MrPatan

The formula for success is not a sum of factors, it's a multiplication of factors.

Yes, you need luck to be > 0. But you better have hard work also > 0, or you won't have any success anyway.

No, the sales and marketing guys are not parasites leeching off your hard work because you're the one wrinting the code. It's not S + C, it's S * C.

No, it doesn't matter how good and productive you are, if you don't know how to search for jobs, pass interviews, etc, you won't have a job.

And not wanting to work hard because "you need luck anyway" is not a winning strategy.

Ok.

I'll explain because there seems to be a genuine misunderstanding.

Of course the scientific method is great, and the only tool we have to understand the world. Of course. Very true.

"The Science", on the other hand, is a sales tool. Something to be invoked to push a product, a policy, whatever.

Science, the scientific method, the sum total of humanity's knowledge and wisdom, can't be stopped. It may be delayed, but truth wins because truth predicts the future, and lies don't.

But "The Science", that's different. Pay off a few key people at the right time, and you can get yourself a nice handy "The Science" to sell whatever it is you want to sell. It won't work forever, but it doesn't need to. By then they've already cashed out their shares, won the election, whatever.

> If you can't distinguish between science, medicine, media and government policies, there's little we can do.

I surely can. And this thing you say has nothing to do with what I said, which is that they destroyed completely trust in all of those institutions.

I don't know what you're arguing for, all of those things you list happened because of the desire to ignore the actual science and common sense in favor of preferred policies.

1 They caused a panic

2 They didn't fight off the virus very well

3 There was unrest, there is still unrest, and to all those problems, add that people don't trust science, medicine, governments or media

4 The policies enacted kind of were a dead end? A waste of 2 years for little benefit?

5 There was none. No studies, no data, no previous experience.

6 It came out anyway and thanks to point 3, all the goodwill is gone.

I don't know, apply those standards to the course taken? What conclusion do you reach? That everything would be much worse otherwise?

So that's my point. The "clever" policies are going to fail anyway and now nobody trusts the people who pushed them.

It's not difficult: Don't lie. And whoever feels the need to censor people who disagree with them, well, I don't need to check if they're lying anymore.

Fair enough. Can't delete or edit this one anymore, ah well.

No.

That line of thinking destroyed free speech and destroyed whatever trust was left in science, medicine, governments and media.

Was it worth it for a bunch of maybes? "maybe China wouldn't have collaborated" (also, collaborate how? They didn't, they don't).

There is a reason why these freedoms are absolute and non-negotiable: Even when people think they have a good reason to violate them, they're wrong.

If you don't let some information out in case it changes The Science, what then?

No.

The whole point is that they're telling you stuff you disagree with or don't like to hear, but we shouldn't censor them, not that they're wearing a lab coat.

Extensions are too risky

Long-standing entitlement is still entitlement. Expensive entitlement is still entitlement.

That's precisely the opposite.

> the alternative of working any other non-art-related job is too painful

"I don't feel like it" doesn't sound like desperation to me. It sounds more like entitlement.

13 of the last 2

This is a great question, we need more of it.

Whenever there's a new piece of information or "news", always stop and wonder who is telling you that, why, and why now. Not enough people do!

If the rock floats, it will be the biggest indictment against the current way of doing research you can possibly imagine.

Not because of JS in any case. JS is the whipping boy of desktop performance because its ascendance happened at the same time as what you say: interfaces that update on the fly and need data from the net to do anything at all.

So now download times get blamed on JS and Electron by the haters. Ah, well.

The code the unexperienced write is infinitely faster than the non-code that would be not-written by nobody would the unexperienced not write code.

Because all the king's horses and all the king's men can't put the sample back together again

To "combat misinformation", surely?

The moment they push the sample and it "turns and snaps" into the magnet in this video:

https://sciencecast.org/casts/suc384jly50n

makes it look like a diamagnetically levitating piece of graphite moving over multiple magnets in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-tW8_SRW3g

Why am I wrong? I want to believe!

Every sigmoid not carrying me up is close to the plateau

How is ad revenue share open to everybody "bribing right wing activist accounts with Twitter cash"?

The power knob controls and displays, visually and tactile-ly, the current power level.

> Every day is mental pain as I get older and younger folks are above me. It feels undignified, humiliating at times.

This is transitory. I get it, but it only stings now because you're not that old yet, so you feel you should be in that fight. A few years more and it's typical for the manager to be younger, nobody has the population pyramid for seniority promotions anymore.

It helps to get somewhat out of the ladder and go freelance or similar. It ends up being very very similar, but in your head you're on a different track.

Credit? It's the (non central)bank accounts what lose meaning, imo

It may be a matter of explaining it differently. Maybe just the names! But I never "got" MVC, and I got the one way data flow pattern straight away. Maybe I was just old enough to get the point that time around.

No. Here's the quote I responded to originally, slightly expanded for your convenience and ease of use:

> Similarly, building a somewhat straighter fibre (and then microwave towers) from Chicago to NY has no societal benefit I can discern. (But the solution to that is fintech and regulation, not crypto.)

I've always been talking about technical infrastructure, you're the one who brought up delivery of oil barrels.

If you think this bit is not important enough that's fine. Feel free not to get involved.

1 BTC = 1 BTC

Isn't that an admission that the first page is not good enough in so many cases now that they had to make pagination easier?

Nobody is saying delivery of assets is done on chain.

That's a strawman you've skewered twice already, well done.

What we're saying is: a lot of the low level infrastructure used now in finance (brokers! Dealers! Clearinghouses!) is easily replaced by some code, once you have trustless decentralized computers. Which we do now.

Then your oil barrel market is just some code nobody needs to trust, and yes, the "last mile" of it still needs "guys with guns" infra. So what? We made a part of that market freer and fairer.

Cool, isn't it?

It's the same application layer just running in a different tech and social stack.

It's clear why the current gatekeepers don't like permissionless alternatives, but why do you agree with them?