CuriousSkeptic
CuriousSkeptic on Hacker News
In Sweden it’s tax to compensate for legal copies only (think fair use equivalent)
Prosecuting “piracy” is sold in as a free trade deal requirement with the US
Someone mentioned PS, also consider if this new FDE thing is for you in that case.
Some other people suggested QA, if you enjoy interfacing with customers I would also suggest you look into the PM role.
Note sure this is a strong counter argument. It not that surprising that a system optimised in a certain direction has trouble accommodating operating modes it hasn’t optimised for.
> you pay them interest directly or indirectly through everything you pay for
I wonder how feasible that would be to track as an economic index. Even on individual level its popular to workout which day of the year you start earn money you get to keep after income taxes and vat.
FWIW it was a genuine question. I’ve only seen charts where the exponential trend remains, or even accelerates.
> We have probably hit a limit to scaling LLMs through raw parameter count alone, at least we're not seeing the exponential pace.
Source?
Try handing them a copy of “10X Org”
(the authors tries to abstract over team topologies, adding some additional design dimensions)
I do wonder though, how does metric based factoring compare to expert intuition based factoring? Can the latter be emulated by agents? Are there studies?
Has it been tried?
I mean, it is a common moderation goal, in physical meetings, to make sure the silent ones gets heard.
Could be interesting to try a social network approach om those terms: promotion inversely correlated with engagement.
A better analogy would perhaps be to consider the land the farm uses as the commons (it was before becoming private property)
We can debate the just access to land (commons) and point to Henry George, John Locke, Thomas Payne and others, but still agree that the value produced by the farm comes from the labour put in to refine the common resource into something more useful.
There can be rent seeking and value
produced at the same time.
Edit: One can provably extend the rent seeking parts of the analogy in terms of John Deere and Monsanto
You can substitute Robin Williams with Peter Naur, and the speech with his “Programming as Theory Building” essay, and that is more or less what you’ll get
> we must fix these top three problems!!!” And it’s all the stuff everyone has known for years but management has refused to give anyone the authority to fix
So a net positive then?
You can’t is an acceptable answer. The entitle point of such a feature is to prevent people from doing that.
Your graph model lack the aspect of increasing complexity. As you traverse the graph every available node gets increasingly more distant. In some areas of the graph less so than others, a good heuristic function not only identifies a single shortest path, but also dense areas of possible value in the graph.
The question is if blind speed scales quicker then distances grow.
Could your observation be any other way though?
It recognise addiction (limited agency vs influence) and monetisation (economic rewards the primary means to influence behaviour) as problematic. It kind made “doing bad for pay” a premise of the system.
Large pay-checks incentivising bad behaviour is exactly another observable outcome of the same systemic issue.
> death by 1,000 monthly subscriptions
Is another area needing new legislation. Changes to copyright, interoperability requirements and such, we can change more than one parameter
I like to think of it as the period when software engineering finally grows up to be a respected discipline with a body of actual theory
> the contractor
If there is a single policy change I could pick for public spending on IT it would be to forbid outsourcing to “contractors” and thinking of software delivery as “projects”
A lot of NVC writing is pretty bad. I recommend going directly to the source
https://youtu.be/l7TONauJGfc (3h video, but worth the time)
I think NVC is better understood as a framework to reach deep non-judging empathic understanding than a speech pattern. If you are not really engaging in curious exploration of the other party using the OFNR framework before trying to deliver your own request I don’t think you can really call it NVC. At the very least it will be very hard to get your point across even with OFNR if ot validating the receiver.
Validation being another word needing disambiguation I suppose. I see it as the act of expressing non-judging emphatic understanding. Using the OFNR framework with active listening can be a great approach.
A similar framework is the evaporating clouds of Theory of Constraints: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaporating_cloud
Also see Kants categorical imperative: moral actions must be based on principles that respect the dignity and autonomy of all individuals, rather than personal desires or outcomes
Not sure this equation works out. If demand for labor goes towards zero it really means there is no demand. In other words, when AI and robots fulfil every desire of their owners there really is no need for “tax payers”
This exchange reminds me a bit of the experience of becoming a parent. The permanent reconfiguration of priorities from the intense oxytocin high is also quite impossible to explain to non-parents.
The idea being that if we put apple in a regulatory environment where rent-seeking is no longer the winning strategy they could be forced to redirect their resources towards competing on customer value instead.
How about instead of a single os level toggle you get a trillion dollar company, renowned for their high quality design, invested in providing the best possible UX while respecting the user as the owner of the device?
I don’t get it. Did you men that “It seems totally right to protect people's intellectual property” follow from “your financial model depends on you being the only distributor of copies of something”?