CPUstring
CPUstring on Hacker News
Slop existed before AI at a monumental scale. Meta and Alphabet made sure of that.
Coming from the middle class, I've never met anybody talented coming from a shitty school who didn't also get filtered into a gifted program at a good school. Maybe your school system just wasn't competent at filtering people?
Those that I know who have made bad life decisions (kids too early, dropping out of college, leaving extremely supportive parents) could totally have been expected to based off looking at GPA/SAT signals.
I'm not sure that is maximizing employment as much as it is taking advantage of labor that is too cheap to meter.
You can use payback time to back into expected returns that adjusts for the time value of money and you need to consider that you're getting expected (investable) savings as well.
Indeed, anything that can pay itself back in less than 5.5 years should be on par with the market.
You can make a joke because that, while conflict minerals are horrible and cause enormous damage to human life, the conflicts between people on a team are also very small. Comparing the two as if they are equivalent, when we all know they aren't, is funny.
A character assassination would be something like "He does something morally reprehensible (cheating, selling ads to three year olds, etc". The above post is more like "He harps on multiple things he maybe shouldn't, and has an outraged user-base he keeps stoked, so that should be taken into account."
If I said, "I find his voice really grating and his outrage mostly makes me dislike him" that isn't a character assassination- just my opinion he is unlikeable.
So many times, dark mode just seems like somebody pressed the "invert color" option
One of those stories is having a bad password memory. One is a person conducting business on his personal account and triggering flags. Another is a business messing up.
It's a good habit to keep multiple interlocking personal email accounts from multiple providers, but being cloud-first is still obviously correct.
Musk drives his team for speed because every one of his companies still has the "how much runway do we have" mindset. Lots of people can throw stones from their glass towers knowing they work at a company that will exist in 2030 or 2040, but SpaceX can't say that unless they are always moving.
Quibi has all the hallmarks of _corporate_ groupthink. "You know what the kids like? They like phones and Joe Jonas, my daughter won't stop talking about him."
These things are made by executives and leaders that are so type-A they don't actually look at their phones because they're barking out orders to format a PowerPoint slide, and then instead of just asking their kid if they'd do something (sit down for ten minutes to watch Sophie Turner) they get a big panel of people (who sign up to do panel studies) and ask them.
When big media companies make apps, it's like when developers go to the edge of a town and build an urban hellscape edge city. When will media executives realize they can't Robert Moses their way into the FAANG?
Mosquitos transmit and incubate malaria. You don't get malaria from hanging out with a person with it, you get it from getting bit by a mosquito that has previously bitten a person with malaria. [0] Given that the two are intrinsically related, it makes little difference when having a shallow discussion to make the distinction.
[0]https://healthclinics.superdrug.com/is-malaria-contagious/
That is explained in the video
Whatever is happening, it got me out of bed instead of browsing endlessly
That's just arbitrage, right? If you're able to sell them at higher prices, the venue should've done it themselves.
Good question. It should be a progressive tax
You think a bunch of lawyers who got into their positions because they speak well will start writing in comment threads?
I imagine that "death from sitting too long" and "death from heroin overdose" differ a lot on the preferability spectrum.
It depends. When you read, you're approaching a well to drink the knowledge therein. When you're approaching a place that streams- HN, reddit, twitter- you're approaching a river.
You approach rivers and wells differently, and so you probably forget books and "flow"-based articles differently.
One of the key things that the book does is say, "Hey, you're probably looking at history with fundamental attribution bias goggles on. Take those off." The civilizational features that go into its namesake may not be sufficient or necessary features of wealthy civilizations, but they are important things to consider.
There is an entire section in the article about how most people's first reaction is "don't burn the house down" and how the community worked together to create safety systems. The community is aware and working on issues like that
To be fair, France currently has more forests than it did a century ago.
This comment is unhelpful and negative for no reason. Somebody helping somebody else should not be dismissed but instead rewarded.
I get all my instructions from my manager, product manager, and VP through email. The only time we communicate digitally in non-email ways is to share pictures/diagrams on Slack.
Kerbal Space Program without a doubt.
I've made the mistakes of reading more scientifically inclined books on Audible, but I've recently realized there are three strong categories (1) history books, (2) history-of-science/scientist type books, and (3) self-help/philosophy books.
Listening to Marcus Aurelius before bed while brushing my teeth turns out to be a good meditation.
One of the key questions after the first pass is "is this well-written enough to keep reading?"
The morality of the consumer vs. the morality of the supplier an interesting problem. On one extreme, we have the drug dealer relationship. The supplier is obviously more morally duplicitous, and the consumer is often pitied (at least in liberal, anti-drug war circles). At the opposite side of the spectrum, you have suppliers making entirely ok or even ok things selling them to bad people. Are fertilizer providers to blame for consumers turning their products into bombs? Obviously not (actually, I'm not sure legally, but common sense says no).
In the middle, you have a wide array of relationships. Is Coca-Cola to blame for the obesity epidemic? Are gun companies to blame for suicides or mass shootings? Is Juicero to blame for customers being dumb shits?
I think when you answer different examples, you get a pattern: when a supplier is selling a negative/zero value product but induces demand by playing off human weakness, then they're doing something wrong.
Juicero is playing off human weakness (the wealthy tech nerds' desire to be "hip" and "fit") just like a a fashion company plays off human weakness (by creating unrealistic representations that it goads its customers into trying to reach).