term. Uber relies on drivers not running all the numbers before signing up.

As someone who tried the music-or-nothing approach for several years after college and two years in ended up with semi-regular panic attacks, persistent existential dread, and crippling anxiety over finances, I can't recommend getting a day job enough. It saddens me to think of all the creative work I could be doing and all the artistic growth I could be seeing instead of developing marketing software, but at least I'm able to pay my bills, maintain a relationship, and generally live a life that consists of more than just obsessing over music. Less existential dread, too, which helps with focus when I do work on art after work and on the weekends.

I was prescribed Adderall as a child and was made to take it twice daily for many years. I had serious problems sleeping due to it and turned from an outgoing and popular student to a solitary and angry child. It isn't good for the development of children to be prescribing them a lighter version of meth. I was fortunate that my parents allowed me to choose to stop taking it before high school.

I don't think anybody is proposing prescribing marijuana to children and forcing them into a lifelong dependency on it. If Adderall is just available, sure, whatever - but a lot of current users of it were initially forced into it without a clear understanding of the consequences.

I strongly disagree that companies mandating RTO are doing so to improve their bottom line - it seems like it's largely done out of a sense of tradition, to placate management's anxieties, or to justify sunk costs in office real estate. Remote work has worked fantastically for my company, and my observation in working as both a manager and an IC since moving to remote is that both I and other employees are in general both more productive and happier. My company has set the remote vs. hybrid vs. in-person decision to be on the department level, and in general it seems like the departments mandating fully in-person have elderly, out-of-touch management who rarely come into the office themselves.

Employees are justified in complaining about mandatory RTO - it presents a significant impediment to work-life balance and demands extra time, money, and energy from employees while giving almost nothing of value in return and providing questionable value to the company.

There are tons of relatively cheap music libraries with human-composed and human-produced music that is vastly higher quality than MusicLM's output - they are used for documentaries/commercials/low-budget projects and are loaded with metadata that make it easy for directors and editors to quickly find what they are looking for. Low-quality, weird-sounding AI-generated music with wonky rhythms, an inconsistent beat, bizarre digital artifacts and a generally unpleasant lo-fi sound that probably has to be patiently generated and listened to over and over again to find a usable result is highly unlikely to beat out already very cheap, much higher-quality and easily searchable human-written music for even the lowest budget projects.

A lot of tech coverage is just fawning hagiography rather than societally useful critical journalism, and a lot of people involved in tech seem to prefer it that way judging by their public words and actions - "don't question me - I'm changing the world!" The decline in ad revenues for papers and lack of employment opportunities for serious journalists doesn't help.

Deep Work by Cal Newport is near the top of that list - I have to warn anyone who might buy it that it is an incredibly disappointing and derivative book written with all the rigor of a BuzzFeed list. Read Flow by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi instead - where the only decent ideas in Deep Work are taken from.

"The largest investments in music are the acquisition of old publishing catalogs, while almost nothing is spent developing new artists."

While music companies are certainly spending big on old publishing catalogs, the second statement here is fact-free. Investment in new artists still represents a very substantial portion of the big three record labels' budgets, and is very much still viewed by execs as the most important part of the business.

I'd like to add that the most significant innovations in popular music have not been a result of record label investment but rather of grassroots creative work by individual people and communities, largely unpaid (and thanks to technological innovations and new instruments more than anything the labels themselves do) - the record labels just pick people out of a preexisting music culture and turn them into stars and brands. The labels are ultimately not the driving force behind musical innovation, so this article comes across as unnecessarily alarmist.

This hasn't been my experience at all. Plenty of social connection and discussion of personal lives in my team meetings, just less with coworkers who aren't on the same team. I'm doing better cognitively and emotionally working from home - I can take breaks more freely and use them more fully, going on walks around my neighborhood instead of a dull corporate park, interacting with my fiancé instead of coworkers, napping on my lunch break. I have more energy, time and money to socialize with friends outside of work and pursue fulfilling personal projects thanks to not commuting. I'm more productive at work because I'm less distracted by office gossip and unproductive coworkers and because I'm happier.

Locals should have been better compensated, more taxes should have been paid to the local government, costs related to environmental cleanup should be paid for by Areva. The business that went on there was fundamentally extractive and unfair to Niger - a result of a drastic power imbalance.

I fail to see how my "original premise was called out" or how I "moved my goalposts", but great job defending neocolonialism online - you really owned me!

I advise anyone not in the know to look into France's historical control of uranium mining in Niger. France's nuclear industry has long been fueled by a highly unequal neocolonial relationship with their former colony.