black_13

he was everyday people.

How did we come to this? How did a country that once dreamed of freedom, innovation, and human potential end up here — in offices we don’t want to return to, doing work that drains more than it gives, under leaders who measure our worth by output, not humanity?

Is this what we were building toward — a world where leaving becomes the only act of resistance left, where silence fills the space of those who walked away, and those who remain carry twice the burden?

Is there still a place for meaning in all of this — or are we simply cogs in a machine that forgot why it was built in the first place.

Using Rust is a political solution to deskill a generation of coders to replace higher-cost labor with lower

The push for Rust isn't just a technical decision - it's a calculated economic strategy. By forcing rewrites of stable systems in a new language, companies effectively reset the clock on developer experience and expertise.

When a C/C++ codebase with 30 years of institutional knowledge gets rewritten in Rust, senior developers with decades of experience suddenly compete on more equal footing with juniors who just graduated. Your 15 years of C++ optimization knowledge? Now worth less than a 22-year-old's six months of Rust bootcamp training.

This isn't about memory safety - it's about labor costs. Companies call it "modernization" while quietly erasing the premium they'd otherwise pay for experience. The technical arguments serve as perfect cover for what's really happening: deliberately manufacturing a scenario where they can replace $250K senior engineers with $80K juniors.

The pattern is familiar to anyone who's watched other industries. Create artificial obsolescence of existing skills, then exploit the resulting chaos to reset salary expectations and eliminate the leverage that comes with specialized knowledge.

This is why language transitions always seem to coincide with hiring freezes and "restructuring." It's never been about technical superiority - it's about breaking labor's bargaining power.

# Why No One Touched This Post on Economic Insecurity in Aging America

I just read a sobering TIME article about America's aging workers who can't afford to retire. It profiles 69-year-old Walter Carpenter, working physical jobs despite peripheral neuropathy, bad knees and hips - one of the growing percentage of Americans 65+ still in the workforce (19% today vs 10% forty years ago).

Here's what's interesting: This shouldn't be partisan. The systematic dismantling of retirement security (shifting from pensions to 401(k)s, stagnant wages, rising costs) has created a reality where people work 55 years and still can't stop. As someone who's 59 and facing this reality myself, it's deeply personal.

The most telling quote: "What will happen when, as a friend so aptly put it, I become 'too frail to work and too poor to live?'"

I suspect this post got no traction because:

1. It's uncomfortable - forces us to confront the human cost of our economic system 2. Doesn't fit neatly into tech-optimism or "just learn to code" narratives 3. Reveals the failure of the meritocracy myth many in tech believe in 4. Lacks an easy solution (auto-IRAs are mentioned but too late for current older workers) 5. Hits too close to home for many in their 40s/50s who fear the same fate

The discussion we're avoiding is: what happens when a lifetime of work doesn't guarantee basic security in old age? And what does that say about the system we've built?

This is OUTRAGEOUS! If China treated Uyghurs this way, we'd be howling about human rights abuses and demanding UN intervention! Windowless cells, denial of legal counsel, forced isolation, strip searches, suicide attempts - we'd call it exactly what it is: TORTURE. But when it happens on American soil? Suddenly the outrage disappears. The hypocrisy is absolutely SICKENING. How DARE we lecture other countries while locking migrants in cages until they're driven to swallow screws just to escape their misery? This isn't just wrong - it's a betrayal of everything America claims to stand for!

The Theranos Startup Model is just the capitalist equivalent of SSFP: Instead of making useless shoes, they make useless software or fake hardware. Instead of meeting state quotas, they hit VC funding goals. Instead of the government propping them up, investors keep them afloat.

2. Theranos as a “Startup Shoe Factory”

Theranos is the perfect capitalist version of the Soviet Shoe Factory:

Soviet Model == Theranos Model (Capitalist Equivalent) Shoe factories produced small sizes to meet quotas. Theranos faked blood test results to meet investor expectations. Factories cut material costs and quality to meet output goals. Theranos lied about its technology because real innovation was too slow. Central planners rewarded metrics over reality. VC investors rewarded hype over real products. Factories looked productive on paper, even if they made useless products. Theranos looked like a billion-dollar startup, even though it had no working product. The economy was distorted by planned quotas. The startup world is distorted by fake valuations and exit-driven funding.

This article is harmful and flawed in multiple critical ways: Data and Analysis Problems:

Cherry-picks economic indicators while ignoring wealth inequality, racial disparities, and class divides Uses averages instead of medians, masking extreme inequality Overlooks crushing student/medical debt Makes unsupported claims about Gen Z homeownership despite record unaffordability Ignores gig economy instability and job insecurity Misrepresents political behavior through oversimplified economic determinism

Healthcare Crisis Omissions:

US life expectancy declined while European peers improved Ignores mental health crisis among American youth Overlooks devastating impact of medical debt Fails to acknowledge value of European universal healthcare Disregards social determinants of health

Quality of Life Disparities:

Neglects European work-life balance benefits (paid leave, vacation) Overlooks value of social safety nets Ignores public transportation and urban planning benefits Dismisses environmental health impacts Fails to consider housing stability programs

Harmful Impact:

Perpetuates false narrative of American exceptionalism while ignoring systemic problems Minimizes serious challenges facing young Americans Discourages necessary policy reforms by suggesting everything is fine Promotes dangerous misunderstanding of generational economic trends Undermines push for better healthcare, worker protections, and social programs Uses selective data to dismiss valid concerns about inequality and economic instability Creates false division between European and American youth experiences Distracts from urgent need to address climate change, healthcare access, and wealth concentration

The article's rosy portrayal of American Gen Z success does active harm by providing cover for continued inaction on critical social and economic problems while dismissing very real struggles facing young people today.

