notjoemama

I should mention, he knows I'm a software engineer, but he doesn't know I posted this on HN. Here's his post with a video: https://x.com/bradmillscan/status/2077096834485375103

> I see female sexrobots as a symptom, a manifestation of the male gaze.

Men's insecurity, of course it is. That old chestnut. I'm exhausted by having to capitulate to female centric sensibilities around physical intimacy. This has been going on for decades. Your comment is endemic of the dismissive and othering nature around men's needs and experiences. Men and women are different. Unrealistic expectations from and for both is the foundational problem here.

The only good way forward is understanding, forgiveness, gratitude, and some romanticism and adoration, from and for both sexes. A nice big sun spot that wipes out social media would help too.

I’ve been around since the 70’s and it’s improved dramatically. Big difference. That isn’t recognized nor celebrated like it probably should be. But like the CGP Grey video showed, hate seems to spread farther faster on the internet. I think it was called “You won’t like this video”.

Why is this posted on hacker news? Seems ill fitting...

That aside, it sounds like the FBI set him up maybe? If that's the case, can we NOT play political sports-ball and do this to every other politician regardless of party?

I mean, I receive fake emails and texts testing whether I give up privileged information from the company I work for as ongoing security awareness training. Soooo...maybe we need to do something similar with government employees?

I haven't read the book but it sounds really interesting. Regarding tone though,

> monogamy is to blame for a lot of our western views today

Does the author use the word "blame" to mean "the reason for" or do they present it as a critique of monogamy? Not a big deal, just made me curious when I saw that.

Check it out, there was one post...no comments though. Kinda sus. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45052881

I liked this YouTube comment: "Never before have I seen a CEO get away with straight up lying to investors so often." So...like, you're kinda young then, right? Basically you're unaware of private equity, the 2008 housing crisis and occupy Wall Street. I agree what he's doing is wrong, really wrong. I'm just sick of the obvious partisan schadenfreude hyperbole. Was an article about Chorus on hacker news? I'll search, maybe I missed it by one day. Such is social media.

That's a bingo! Christoph Waltz is just a great actor.

I'm building an app in my stack with fairly common requirements. There are a few code examples that cover requirements but none that cover our specific scenario. After searching the web myself, I asked 3 different AI models. All they did was regurgitate the closest public GitHub example, lacking the use case I was trying to do. Solving this problem can only be done by understanding the abstraction of the alteration in design.

These things can't actually think. And now they're allowed to be agentic.

In some ways they're just glorified search engines but there's a geopolitical sprint to see who can get them to mock "thinking" enough to fool everybody.

Out of ego and greed, everything will be turned over to this machine, and that will be the end of humanity; not humans...humanity.

> live coding does not select for generalists

I have a rage memory now of a "live coding" event that makes me want to leave this profession and never come back.

Here's my suggestion for the technical interview:

1. Applicant signs NDA and agrees to not use AI 2. A small bug or feature request is chosen from the backlog 3. The staff engineer pair programs with the applicant until it is fixed/implemented

This does a few things:

a) The interview is suddenly "productive" for the employer rather than a cost sink b) No one will apply that doesn't actually know the stack/framework/language c) The interviewer gets a real world example of what its like to work with the applicant d) Leet coding and puzzle solving is eliminated in favor of real world coding e) A secondary skill set that doesn't actually contribute to the work is eliminated (go pound sand autists)

I'm saying you're wrong because you cannot substantiate your point. Quantify it and I will admit I'm wrong.

Incorrect. Politicians defer to experts and that fails when it is shown the governing bodies (as I did above) are not performing the necessary functions to ensure safety and efficacy. Politics follows society, not preempts it.

Conversationally it's probably more about morality. However, for those like myself that have looked into the matter, it becomes a much needed discussion about standards of care. The AMA holds regular meetings to determine standards of care. Fortunately for us, they post these to YouTube. I looked and found the most recent meeting where they adopted standards of care for youth and gender dysphoria. It was a brief section about 1/3 to 1/2 way through the meeting. I'll recant and summarize what I observed from the dozen+ people in this meeting:

Lead speaker: Ok, next is medical transition for youth and adults. I'll admit I just don't know much on this topic so I'm reaching out for someone else to take the lead and discuss it.

pause...

Second speaker: Well, I also don't know that much as it's not my field, but I've looked over the proposal and what I can't find are long term studies on the effects. I think because of that we simply don't know...

Third speaker: Hi this is <?> and while this is also not my field I'm an ally and I can tell you what's been presented to us (the AMA governing body) from the APA is what they ave determined as effaceable procedure.

pause...

