212 karma · joined September 23, 2022
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/mattdemers; my proof: https://keybase.io/mattdemers/sigs/45Z1fpAmUYrOWKHjeE1LKPtQ9J1ixdr-_D9uUfkdzQU ]
Because that would get in the way of Pocket.
It's essential to the eventual "I have a course/lifestyle/Notion template to sell you" pitch that people like this are going for.
But that seems counter to the idea of a management pastiche drooling over the cost-cutting potential of AI.
I know that's not anything new, but it's interesting to see how pervasive it is for one, specific service. Seems much easier to do than selling like... Asana automations? Zapier zaps?
But how does that happen when our government officials (at least in North America) seem technologically illiterate, and rely on Silicon Valley for their re-elections and donations (therefore becoming more susceptible to lobbying)?
By friendly fire, apparently!
I think that it's more speaking to... "I know why this thing that I'm leaving led me to the place I'm going, and I'm appreciative for that." Notsomuch the practical burning bridges in terms of jobs, but the piece I was quoting was more about the mental progression of "Okay I was really into this type of relationship, but it doesn't work for me any more. But I'm going to keep the connection of why it did work for me, so I can have context and appreciation for the growth I'm experiencing as a person."
Felt it applied well to creatives and athletes who feel like they still have a role to perform, based on something very personal.
Not excusing the article, but it feels very rare that we get someone "on the record" or an objective "this is actually happening due to the information we have" out of journalism. It's opinion and supposition disguised as fact.
Obviously it's because of NDAs, punishments for going on-record and personal safety, but it still feels like that shouldn't be an excuse for shoddy articles.
Is someone finding that annoying or distasteful, or thinking "wow, they have a lot of time on their hands" valid reasoning to calling them "evil and disturbed", or are people just not wanting to put the equal amount of effort to resisting/subverting that?
This is worse when the book is just... anecdotes? Stories about hypothetical clients (or ones they swear exist, but don't), which you can't really port over to yourself.
The thing is, you're never going to get that "manual" from a self-help book. Maybe from a therapist or a coach, but the majority of the work and exploration has to be done by yourself; to the people that feel hopeless, discouraged, depressed and alone (the people who may be buying these books) this is a hard thing to sell, so the authors don't.
I wouldn't have assumed that; I was more thinking the "got some Hue bulbs for Christmas and someone pointed them to HA" kind of thing. Thanks for pointing it out.
I'd argue that Google incentivized the web to change in a way in order to better exploit/profit from Google, and that's led to a net negative experience for Google users (who then leave, causing problems for Google).
site:reddit.com OR site:news.ycombinator.com %s
It still blows my mind that kids are using Chromebooks and Ipads daily on an elementary level.