gooosle
gooosle on Hacker News
So... it would be a lot cheaper to just buy all of the books?
'sacrifice' what exactly lol?
Going the athlete route is generally easier and requires less time investment than going the academic route.
> Think about these fantasy sports gambling apps, your coworkers who distract themselves from the drudgery of work by discussing sports, the financial institutions that take a transaction fee from money being passed around, the infinite scroll of content on social media, all because of athletes.
I don't see how you can claim gambling, and pointless discussion about some arbitrary game you (they) don't even play are positive. Financial transactions for the sake of financial transactions are also completely pointless.
How dare you steal these hn comments by copying them over to your PC using your browser? Thief!
Russian is a Slavic language and very similar to other Slavic languages especially Ukrainian and Belarusian. Far closer than German and French. I have family across 5 different Slavic countries and hear various Slavic languages regularly. You're just spewing complete bs for political reasons apparently.
It's more like telling a German name from an Austrian name.
Not at all, there is no resentment - that's your imagination. There is nothing about what I described that indicates that it's a bad work environment - I quite like it.
You're bringing up various completely unrelated factors seemingly as a way of avoiding the obvious point of the anecdotal story - that AI for coding just isn't that great (yet).
Not at all.
What was claimed was that a complete feature was built in record time with AI. What was actually built was a useless and buggy piece of junk that wasted reviewer time and was ultimately thrown out, and it took far longer than claimed.
There were no useful insights or speed up coming out of this code. I implemented the feature from scratch in 30 mins - because it was actually quite easy to do manually (<100 loc).
You planned and wrote a feature yesterday that would have taken yourself 2 whole days? And you already got it reviewed and deployed it and know that 'it works flawlessly'?
....
That reminds me of when my manager (a very smart, very AI-bullish ex-IC) told us about how he used AI to implement a feature over the weekend and all it took him was 20 mins. It sounds absolutely magical to me and I make a note to use AI more. I then go to review the PR, and of course there are multiple bugs and unintended side-effects in the code. Oh and there are like 8 commits spread over a 60 hour window... I manually spin up a PR which accomplishes the same thing properly... takes me 30mins.
How do you know whether your TLA+ model is accurate?
Sure, the 'free speech' propaganda is a conscious part of the (better/more effective) public opinion manipulation playbook.
The difference with Russia is that they are much worse at hiding their corruption and censorship.
In Canada you can just steal public funds if you're in the government with complete immunity. Set up a government program to support X (ex - greeness, gender education in congo, studying a random worm somewhere in asia, etc), then just transfer the funds directly to your own companies, and the companies of your friends and family [1]. We had like 5 major corruption scandals in the last 2 years - basically zero repercussions for those involved.
If you pick the right reason/name for X - anyone who crticises you can also automatically be labelled racist, dumb, fascist or whatever as well.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Tech...
Most subreddits tend towards complete bubbles, where anything that goes against the prevailing opinions gets down voted into oblivion or outright deleted by mods.
It's funny you say that cause chatgpt, Gemini, etc have way more censorship built in than deepseek.
HN ranking algo is suuuusssss
No, I wouldn't agree with that at all.
Also big difference between saying 'X did this good thing' and 'X did more good than everyone else combined'.
And the onus is on you here - you made the absurd claims - now either back them up or walk them back :)
I have no way of measuring how much good Bill Gates had done for the world. He has certainly done a lot of evil as well. I literally have have no way of objectively quantifying either, and neither do you, which is why your claims cannot possibly be objectively supported by any rational means.
The explanation is the entire human race working diligently to produce, create and grow. Not because king Bobbert the 7th gave some artist some money, and not because king Jeffrey got rich by enslaving/conquering/exploring someone else.
You don't seem to understand that your own personal feelings of love towards the 'benevolent billionaire' and their vanity projects do not in any way support your claims. Especially when you're quantifying your claims in such extreme and absurd ways.
You also don't seem to understand that if a team of scientists discovered a cure - that doesn't automatically get 100% attributed to whatever billionaire funded the building the scientists were working in at the time.
Maybe you need to do a quick Google on monetary policy 101 and how money is created. You seem to not understand the basics here.
While you're at it, consider what portion of MS success is directly attributable to Bill Gates and not the many thousands of other people involved in the company and code it literally copied from open source projects. Not to mention the extreme anti-competitveness of MS and their aggressiveness in suing and shutting down other companies, and other negative externalities they generated.
Now you're playing games around the semantics of the word 'attributable'? Lmao
I also love how all of your analogies/examples immediately switched from amazing societal improvements to measurements of physical object characteristics. Truly amusing stuff.
Let's take one of the metrics you suggested - 'number of lives saved' - go ahead and tell me how tech billionaires have saved more lives than any other group.
Or maybe just admit that you're talking out of your ass.
'gave to the world' implies the world didn't have this money before gates came along. Which is obviously not true and quite literally impossible.
It asked for specific metrics backing your claim.
Your claim was that tech billionaires contributed more towards the good of society than any other group.
You provided a list of metrics that are in no way exclusively attributable to tech billionaires, and no actual data/number on how and how much these are attributable to tech billionaires.
Your analogy is completely unrelated too.
It's more like if you said 'whales are the best animal' and then gave me a bunch of random metrics about the state of the world.
Where did Bill Gates get these billions that he 'gave to the world' ?
Did he generate them purely from his genius and benevolence?
It doesn't contain anything that would either back or excuse your claims.
It's possible that you merely need to take Bill Gates balls out of your mouth to be able to make a coherent argument.
'proposed metrics'? LOL
Is that a way of saying 'I don't actually have any data or numbers backing my absurd claims'?