jeffjobs4000

Robotics is an enormous TAM, and would be all this company needs to justify this type of valuation.

Also, video games, and movie / tv / video content generation.

Yes. Social networking was fun. Social media is brain rot.

That's certainly a point of disagreement. I think this absolutely should be ignored.

Him saying the ISS should be deorbited after 27 years rather than 30 years isn't a disqualifying opinion.

Freaking out at perfectly valid opinions or actions is a bad thing to do. If you are constantly screaming over nothing, you'll be tuned out, and that's bad for when there are real things to scream about.

Correct. So a strong counterweight is important to whichever side is in power.

My point with "like any human beings" was to not demonize the current group, and point out that any group of people in power will do stupid things.

It's scheduled to be deorbited in 5 years, but Musk thinks it should be done in 2 years... IS DEMOCRACY AT RISK IN AMERICA?!?!

The current administration will attempt to do many dumb things, like any human beings. Crying wolf at every action or opinion diminishes the other side's creditability for when it matters. This is bad for all of us.

If there is access to the hardware, then the data and software are not secure. So you couldn't run any business applications or anything were you would need to have an assumption of data privacy.

Something most of the think pieces, and interviews with Michael Lewis, discount is just how geeked out on amphetamines this guy was.

Sorry you went through this. If you want to make another attempt, I've found that the older I get, the slower ramp up time I need getting back into exercise. Do far less than you're body is able to during the workout when you start. To the point where it feels like you're not stressing yourself at all. Then make a plan to slowly ramp up from that point over 6-10 weeks depending on the shape you're in and age. After that, you can start pushing your body closer to it's limits during any given workout. Also, it will just suck the first 3-4 weeks before you start enjoying it.

I find this passage to be far more readable than the Scarlet Letter one posted above. Sure, it's long, but it's developing the character.

Before screens, people must have gotten far more enjoyment from authors painting mental pictures in tiny detail.

We have HD video as an option now. A long description of a rose bush doesn't do it for me unless it's needed for the actual narrative.

Sundar? The guy who reports into Ruth?

Sundar has the CEO title because he's so meek that grandstanding politicians feel bad being too mean to him during congressional hearings.

Google's priorities 1 through 10 are to avoid anti-trust messing up their money geysers.

Open Source is just Freemium with more steps.

There's a certain % of people who prefer WFH, a % who prefer WFO, and a % who want hybrid. The same person could change preferences over time as well.

People will sort themselves into the teams who share their preference over the next 5 years.

Just like how not everyone wants to work 100 hour weeks at an investment bank, but a certain group of people want to take that deal. You self select for it.

I think this debate gaining the fervor of a religious war stems from people not wanting to have to leave their current job to obtain their WFH / WFO preference? The re-shuffling will take a few years, but if you prefer something different than the pre-COVID status quo then you should be happy the shuffling is happening.

Thinking about it more, the WFO crowd grouping themselves only with people who actually want to be there is probably better for them too. The great re-shuffling benefits all! Don't go all Spanish Inquisition on those who don't share your work arrangement preference.

Well that's good news. Thanks for correcting me. I think the attempt still makes my point that people are doing drastic things because of the prevailing narrative on the subject.

I also don't mean to rag on the kids, I appreciate their passion. I just think it's misguided, and that if the wider array of potential solutions were better known then people could be more productive working on solving the problem. I think the fatalism about the topic is sad and unnecessary. I didn't mean the comment to be a cultural war "pick a side" post. The passion around the subject is justified, but I think it could be channeled more productively.

Many people use to agree with Malthus in the 1800s that the world was about to run out of food. Then the Haber-Bosch process was discovered, and problem solved. More mental energy should be put into finding a similar solution for climate change versus this century's equivalent of "the world needs less people because of food limitations".

Geoengineering projects should be getting far more attention in the public eye. There are serious alternatives to letting society crumble due to climate change. People are choosing not to have children and citing climate anxiety as the reason. Just today, two teenagers in London ruined a Van Gogh for a climate protest. It's absurd. If you apply any amount of rational thinking to the problem, you'll realize that it's incredibly likely that we'll solve climate change.

The paper cited here is from a U of Arizona professor who previously won a MacArthur "genius" grant, and develops the optics for some of the largest telescopes in the world. Not a quack. Harvard has a Geoenigineering department. Smart and credible people are working this problem out. We should give them our attention, money, and talents. The paper in this post lays out a plan to reduce climate change for under 0.5% of world GDP in 2006. The price of launching weight into space has plummeted in the 15 years since this paper was written.

If you're worried about unintended consequences of geoengineering, then contribute to reducing risk by helping to develop AI. Then we'll be better able to model its effects and mitigate risk through increasingly accurate simulation. We need to tell people to study materials science or something that will actually help if they're concerned about the climate.

Climate Fatalism is so mid.

I first learned how to code in R before moving on to Python, then some C and Go. I think a big cause for the SWE hate of R is that it's not OO programing. R is a functional language for data analysis. If you don't grok that, then I can understand why looking at it would make you barf. Going the other way, from functional to OO, caused me physical pain as well.

R is amazing for data analysis. Also, RStudio is a much more efficient solution for iteratively exploring data than Jupyter. Don't make fun of a screwdriver for not being a hammer.

France has nukes though. So I think you still have the MAD issue. Maybe France doesn't have enough of a stockpile to destroy all humanity 8x over, but not sure how much that changes the game theory.