Lead speaker: So...I suppose we can take a vote to accept the guidelines sent to us from the APA.

pause...

Then they voted to accept it with no more discussion. I'm shortended the exchange, but it is not much more than what I am presenting to you.

Stop and think about that. We use the terms "standards of care" and understand that to mean there is some authoritative, intelligent, well founded judgement from what you and I assume are experts over these topics. That's not what happened by this review board in the AMA. There was no medical discussion, no weighing of prescriptive protocols, no measure of caution, or even of any medical literature regarding the topic. The American Medical Association simply accepted whatever the American Psychological Association told them was the correct medical protocols. What an abject failure.

I also recently watched a clip, a complaint about how women should not be a special case in medicine. This had to do with menopause and the complaint was that women are (to use a colloquial term) gate-kept from hormonal treatments (in this video, testosterone specifically) where as men not only have an established diagnosis of hypogonadism but that through only a 6 month trial, testosterone was approved by the FDA for treatment, but only for men. The complaint was somewhat of a feminist one, an argument for equity. If men could so easily get testosterone for treatment then why can't women, in terms of ""equity". What surprised me was the approval was only based on a 6 month trial. What of the long term exposure? What are the risks? Why approve something with so little data and medical basis? While I empathize with the video's speaker, I saw what I think is a much more problematic issue. When it comes to medicine, there appears to be less scientific truth underlying these decisions.

So, back to your point:

> what other people do with their genitals

While you may perceive some personal or moral assertion, and I acknowledge that is often true, I submit it is also true that others genitals deserve a lot more medical scrutiny than "we don't know, but someone else said this was better". Because, other people's genitals could potentially be my children's genitals and as a parent, or a grandparent, or other family member, who cares more deeply, I expect there is a factual and provably medically necessary response. If that cannot be proven, then there is no rational basis to move forward with medical treatment. The only treatment that makes sense is psychological, given the other supporting data on this topic.

So, you fail to recognize that the comment I was replying to was inherently off topic?

Neither did I or anyone else suggest, state, or imply, that "the status of LGBT" ought to be eliminated. I find people that reply based on perceived character fail to actually have a dialogue on the topic. More an emotional catharsis than actual discussion. That may as well go in a blog because those kinds of people aren't actually trying to have a real conversation. Great content for reddit. But poor form for Hacker News.

We're getting off topic, but isn't part of the issue the pockets of extreme activism from that community too?

It's hard to simply accept people when they parade in their birthday suit in front of children. It's hard to accept others as simply normal when they admittedly infiltrate educational institutions with the intent to force their ideology on the masses. That has NOT happened everywhere or even all the time, but it has happened.

There is also data showing increased rates of various psychological problems and societal maladaptive behavior. While right leaning news and social media loves to cherry pick (as the left does too), I think the obvious falsehoods from the more extreme activism is turning people away. We're those things improved by the community itself, there might be less resistance and more acceptance. As I recall, same sex marriage had majority support. It seems to me there are enough people in the US that are perfectly fine with how others chose to live so long as their autonomy is not impeded.

I'm reminded of the movie Footloose. In it the teens of a small town controlled by far right religious ideology win back the ability to have school dances. The argument against dancing was ultimately not found in the religious text, and seeing the hardship this was causing, the "elders" relented. We're now at a point where racial bias and acceptance training, as well as walled digital gardens of extremism, is the overbearing church elder. You can be fired from work, debanked, publicly smeared for saying what you didn't say, for believing what you don't actually believe, and generally ostracized. Unless...you think the way the far left activists want you to think, to say what they want you to say, to behave the way they want you to behave. Your right to pursue your own happiness ends when the collective activism requires you obey them and their non-scientific belief systems. (Sokul hoax, sex inexplicably both a choice and inherent, gender divorced from sex characeristics, gender is a spectrum despite a clear bimodal distribution with only 2 "winers", standards of care are from the APA not the AMA [eg: no medical basis], clear evidence the dutch protocol has failed)

I actually think this is a great discussion topic if people can be mature and willing to be honest, setting personal feelings and emotions aside, as much as they can anyway. I believe there's a sweet spot for acceptance in society but only through open dialogue can solutions like that be found. The more a community (right or left) seeks to silence perceived dissent, the less appealing they are overall. Don't you think?

Wow. By your other comments I know you "know things". But this...this you do not know.

Rails was "hot" 20 years ago? lol, and you have completely missed IIS, .Net, and (dun dun duuuuuuuuunnnnn!!!!!) PHP. I bet you don't even know what ASP was.