Agile is number one interuption of all enginnering activity .

The US is succumbing its deep desire to be a fascist state with trappings of deep south slave culture.

The Wall Street Journal's framing exemplifies how establishment media obscures systematic dismantling of public goods while blaming individuals. Their narrative of "outsized expectations" conveniently ignores that their editorial page championed policies creating this crisis: deregulation, union-busting, and tax cuts that gutted public investment.

The "conventional path to adulthood" they reference required massive public investment - the GI Bill, FHA loans, strong labor protections - which WSJ consistently opposed. Now they blame millennials for failing to thrive in the hostile economic environment their ideology created.

The article's focus on individual choices ("high expectations," "choosing less traditional paths") deflects from the core issue: the deliberate dismantling of public goods and social safety nets that made the postwar prosperity possible. When 30-somethings say "instructions don't work anymore," they're describing the collapse of institutional supports, not personal failure.

The WSJ's perspective represents the interests that profited from privatizing public goods while downloading risk onto individuals. Their "tough economic luck" framing obscures how these outcomes were policy choices, not accidents.

I have a voice in my head that says dont read the wsj

How about not watching tv

This is something ive seen at three defense companies ive worked for. They will toss the new hires in bad times but hang onto the old timers and let them do as the please. The rto never applies to them and they horde like smaug. The best job in defense is to be one of these. Boeing made lip service to passing on knowledge but when it came to true core ppl they were never part of the process.

That us how i feel as well the US will finally get what it deserves.

Bankruptcy sounds good.

And does it matter? The broader economy is whats is killing me and everyone one else. Healthcare and education are luxuries i dump tons of money into providing healthcare and education for my kid. Healthcare for myself.

I work for Boeing and i deal with shitty legacy code and shitty legacy ideas

The evolution of software development methodologies, from waterfall to agile and beyond, reflects broader shifts in business models and power dynamics within the tech industry. As companies have moved from traditional profit-driven models to ones focused on stock value and rapid growth, development practices have adapted to prioritize speed and flexibility over long-term stability. This shift has coincided with a change in the role and autonomy of engineers, who once had more control over the development process but now often find themselves navigating business pressures and shortened cycles. The debate over methodologies like waterfall versus agile is thus not merely about technical approaches, but about fundamental changes in how value is created, how engineering talent is utilized, and how software projects are controlled and prioritized. This context helps explain the generational divide in perspectives on these issues, with older engineers potentially valuing stable, well-engineered systems, while younger developers may be more accepting of rapid iteration and business-driven development cycles.

Few of you attempt to contextualize the vast sum of 13 billion euros and others fixate on its magnitude without delving into the nuanced policy implications. This oversimplification, coupled with a lack of comprehensive understanding of EU dynamics and international tax law, leads to mischaracterizations of the situation as a "fine" rather than a ruling on back taxes. Also libertarian mindset manifests in various ways: skepticism towards government intervention and international governance, emphasis on corporate rights and freedom, and a tendency to reduce complex systems to simple narratives of overreach versus liberty. Notably absent from much of the discussion here are the wider ramifications for global tax policy, the delicate balance between attracting foreign investment and maintaining fair tax practices, and the potential impact on wealth inequality. The commentary also reveals a curious dynamic where Ireland, the supposed beneficiary, is reluctant to collect these taxes due to fears of losing foreign investment, a nuance lost on many commenters. Ultimately, while the discussion generates interesting points about the scale of corporate wealth and taxation, it often lacks the depth necessary to grapple with the complex legal, economic, and ethical issues at the heart of this case, highlighting the challenges of fostering informed public discourse on intricate matters of international finance and governance.

I am currently working for Boeing and its a disaster. I get constant hell from my manager because i stop at 40.

Boeing problems are because everyone wants their 401k to return as much as possible Boeing got to where it is because of Wall Street

If you took the same amount of money spent on the starliner and spent it on education poverty eradication and just universal income Americans would howl.

Turn to housing

Actually it would be for the best if every tax return was public information

Doesn’t keep us from buying their crap.

Firstly, the commodification of mental health treatments raises questions about access and equity. If the primary driver behind the development of these therapies is profit, there’s a risk that only those who can afford them will benefit, potentially exacerbating existing disparities in mental health care.

Secondly, while psychedelic drugs offer promising therapeutic potential, their promotion must be approached with caution to avoid oversimplification of complex mental health issues. Mental health is multifaceted, involving biological, psychological, and social factors, and no single treatment is a panacea. Ensuring that these substances are integrated into comprehensive care models that address the broader needs of individuals is essential.

Moreover, the normalization of psychedelic drug use for therapeutic purposes can blur the lines between medical treatment and recreational use, raising concerns about misuse, addiction, and the stigmatization of those who choose not to use these treatments.

I wish the same were true here in the US

Ethnic cleansing or genocide.

The perfect gift for the 1 percent

But they endanger others who have to go looking or attempt to rescue them.