arbitrary_name
it was more shocking than when multiple state legislators were gunned down and the shooting was blamed by Trump on Marxists? Or when Rob Reiner was shot by his son and Trump implied he had it coming?
nobody is trying to tear down AI companies. but there is a general reaction to companies and their leaders who imply that 'risk to civilization is non zero', or they need unemployment is likely, while pushing for the state to backstop them.
This take fails on even the most basic reading.
the reason we have weekends and no child labor is because workers died for it.
the state, the capitalists desire control, obedience and extraction. worker well-being is a low priority. workers advocating for better pay, safe working conditions, etc were routinely killed.
why is it laughable to say that there is a need to resist the injustice and push for better working conditions and rights for all?
and overly extractive systems are unstable over the long term.
are you confident that the current level of extraction is optimal, or sustainable?
if a large part of society decides that it's not optimal or sustainable, where would you stand? prevent change? or seek equitable and stable redistribution?
there are so many examples of the inherent unwillingness for the beneficiaries of extractive systems to resist change: see the laws imposed against serfs following the black death, or the shooting and violent suppression of striking union workers.
that cycle is beginning again: MAGA, widespread rioting in France, Italy and other places.
There is economic and political injustice. Systemic extraction is passing a stable equilibrium.
relax the grip on power and resources, or spend the blood and treasure it will cost to maintain it.
but don't bullshit anyone with this 'life has an inherent cost': that's trivially obvious to everyone.
we are well past the point of collectively paying that cost. it's just not fairly or reasonably distributed.
that does not justify voting for the worst candidate for this office in as many decades.
this argument immediately pops up. and it's easily refuted: just don't vote for the guy convicted of felonies and with a long history of boorish behavior and grift. it's really not that hard.
example: I'm a new Zealander.
i don't want Americans immigrating in large quantities to New Zealand, because they have cultural values that change the nature of the society, in ways that i don't want it to change.
And i don't consider American a 'race', but more an agglomeration pf people with some general preferences, shared experience and even material characteristics ($$$) that will have negative impacts.
Now, if i could filter, as a voter, to 'allow in Americans that share my values and that would minimize change on axes that matter to me', i would accept immigration of Americans.
but, as a voter, i cannot do that. So instead i vote to keep immigration restrictive. that does not mean I consider Americans inferior, not that i hold that they are meaningfully different from me in any way except culture.
it's not racism. but instead a generalization that we are forced to apply as individuals.
does that change your perspective on this?
we let the rot grow for too long.
Feels like a very similar policy being pursued here.
i get much more satisfaction out of preparing a meal or reading a good book than work. i like to choose what i work on, rather than be told by the prevailing wage rate what work i should do.
caring for a child is one of the most valuable and rewarding activities, but it is not rewarded monetarily. that doesn't make it less valuable or worthwhile.
Saaspocalypse is overstated. but some kind of changes are coming.
feels like pure copium to believe that won't change rapidly.
that seems like a moronic reason to support a moronic war.
it's a utility. i don't customize anything that doesn't relate to ergonomics and efficiency.
and some people just want to tune and tweak: look at car modding, bumper stickers, etc
do we need both options? probably. but painting small scale organic farming as'the same' as the alternative is...not accurate.
sometimes, employees are bad at their jobs, or organizations are unable to solve their own problems. people who have no long term loyalty or political agency within the organization can help resolve internal issues, provide external validation and new perspectives, and solve problems.
I tire of the snide arrogance of people like you; you think you can solve everything if you cared to. not every organization can afford to hire people as amazing and all knowing as you.
making talented people available on short contracts, for employers with terrible reputations who cannot hire the right people able to deal with ambiguity and short timelines can be a win win arrangement for both sides.
Are there issues across the industry, including misaligned incentives? absolutely. but that isn't a reason to dismiss the entire industry out of hand.
perhaps we should be equally dismissive of all software devs given the sheer amount of terrible software and predatory revenue models? or are we also going to blame some other faceless group for that as well?
There is very little jew hatred on the left. just fatogue with unlimited aupport for a Israeli regime that is losing democratic and moral support due to it's...trigger word incoming...genocidal tendencies.
you're so right.
go peddle your mediocrity somewhere else.
i run into context window limits, or practical limitations of digitizing the book
why do they spend the money they do on the things they do?
they are not altruists and they never will be.
they could change millions of lives today, but most do not.
pure naivete.
Oakland Raiders? not anymore! teams just leave to another city if the money is right. craziness.
the sheer number of ads and marketing.
what are you smoking?