Also...wth with C++ or python on a web server...20 years ago? Ok maybe this is entertaining now. Since you know so much, tell me about the framework libs needed for C++ web apps 20 years ago. eats popcorn <- that...is from BBS, maybe look that up too.

Are you an LLM bot or real person?

You're not just kind of wrong here; you're not just a little wrong; you're "having a bad day" level of wrong.

Take the afternoon off, and drink a Jamba Juice. Maybe call some family and tell them you love them.

> I have IRL facepalmed reading this. This comment gave me the equivalent exposure to 10 hours on X/Twitter.

I don't know man, jumping into a conversation like this is a great way to get people to NOT listen. I agree with your following point and would add I find these matters more complicated. For example, you wouldn't be typing a comment on this site without the kind of corporate freedom that raised the standard of living for the entire planet resulting in a shared technological advancement. Seems this is always a trade off, how much freedom are you willing to give up for centralized fascist governmental control?

No one thinks you're a better person because you said what the special interest group inside your digital walled garden approves. Get outside and meet people more. I suspect you'll find they are not the evil monsters your preferred propaganda websites tell you they are.

Edit: downvotes? do you think this is reddit? someone call the wambulance!

I've noticed this too. I wonder if it is the difference in experience levels. It feels odd seeing excitement at rediscovering a (what you and I think of as well-known) solution. To be fair, I was that kid at one time too. Still, it feels a bit like these more simple things ought to be taught at university so new grads can focus more on solving domain problems.

I suppose, combine this with pressure from public or private investment, and the way to get ahead is to package anything into a prospect of revenue generation. I'm sure that's part of it too. Everything has to monetize because some business school graduate hasn't "made it" until they have a yacht like their ivy league friends.

Eh, probably comes across as curmudgeonly or "who moved my cheese". But if there is an area that can improve this longstanding problem in tech, my guess is teaching the right skills and concepts at the collegiate level. And that's not a simple thing either.

Edit > reading a bit more, this focuses on chat applications and seems to be a decent caching implementation tailored to that domain, of which, I'm guessing will allow AT&T and Verizon to save money on their gobsmackingly horrible AI chat bot in their mobile app. As an individual, it's unclear how this benefits me though. I don't think it does. ME: asks chat bot question about insurance coverage, CHATBOT: immediately serves canned response in no time about how that's covered in my individual insurance plan which I read more about on their website (pro-tip: no, I can't, those details are actually never on the website)

I dunno, just because I know to scroll down on recipe.com doesn't mean it's not irritating each time. It's like web advertising. I can look past it most of the time but I still gravitate to sites that use less or none. I think its a valid response to a bad writing pattern.

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see a mention of the permanent token cell network providers inject into client requests. Knowing what these are and mocking them is another thing a bot might do to impersonate a real device.

Thank you for the link! That was a nice read through. I'm just familiarizing myself with using AI in software development and this gives me some structure around how to scaffold up a domain knowledge response. Very cool.

We are more connected with digital recording devices in the hands of more people on this planet than ever before. It also makes it possible to isolate information from one perspective, for example, creating a dedicated website to promote an idea.

Just curious, are there similar sites recording the repeated terrorist attacks against Israel? The rapes? Information is only good when it contains enough context to intelligently weigh the facts. I don't suppose you could link those as well could you?

A number of comments, sometimes admirably referring to historical events, are conveniently ignoring the attacks and horrors wrought against the people of Israel every year for decades. I am not defending the IDF's actions, but I want to ensure an accurate picture is painted in the court of public opinion.

I know Israel has attempted a 2 state solution 3 different times since 1947, unsuccessful because they were subsequently attacked. That's history. I know Israel has given up large chunks of the land given to them as a result of the investigation by UNSCOP, each time in an effort for peace. That's history. I've spent my life watching news reports of bombings at their border, bus stops, public squares, their fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, and children picked off.

Because we have lived the last few decades at an unusual time of peace, I think people have forgotten or not been exposed to the horrors of war. Now, when friendly fire occurs, when mistakes are made, unintentionally or from bad strategic intelligence, it shocks people more than it used to. Please consider these things as well when determining how you feel about Israel's recent response to the October 7th attack.

Why?

> The biggest difference in death rates has been in people aged 15–49 (see ‘Early deaths’). Among these younger people, the death rate has been falling much more slowly in the United States than in peer countries — and it spiked drastically owing to COVID-19. “More people die younger,” says Lynne Cotter, a senior health-policy researcher at KFF. And because young deaths erase more years of life than do older ones, they drag down overall life expectancy.

> Overall, chronic conditions — heart disease, cancer, stroke and respiratory disease — take up four out of five spots on the country’s list of biggest killers.

