dclowd9901

We've frozen hiring (despite already being under staffed) and our leadership has largely pointed to advances in AI as being accelerative to the point that we shouldn't need more bodies to be more productive. Granted it's just a personal anecdote but it still affects hundreds of people that otherwise would have been hired by us. What reason would they have to lie about that to us?

Gotta say, Animal Crossing during Covid was a god send. I spent a lot of time in that game just putzing around and taking in the world. I'm not traditionally a person who enjoys those types of games, but the routine of hopping in every morning while I had coffee and every evening while I was winding down really lowered my stress level during an exceptionally stressful time in everyone's lives.

It feels a bit like LLMs rely a lot on _us_ to be useful. Which is a big point to the author's article about how companies are trimming off staff for AI.

You're taking a sliver of truth as though it dismantles their entire argument. The point was, nobody was _claiming_ databases would cure all diseases. That's the argument around the hype of AI here.

I've found that putting arguments into simple, general terms tends to make people rethink their positions.

I had an argument with my dad a while back about single payer health care. A lot of people on the left might frame it like "don't you think everyone is entitled to access to health services?" But an idea like this is like nails on a chalkboard to my dad, who believes everything should be merit based, even access to health care.

Instead, phrasing it as "wouldn't you prefer it if we paid the same amount of money every month and when we go to the hospital we don't have to worry about any out of pocket costs?" This really nailed the point home to him. It's not about entitlements or whatever. It's about people not being destroyed financially by bad health. We skip over the feely stuff, we skip over the specifics of cost. We can both agree that this mechanism makes a lot of sense for most people, and the current system is rather arbitrary.

Anyway, he's still firmly a MAGA trumper but I do think on the aspect of health care, he does see single payer as a viable alternative.

Do we really believe there is a rooted undercurrent of antisemitism at Harvard of all places? Or is this just anti-zionist expansion straw manning? I'm sorry but the continuously faithless positioning of the Trump administration right now makes me believe the antisemitic accusations are a pretext.

Most if not all of his cabinet (surprisingly) have an Ivy League background. Not sure if that's an endorsement on them, or an indictment on Ivy League schools

"San Junipero" I think was the kind of black mirror episode that black mirror always should have done. An honest depiction of a certain technology to its ultimate realization. Is it completely perfect? Absolutely not, but it's good in all the ways that matter to people.

If you had to encapsulate the vibe, it would be "people just post shit to see if other people are as weird as they are."

It was a whole era, folks. And I don't mean "does anyone else" Reddit crap that is absurdly naive. This was way more before and way more naive than that. You didn't have any expectation that you were normal (even if you were weird). You just did it to gauge how fucking weird you were.

There's lots of different kinds of art, some of it more commercially viable than others. Consider 3D designers selling print models, people like myself who are interested in restoring old cars or other endeavors that are artistically rewarding and aren't just painting or sculpting. Hell, people seem to do pretty well currently as content creators on YouTube.

My point is immediately jumping to the idea everyone's going to be pumping out shitty paintings and music that no one will want is lacking in imagination.

In some ways we made it better and in some ways we made it worse.

Yep, this. Being aligned with an influential and well-liked manager is probably the biggest indicator of your overall career trajectory at a company.

Gotta disagree. The most disruptive up and comers seem to get there through word of mouth. I mean look at Figma. I haven't seen a single Figma ad since they began as a company (they probably exist somewhere) but they really rocketed off through word of mouth among the design community. Pretty sure slack was similar in this regard. Both disrupters.

I have no actual evidence of this always being the case but I would imagine given the fact the nature of a disrupter is that they're usually operating on principles of delivering a better product but without the budget to go crazy with advertising, they have to find more grassroots methods of market penetration.

I think we could actually start the path to this by making unethical advertising illegal. Here's kind of what I'm thinking: no forced advertising. All ads that steal time away from you (like forcing people to watch ads before accessing something) would be illegal. The reasoning being that you're essentially stealing an infinitely valuable resource: people's time. It's unethical for ad agencies to steal such a valuable resource for such a meager reason.

Someone explain to me how this wouldn't work: they seem to be able to tell when a prompt for copyrighted material is happening. Why couldn't we make it so prompts that yield copyrighted material pay a licensing fee to the owners?

Right, but it's what their news outlets tell them is going on. They fully believed Kamala was a threat to their gun ownership, and her race and gender (let's face it) was a threat to their ego.

Well, if you look at it from the perspective of faithless reporting like that from Fox News and Newsmax, the information pipeline has been selling a narrative that the left has been on an authoritarian tear since Obama. The newscasts are chilling: every one of them for more than two decades has taken a position that the left is an existential threat to the United States.

With that kind of context, it's really no wonder there's support from the right for an authoritarian leader. They honestly just think they're playing the democrats game and playing it better.

It _is_ a bit odd there's a complete lack of reflection on some of these moves though, but I suppose so long as the current executive branch veers away from changing the second amendment and manages to carve out enough exceptions for their most ardent supporters, all's good from their standpoint.

As someone with an e30 and who is currently doing a rotisserie restoration on a '76 2002, this is just awesome. I wish they archived some of their ad literature for these models.

I'm in the same position as you, but I see myself as rather lucky. I worked very hard but I also was taught hard work translates into success, many people don't see that relationship. And I happened to be interested in a lucrative career path.

Yeah I relate to this too. I often head into something not knowing what to do, taking the naive approach, realizing there's some patterns I can tool out and simplify, and refine my process. Basically just chewing through the problem. Frankly I've never met a project I couldn't finish. Since I'm not really that talented, it's the thing that gives me the confidence to tackle something.

But it would be up to him, wouldn't it? I think that's the main deal here: cart blanche access to your data, or giving into someone's bullshit fishing attempt because it's inconvenient.

Perhaps Apple has a greater leverage in China due to its outsized manufacturing presence. And it's likely they already dont offer ADP to Chinese citizens.

While I agree with the essential point you're making, it's pretty clear this overreach was always part of this administration's game plan. At least until Pence delayed it through validating the 2020 elections.

He took it that way because without a charitable interpretation such as yours, the wording leaves power assigned vaguely enough end run judicial review. Given this administration's history with attempts to grab power, I'd say your interpretation is _far_ too charitable.

If the Supreme Court and Congress has no enforcement power, though, what recourse is there?

I've found 1-bar 4G LTE to actually be enough to do work on at home, to my surprise (in the occasions that my in-the-ground cable connection up and dies on me). Only thing I don't get is Zoom with that, but it's nice to have a good excuse not to be in a meeting.

It seems like the kind of idea you might just "step over" as being too simplistic. I wish I had the time and energy to just explore simple ideas like this to see if I could create a compelling game or creation out of them. I think it takes a child's creativity, earnestness and positivity in some respects, and I'm afraid to say I'm a bit down on the world at the moment.

_Really_? I'm not one to defend Jonathan Blow The Personality (TM), but the game masterfully weaves the puzzle aspects into the adventuring aspects of the game, and encourages you to expand your perspective throughout. The sort of experience I had playing that game made me wish more games were like that (Fez being another notable example).

Yeah, I remember this one (flOw), played it on PS3, I think. It's a very cool game. There's an eeriness about it, and there's definitely something resembling a narrative. It was always kind of thrilling to "level up" (quite literally, since you're moving between scale planes in the game), and what kinds of creatures you'd encounter at the next level. They would have new mechanics and shapes that you kind of had to figure out by evolving your play style.

Sony can really put out some amazing first (second?) party stuff when they want to, which makes me wonder why they don't do it more often.

> and of the people who were interested in Katamari, I asked the ones who I thought were the coolest to join the team

Moment of silence for the death of "culture fit" in companies. I know it was not all great and warped hiring in ways that were problematic but there's something to be said for working on a project with other people who you know will just "get it."