nnnnnande

Turning this into a moral discussion is besides the point, a point that both of you missed in your efforts to be based, although the moral discussion is also interesting—but I'll leave that be for now. It appears as if I stepped on ArthurStack's toes, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and reply.

My point actually has everything to do with making money. Making money is not a viable differentiator in and of itself. You need to put in work on your desired outcomes (or get lucky, or both) and the money might follow. My problem is that directives such as "software developers need to use tool x" is an _input_ with, at best, a questionable causal relationship to outcome y.

It's not about "social clubs for software developers", but about clueless execs. Now, it's quite possible that he's put in that work and that the outcomes are attributable to that specific input, but judging by his replies here I wouldn't wager on it. Also, as others have said, if that's the case, replicating their business model just got a whole lot easier.

> This is technically what everyone should aspire to be

No, there are other values besides maximizing utility.

Oh, just like every other business then! That's a nice strategic differentiator.

Look, I'm sure focusing on inputs instead of outcomes (not even outputs) will work out great for you. Good luck!

Sounds like a great, outcome-focused, work environment!

On the same topic, I usually refer back to this fantastic talk on how to add and commit a file without using git add or git commit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdvlu_R8EWE

I’d wager that it’s a reference to the old Swedish name for the Pacific Ocean and not Södermalm.

I said the same thing to my SO the first time I tried out ChatGPT.

However, I'm not sure if AI is where I'd draw the boundary for myself at least, as I've had the same lingering feeling from only reading HN comments and seldom writing my own, or consuming BreadTube content for instance.

More often than not, my opinions and thoughts are constructed for me by someone else as opposed to me doing my own critical thinking. Perhaps I'm one of the below-average thinkers for who ChatGPT will be a godsend.

Yeah, this is probably the reason and the author even elaborates on this in the sentences following the bit quoted by cldellow:

> Even though the data says hstore, knowing that posts will be seen by more and more people over time, I might choose the HLL solution for an actual implementation. It's far less likely to pose a bloated row problem, [...]

Coup or Smash Up

Strange take. Saying that racism is not new in the US (because the discussion was about the US) is not the same thing as saying that racism is a uniquely US problem.

> But Russia is where people here start being outraged?

It's entirely possible that the same people are _also_ outraged by Apple's business in China.

This argument keeps coming up in similar discussions and I don’t really understand it.

Can you not imagine a scenario where we didn’t leave everything in the hands of a completely unregulated market?

Seems like it could be an improvement on https://swimlanes.io/ (the fact that you can choose the type of diagram).

Yes, so why not do something about the negative ones?

You're right, but even that is more nuanced; for instance, the US unemployment rate is based on a survey that counts any paid work during the survey week as employment.

I'm not in the US myself, but I think for the HN crowd in general moving to someplace else isn't a problem as we have the financial means as well as the independence. Other social groups might be more dependent on the social support around them (family, friends and maybe government). For them, moving to another place would be akin to resetting everything and starting a new life, with all the associated risk.

> This mentality of “I want everything you have but I don’t want to actually put the time and effort in to get it” is very frustrating.

How do you know that these people haven't already put time and effort into trying to get an "actual job"? It would seem to me that the free market does not serve everyone with equal economic opportunity and that the world economy is more nuanced than what your average libertarian would like you to believe.

This is a great point. Kind of off-topic now; do you know of any books that take such an approach? The subject doesn’t matter, as I’m more concerned with the pedagogy in this case.

The one that springs to mind for me is Functional Programming in Scala.

SVT | Data engineer | Stockholm, Sweden | Onsite | Full-time | https://svt.se / https://svtplay.se

Sveriges Television (SVT) is Sweden's national public service broadcaster. Our aim is to create and provide content that engages, entertains and enriches – all in the service of the public.

We produce a lot of our own content and develop applications for news and entertainment. Recently we started building our own analytics platform to help us make more informed strategic and operative decisions and make SVT more data-driven going forwards.

Tech stack: Go, Scala, GCP

For more information and how to apply: https://blogg.svt.se/svti/next-data-engineer-team/

Agreed. That was the point I was trying to get at, albeit I might not have phrased it as clearly.

"If the algorithm is predicting that 10% of white people and 30% of black people will do X, because that is what actually happens, some people will still call that racism but there is no possible way to change it without reducing accuracy."

What is actually happening? Does it tell you if they are they doing X precisely because they are black or white? The racist part might not be the numbers per se, but in the conclusion that the color of their skin has anything to do with their respective choices.

edit: spelling

That seems somewhat disingenuous, unless I've somehow completely misinterpreted OP's point. OP was not proposing violence as the fix, but merely stating the fact that historically only wars or other kinds of catastrophic events have reversed trends of increased wealth inequality [1].

Stating that as the basis for a debate is not the same as endorsing violence as the fix. It seems to be a tragic fact that different societies have not found a political way of solving this issue and that alone is worth discussing.

[1] https://voxeu.org/article/europe-s-rich-1300

Yeah and it seems like you have managed to figure that out without the need to quantify it, which I believe was the point that the OP was making.

A point could also be made that life is too short to take yourself too seriously, but to each his own.

The fact that this is being down voted is such a shame. It's a good addition to the discussion and it shouldn't be down voted just because one does not agree with it politically.

"People have every right to set general standards for how they want business to be conducted and promulgate those standards by law."

I think that this in particular is a very important insight with regards to the accountability of multinational corporations. In this case government acts as a way of stipulating conditions of common decency.

No, actually they explicitly state that they also coached it on what they though was good or bad (4:33 into the video). Having said that, I guess we still don't know which game mechanics were coached.

4:33 into the video: "[...] and coached it on what we thought was good or bad".

Yes, but it's a technicality. For all intents and purposes it is an argument against pop-up employers if that form of employment means having worse health care coverage, or none at all (I'm not based in the US, so not entirely sure how it works). Ensuring the same health care coverage invalidates the argument, but that's not today's reality as I understood it.

Why is this being downvoted? The parent poster complained about the article not presenting any evidence and then goes on to state that most people over 30 are extremely risk averse - without presenting any evidence.

Aren't we allowed to make any assumptions as to why that might be or if it is even true at all?

Wouldn't it be possible that the tool might also influence the difficulty in building said habit? If different tools require you to exert varying levels of mental effort only to remember to use them, then then medium/tool might matter.