> As of 2022, about 42% of adults were considered obese in the United States, compared with 27% in the United Kingdom and 5.5% in Japan. Obesity increases the risks of developing diabetes, heart disease, cancer and many other conditions.

> Research supports Kennedy’s argument that ultra-processed foods might be partly to blame for poor health. Their consumption has been linked to increased risks of obesity and some other chronic diseases, and is relatively high in the United States. Such foods comprise an estimated 58% of US daily energy intake — similar to that in the United Kingdom, but greater than the 48% in Canada and 31% in France3.

> Deaths from substance misuse are explained mainly by overdoses of synthetic opioids such as fentanyl — part of the US opioid crisis. Many Americans are killed in traffic accidents, partly because they tend to spend proportionately more time driving, and in bigger cars, than people in many other nations.

It looks like obesity promotes chronic disease and the younger demographic is dragging the life expectancy down.

Where?

https://hdpulse.nimhd.nih.gov/data-portal/mortality/map?cod=...

A higher concentration occurs in the south eastern quadrant of the US. This as I recall coincides with obesity rates.

What can I do personally? I guess eat less processed food, cook more at home, walk more, or engage in fun phisically active time. Even cleaning the house, yard care, home gardening, simple hikes, or walking while shopping can help. Chosing stairs over elevators, that kind of thing.

What can the government do to help? Maybe regulating sugar additives and plastic use in food containers? Limiting the use of seed oils in convenience foods, in favor of healthier options? Build back a strong middle class would go a long way towards preventing the other causes too. Drugs and gun deaths are linked to poverty. The closer the middle class is pushed to the poverty line the more those things increase. I suppose there's some merit to preventing the illegal import (smuggling?) of drugs like fentanyl, which in that case requires a harder stance on import from China. I dunno guys. I'm throwing darts at a wall here...

Is there a rating site or alignment test for wiki articles and their authors? I'm aware of the inherent left bias on wiki and while I still find it informative I am forced (because of their behavior) to consider the subtextual implications in the language they use as well as what is willingly (and sometimes very intentionally) addressed or omitted. it would be nice to have a wiki-bias chart like the media bias chart.

It's not just those incidences though. I think many people have had bad experiences from buying on amazon. Even the shopping process (and this may be the bulk of bad perception) is atrocious. They have a brand filter that is littered with knock off and unknown brands (most I suspect are Chinese). They refuse to include a country of origin filter. We all know why. Reviews have been fake for years, some sellers do little to hide that they've swapped the product on the page to get top rankings for a new product. Product: a plastic step ladder, the reviews: "these bath bombs are so lovely!" Shipping and delivery speed has fallen off for people outside metro areas. Congrats on the vans I guess? Combine that with tertiary problems like scalping, forgery, and lower quality garbage from China, and then fly celebrities into space with subsequent vacuous VSCO-girl like philosophical statements, and its fairly clear why someone's opinion of amazon might be bad. Not to mention their exceedingly poor performance with Prime video. I understand hyperbole is rampant online, but let's maybe agree that water is wet when it is.

> in the modern web world you often have persistent client server connections

Is this actually true though? I’d be interested if you know any data backing that perspective. I only know what I’ve worked on and my anecdotal experience doesn’t match with this statement. But I know my sphere doesn’t represent the whole. In terms of state, by now there are many ways of dealing with persistence and reconnection. Not only are most of those problems solved with existing technologies and protocols but they’re everywhere in web dev. Maybe we’re talking past each other? Did I misunderstand your point?

Sounds like a normal conversational speculation to me. I simply searched for her name + divorce. The Yahoo Finance article I read said there was a prenuptial in place but they settled for an undisclosed amount. At the time he was worth $30B so a $350M buyout for 23andme is probably in a reasonable assumption of what the settlement could have been. Conversationally speaking of course. We don't know either way.

You didn't happen to try an app called Nothing but Crickets did you? I made a whole $4 from advertising.com from that on WP7. It was a single button and when you clicked on it, the sound of crickets would play. I always hoped someone would use it in a meeting. I didn't care about the money. I just wanted to make people laugh.

Light is comparatively and objectively slow in comparison to the distances that exist. Andromeda is 1M light years from us. From that perspective, 300k kph is oddly slow actually. I love the passion that you're brining to the table though. It reminded me of the blue giant stars whose lifespans can be as short as tens of millions of years, more often hundreds though. For billions upon billions, I suppose that would be white and brown dwarfs. Although, if we could orbit black holes and harness the energy of gravity, then we're really talking long time scales. Cracking the aging problem would allow us to think in very long timescales. But I do wonder whether the human psyche could handle such long lifespans.