And if you really want to live in a world where people should be listened to on the basis of how rich they are, well, you don't really need to change anything, now do you?
And if you really want to live in a world where people should be listened to on the basis of how rich they are, well, you don't really need to change anything, now do you?
This is like an aerobics VHS in the 2000's. You might still get some sales because of older people... but you're done. You're no longer part of the culture. Get your speaking gigs / paid mailing list subscriptions while you can, I guess, because you'll sell 1/5 of what you sold before (being generous). It's all downhill after this.
Noticed how your HN submission is greyed out because of all the downvotes? That rarely happens in this site.
You should watch The Social Reckoning trailer which just came out. Check out the comments.
Downvotes mean nothing on HN, alas.
Factual statements are downvoted because some people don't like the facts quoted. And, worse, mods find that okay.
It makes HN a worse place for serious discussion and for finding out the facts about an issue, because what is discussed is driven by lazy, stupid people's sentiments.
"Incorruptible argues that this failure is not primarily ethical. It is structural."
...and with at least five em-dashes. Let's assume its not AI, but even then the blurb is very business-esque generic:
"Drawing on two decades"
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22drawing+on+two+decades%22
"a clear-eyed diagnosis and a practical blueprint for change"
...all sounds cliche. Your comments here on HN make it much more likely for me to read the book than the blurb ever would. But I'm not a best-selling author and maybe this is the sort of blurb that sells books to certain readers? Maybe authors don't have much of a say in how the blurb is worded?