jessicas_rabbit
jessicas_rabbit on Hacker News
Stoicism gained recent popularity because it directly opposes other trending cultural perspectives, such as self-victimization dialogues surrounding mental health and self-accountability for survival under capitalism.
The topic is promoted by red-pill commentators because they are leveraging it to argue against societal complaints coming from other people whose needs are portrayed as “weak” or lacking accountability.
Religious writings’ sole purpose is to establish & promote a belief system, based on subjective values.
Anti-discrimination laws’ sole purpose is to dissolve the practice of belief systems that objectively cause interpersonal harm.
These are conceptual opposites in many ways. But if I generalize the concept “writing makes ideas immortal”, then I am able to conflate the two.
The point of this article isn’t to argue that $200M is a large proportion of $1.6T. The point is that one person is taking home the equivalent share of 1000s of workers, in exchange for totally eliminating their jobs.
30 minutes of continuous chemical reaction will have vastly different effect than a reaction that stops & starts repeatedly, for a sum total of 30 minutes.
Suppose a soul is an immaterial source of intelligence, but it controls the body via machine-like material hardware such as neurons.
Or an alternative, suppose there is a soul inside your body “watching” the sensory activations within your brain like a movie. The brain and body create the movie & have some intelligence, but other important properties of the consciousness are bound to this observer entity.
In both these cases, the test just shows that if you damage the hardware, you can no longer observe intelligence because you’ve broken the end-to-end flow of the machine.
Frequently experienced candidates with interview practice will simply ramble for many minutes - listing extensive contributions in excessive detail. Unfortunately when this happens it’s usually pretty awkward for everyone.
The ideal candidate will answer this question very gracefully and enable us to proceed directly into problem solving questions.
Gotta agree with your point about good/bad interviewers. I want to add that good interviewers/interviewees know how to manage the “risk” of such open-ended questions leading to a pointless interview.
Agreed it would be nice to see more dev effort on this side of the house.
This value is partially lost when they use the leading caption & bottom half of their article to sell my boss on survey results via a particular demographic favoring one particular “how” and “why” outcome.