joeamroo

I'm glad you like the sarcasm haha.

As every person in Academia should.

what is wrong with you?

It guessed me as a native speaker, I actually moved to the US at 17 so I'm proud of myself i guess :)

I think a lot of people besides bankers think hedge funds are good for the economy.

Hi HN! These are the second part (out of alot) of my notes on Clang/LLVM. I've written these as I was studying Clang/LLVM as part of my MLH Fellowship, so feedback is appreciated!

This going to be a slippery slope as more governments start to use fines as an alternative type of tax unique to these tech companies. I don't know how Meta/Google can react to these fines (Except the whole opt-in part, but then you have a tradeoff with usability, and people against it usually think that Meta cares about their data outside the aggregate)

Except for Scott Forstall, apparently.

I don't see the similarity, mind explaining?

Your Uncle is pretty unique!

Thanks for mentioning this! I just discovered one of his pieces was probably the inspiration for Ride's Going Blank Again Album cover art.

paul draper, is this normative determinism?

Elon...?

But reality isn't biased towards the radical ideas of its time. Overton Window and all..

reminds me of the song "Processions" by Family

What do you mean by the path curving?

me and a couple of friends are doing so but for logical fallacies :)

What services? nothing can compete with oil profits but tech profits.

> “unfortunately”

There only exists few companies with the financial might and margins relative to Opex like Apple and Google, and even rare a company that is controlled by a major shareholder (Meditations on Moloch comes to mind). I don’t see why or how Apple or Google would change their approach to business given the difficulty of doing so coordination wise and the opportunity cost of doing so. I can only see a company doing so if they had an assertive leader at the helm who is ready to pick up the low-hanging fruits of whatever upcoming technology is gonna make the shareholders the most money.

Speaking of Bob Clampett, I think he did a great job introducing surreal quasi-psych cartoons to the masses. Shame he wasn’t a decent workplace politician though.

Care to explain the latter thought? Could it just be anxiety?

Think of this: can you possibly learn all aspects of a subject strictly using A priori knowledge? How about knowledge that comes through serendipity? The Manhattan project had to gather the knowledge of multitudes of thinkers in order to workout (risking the eventual leak). I see no reason to think in private unless you’re thinking of strictly personal ideas (which might benefit from other people’s critiques) or if you’re a philosopher trying to prove that you can gain extensive knowledge strictly a priori (Hegel comes to mind)

> In the sense that land ownership is zero sum, yes it does. Blame that on zoning laws + People moving into big cities. Just supply and demand, At least in Urban areas with that problem .

> That’s simply not true. In any given market, there’s a limited supply of housing, and it’s much more inelastic than the supply of cars

Is that the fault of humans wanting to live in close proximity with other humans? maybe, there is an ample amount of land anywhere between cities with an inelastic supply of housing.

> Who do you think is lobbying for these laws? I’ll give you a hint: it’s the people whose property gains value if there’s less to go around.

Moloch is a problem.