pk3469

If a totalitarian regime is not better than a democracy, then why is China outpacing the western world by every meaningful metric? Why are more and more governments increasingly shifting to the totalitarian side of the spectrum?

I think it's pretty obvious by now that individuals' feelings of being 'free' are not relevant to the big picture of what nation states seek to achieve. If you tasked an AI with controlling a country to achieve arbitrary goals, you can be damn sure it would be totalitarian for maximum efficiency.

I don't support or condone totalitarian governments and I value my freedoms, however illusionary they may be. But I have no delusions about what the optimal governance structure is.

Nvidia didn't succeed because of their hardware manufacturing. They succeeded because they were dirty and ruthless on the market, and to this day will buy or sue the living fuck out of anything that could threaten their dominance.

Yeah the post seems to confound two mostly unrelated issues. I agree with not reinventing the wheel for relational databases, SQL is fine.

But for other domains, the query languages arose out of need, not because someone felt like it. SQL is hot garbage for for non-trivial logic. I can't even imagine what splunk would look like if you had to query it with SQL.

If anything, SPL (or rather the piped operators approach) would make a lot more sense as the groundwork for a universal query language that works across many domains.

I would be surprised. I was under the impression that kdb+ holds the majority role in fintech.

He doesn't talk about just one person's idea though. Have you actually watched any of those videos? They're not ideally named and they're not his best content, but to pass that off as misogynistic is just beyond disingenuous.

> For people that are "too good for this process" - well, in my experience those are the ones that aren't a good fit for most organizations

If the process is patronizing, good people will simply opt out and pick another of the many options available to them. The more senior the applicant or the higher the demand for the particular role, the more people you will lose.

If your hiring process is unilateral or asymmetric in terms of time investment, you are almost certainly not going to get the best talent.

She is all of those things by virtue of playing public victim. She was a no name vlogger with a handful of subscribers. Her entire 'career', if you can call it that, began when the internet overwhelmed her kickstarter to fund a bunch of videos about how misogynistic video games are. She's the Kim Kardashian of feminism and an insult to 2nd and 3rd wave feminists who fought to improve society through intelligent discourse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqJUxqkcnKA&list=PLBBDFEC9F5...

Watch this and tell me that you think she is making an intelligent argument about anything. And while you're at it, have a think about why the comments and votes might be disabled on those videos.

Speaking against a particular brand of feminism does not make one a misogynist. From watching his videos, it's pretty clear that he isn't prejudiced against women. He just calls out bullshit claims by the likes of Anita Sarkeesian, who is on record stating that video games are a 'male sex fantasy' and whose only credential is being a perpetual victim. People like Phil Mason and Stephen Fry are a desperately needed public voice against bullshit disguised as feminism or social justice.

If Anita Sarkeesian went unchecked, games like GTA would be banned by now and reclassified as rape simulators.

This attitude of blindly dismissing people's arguments or entire credentials just because you bought into an agenda, this refusal to engage in civil debate and discuss matters on their merit. I think this is one of the factors destroying democracies around the world today. Everything must be polarizing, everyone expressing views you disagree with must be shunned. Any attempts to debate established status quo must be shouted down.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian