hhaha88

Pretty sure intentional political scheming is what’s hurting everyone.

What do I know having been in rooms with people of the sort to be invited to Davos talking about keeping power out of the hands of the masses, just as James Madison, author of the Constitution, meant when he wrote the Senate ought to protect the opulent minority from the poor majority.

Blue collar Protestant work ethic is the worst. Instigating anxious doing in rubes is tribal warlord 101; yes yes you stay busy while I sit here.

My value store isn’t dollars, it’s a network of people collectively building in all contexts, not just the ones that are preferred by politics (indeed the “god father” of market economics, Adam Smith, only mentions one market; a free labor “market” that can move between gigs as needed; not sitting still for one employer). That just gives rich nobodies a pass on real effort, loads me up on real work by gate keeping undesirables rather than training them.

It effectively creates constraints on agency at scale, and quotas for the poor; exactly the sort of economy the US is not.

I bet the rich didn’t have a hard time finding TP.

You’re letting someone grift alright, just not who you think.

Relative experience dictates what is curious conversation to others; one might think a curious science minded person would understand that intuitively.

I do not acknowledge your authority to define that term specifically. You have authority over your property not others agency. Delete it from the DB after the fact.

I’m curious about a new political narrative aside from “coddle industrialists and landlords who won before you were born.” How do we get there without studying the system as is? Without comparing and contrasting it with others.

If it’s so banal why pressure myself into restraint? I understand a government that actively protects servicing the sick and needy before do-nothings whose names appear on deeds is a threat to your routine but it seems to me moral relativism is fine for you and the VC cottage industry. Why should society as a whole concern itself with your preferences?

You spend your time cleaning a database of trite commentary that, by your own language, is boring. What a deeply curious application of agency.

Agreed.

This project would open things up if it did something novel.

IMO a Linux distribution is the perfect base as a metaverse client for the entire internet.

Ditch the window manager that only acts like a desktop metaphor and login to a 3D capable viewport. Toggle between 2D and 3D representations, virtually load websites. Like applying AR to cyberspace. Natively relying on that ML friendly GPU.

Something like Godot as the window manager process (controls abstracted behind a traditional default UX or something) and hacking away at its scene tree format. Update UX state to be a 2D UI if needed.

Store the contents of a file as a hash to regenerate it like procedural game engines do would improve security if the users login unlocks things. /home need not be a traditional filesystem at all.

There are a lot of ideas going unexplored due to the money being thrown at business as usual problems.

It’s how landlords work, not software.

Billions of people cannot afford to be online, the environmental toll of consumer gadgets is catastrophic.

You seem to think this is forever. I wish more engineers had gone into plain old physics. Humanity hardly needed more meandering story tellers emotionally decoupled from the real constraints of our reality.

Physical reality always determines our next steps as that’s what provides the information we have to iterate against.

Why debate right and wrong and not simply make it an engineering problem to let people work on?

Why not make that our political discourse? We stop the world at work to solve problems in revenue generation.

Somehow this has to be mired in political speak.

Letting figurative power thrive while squashing people is good business.

What makes you believe gaps in productivity can’t be accounted for by caching, converting to making goods closer to the source as much as possible?

Maybe we could train more experts to avoid them needing to fly all over; buy and serve local.

A lot of efficiency options are left off the table sticking with the status quo.

Well, maybe it’s me but it all translates to “here’s a Cartesian plane and how one random dude would describe a bunch of points on it.”

My value store is not old school business networks, but the network available to everyone. It’s all electron flow in machines, with boundaries ingrained by history.

I see value in novel information design. The history of overloaded human languages and my age related overload on them makes me question what they really offer except traditional attempts at political persuasion.

Meh.

Why groups? Why not 7 billion points.

Everyone is their own political agenda, their own emotional timeline of experience.

Why does an arbitrary 1 of 7 billions semantic view of the gradients mean more than anyone else’s except for his politically protected privilege?

And of course we’re not supposed to discuss that here. This forum has an obligation to high mindedness first. Questioning the assigned figurative value of someone who is a random non-contributor to millions of others, and open discussion about how they may be actively harming them, is not allowed to launch.

Stick to the rules of bounding everyone else into quadrants. Oh wait, though; you all are everyone else to me. I only see points bounded by quadrants. I’ll just stick to thinking of you as a point on a Cartesian plane … what a novel math object he discovered.

The whole thing was elementary math object and biased, insulated, white guy political opinion. I’m banal?

I’m saying the government purposely puts no agency into the issue of inequality.

That, rather than allow the story government could, we require people to cater to unelected elders who judge and manage our agency even though none of us signed a contract at birth recognizing our agreement with the arrangement. We’re talked into after the fact; or we can die. It’s legalized shakedowns for lunch money.

You’re getting hung up on technicals. I’m challenging the story that the US is free of oppressive behavior because it’s not government performing the behavior. I don’t have a contract requiring me to believe Zuckerberg is a billionaire, his forces can assign net worth to me though?

Take PGs four quadrants of conformity. Why stop at 4? Did he run out of numbers? There are billions of people on the planet; why not an essay that suggests then a billion quadrants of conformity? The effort means little to PG, just a few different letters. Why does his boundary matter?

If we’re allowed to filter as we choose why not filter you all out?

Is that the political narrative we want to foster on Main Street? 5% of the population hunts; this contemporary logistics system provides for everyone. Following billionaires who filter out those who don’t conform to their preferred of their 4 categories … why not filter out a minority of billionaires through hefty taxation to empower all the Elons we aren’t. Pre-Reagan taxation empowered a lot of these guys families, then they changed the rules.

Change them back.

You can already do that with a browser. They all still have “save web page”.

Perhaps you’re functionally fixed on the idea an editor has to be interacted with like a word processor?

It’s all electron state. The boundaries are just UI design.

There are drag and drop web app building tools that let you fine tune the code in an inspector window, and transpile to whatever.

Perhaps what you need is to simply change how you work.

Most contemporary business app building could be visual; I mean look at what experiences Unreal enables with their blueprints. If that coding model can result in AAA games, I don’t see why it can’t replace a whole lot of website building effort.

This stuff is possible. It’s just you have to work for the aristocrats or else.

Would you accept a Christian forcing you to recite their Bible and behave within their tradition? Why must I accept your view of worthiness?

What is reinforced in ones neurology becomes the most probable ideas one will work with.

I get I have to work within the concept socially, but I’m pantomiming belief.

If I die there are millions of others who can replace my effort. The same is true of any of us; all these tech enabled companies aren’t running on just your effort.

Why should the concept that makes you feel warm and fuzzy be mine?

I’m guessing that wasn’t an error, but that you’ve simply never considered others might sincerely not give fuck about your personal perspective of how things work socially.

You get a vote. Otherwise you’re just 1 of 7 billion. It’s not written in a contract we’re all friends

Our culture likes to believe workers are free of state intervention, quotas like Soviet Russia.

But here we have yet another story of how the rich, protected by government, guide our agency.

America is a subtle con like that. The rich are protected by government, and then dictate economic agency and priority.

Effectively government has granted others the power to do what it cannot officially.

I’ve been backing up and restoring my personal phone, and managing family gadgets that way for a while.

This is a reskin of an existing Apple iCloud infrastructure project.

Yes because I already have Terraform that will spin up a secure prod k8s cluster in any of the big 3 cloud providers.

All that’s left is compiling a deps list of react components.

English is far more verbose than machine languages. It can easily make a problem seem like there’s a lot more to consider than there is if you’ve already got a corpus of syntax to leverage.

Maybe we’re just getting older and realizing forced social interaction isn’t necessarily a useful goal?

There’s no center of the universe; why does social life, big picture, have to march along with root principles?

Why are school schedules the way they are? Why is school in a bunch of dumpy buildings and not like a sole proprietorship that serves its neighbors, reimbursed for resources so long as it follows some curriculum that in the end just provides basic problem solving skills acquisition?

We need people with skills to make life supporting things. A whole lot of the rest of it, retail jobs peddling disposable crap people could make if they didn’t need a retail job, is just serving old stories.

Maybe constantly needing to socialize is an application of agency we don’t need. Maybe it’s reinforced a lot given institutions push us into competitive groups to haggle in Germanic/Romantic/Arabic/etc gibberish.

Who is working to stop corporate overreach?

I don’t really understand why the species should put its faith in industrialist billionaires given the history.

This is something of a non-story

There was a specific testing requirement at the end of HS

Students still have to attend by state law (or have some alternative allowed by law).

This test is an old law not good education practice and policy. It’s old nanny state thinking. The test format does not align with optimal problem solving behavior.

Source: ex wife and her colleagues are teachers in Oregon.

There’s always debate tabloids will omit to manufacture the right question in readers thoughts; well why bother with education?

Who stands to win when people are asking that question?

Adam Smith wrote the state must protect equality of condition on similar grounds.

The origin of higher education is partly rooted in selling secular credentials the public was too ignorant to falsify, as science began falsifying fairytale.

We keep circling around payola for landlords and manual labor for the rest.

This isn’t exactly new.

Hahaha the old “if your workload just looked like my workload” argument.

I like how x86 is a power sucking hog for the performance and enthusiasts response is to go out and buy more power sucking hogs!

Someone wasn’t around when Linux could figure out what to do with a USB device. Spectre? Meltdown? What are those?

It’s almost as if engineering is hard and being a critic is easy.

Kind of like numbers, language allows for a never ending, so big in a sense, corpus of little ideas.