kukx

I am convinced that the standardized test should be the main or sole factor. Taking into account environmental variables is going to be overly arbitrary and likely to turn political and corrupt leading to worse results on average. If the test is designed well and puts emphasis on measuring IQ then the difference in ed resources should not skew the results too much.

It would be a pathological situation and I do not see how it could be beneficial short or long term. As a society we should make sure that the brightest people get appropriate knowledge and become as productive as possible, as it is in our interest. Smart people is one of the biggest resource the society has. It would be a waste not to use it to the fullest extent possible.

The values are different in different cultures. Western civilization is based on Judeo-Christian values. It is the source.

Does the energy need to be conserved in the same form?

Indeed, it seems like a garbage, clickbait article. It should not be on HN.

It makes me wonder, what the owner could do in that environment to prevent such theft, ie in the circumstances where the police cannot be bothered. I wonder if making extremely loud, directed noise to cause a discomfort for thieves is legal or effective.

> This is generally not possible at twice the cost. We get better at automation constantly. Thinking that just because today our technology sucks it will stay this way, is not reasonable in my opinion.

> When it is possible to automate a job away, it is desirable. Yes, it reduces the cost (of the workforce). However, this change comes with a nontrivial social cost and a problem, what to do with the people that are not able to do more advanced stuff.

> The ability to afford adequate housing, food, and clothing. I'm not saying we should mandate people can afford a 1500 sq. ft. home, ribeye steaks every evening, and Ralph Lauren Polo threads, but how about at least a one bedroom, one bathroom apartment; nutritious, nourishing food; Walmart clothing at a minimum.

Now, what does adequate mean? I guess a place to sleep, a place to clean oneself, food and clothing seems like a reasonable bar for a wage above poverty. Are there many full time jobs in the US that do not allow that?

> Removing the "tipping" system. Increase prices such that an employee can afford the above mentioned necessities.

Removing tipping and increasing prices beyond the tipping, it reduces to just increasing prices. I guess not very smart people create these enterprises, if only they hiked prices… And seriously, they definitely increases them, it is just a necessity. But I would not call this as a change in the model.

> I think the industry will go here no matter what changes we do or do not make to policy, business models, etc.

We do not have to necessary speed it up. People are already having difficult with keeping up with the changes.

> We either decide these people are expendable, or that they are human beings worthy of a baseline of a dignified life. I define a dignified life as the ability to have at least the minimums I described above.

Are there really only two options? Is not that a bit simplistic? And what does that even mean, do you think we should provide everyone with the job that ensures they have the mentioned stuff. What if they have different needs. And what if they do not qualify for any job, should we provide them with the exact stuff that people who work 40h a week get, or the equivalent in money? How is that fair for those who do these boring jobs.

What does it mean to support a family? Is getting them sheltered, clothed and well fed good enough? I think it is way easier to achieve today than in almost any other time in a human history, even for the low earners.

Restaurants are a part of the service sector. A service job does not imply that it is attractive. And they differ in requirements. The well paid ones get more and more complicated and hence, proportionally to the whole population, less and less people will be able to qualify for them.

Please, define what is a poverty wage, it is important. How much stuff one should afford to avoid being called poor.

What is the change of the model in case of the restaurant? I can see only one, automate the jobs away to reduce the costs, namely replace humans with robots.

But, if we consider these crappy jobs, what about people that are not qualified/able to do any more advanced jobs? People have vastly different cognitive abilities, it is not like we can teach everyone to code. It will not work.

Rising the minimum wage is exactly the thing that should not be done, if one cares about the employment levels. It prices out the least qualified workforce of the market. To put it simply the less able/educated/experienced are not productive enough to cover own costs. So that no one wants to employ them and they are stuck. They start to rely on the government to provide them with resources and it means that have to vote for politicians that promise to keep the free money flowing. It creates a perverse relation between politicians and citizens, which may resemble a dealer addict situation.

Would people read ToS, if they were more "attractive"? Well, maybe some, but then again, it would be a chore anyway. I do not see a way to make people spend a substantial amount of time on it, if they are not absolutely forced to do it (for example if the stakes are high). However, I do not have any papers to back it up, it is just my hunch.

Life by design is rigged and there is little we can do to change it. Natural selection may help with some problems, but it is also cruel in its nature. Knowing it does not mean we should not try to make the world a better place, we should. But there are fundamental limitations like IQ, free will, laws of physics etc that we should not forget about. Going back to the ToS problem, they could probably offer a more expensive version with a ToS aimed at more demanding customers, so that they could opt out by paying more. I think it would be fair.

Sure, there are limits to the extend in which people can take care of themselves. For example if they are born with a low IQ they may never be able to do provide a net benefit to any job or almost any job. So that they are effectively unemployable. But if you are able to do anything of benefit to the society then you should do it. And having a job is the way to do it and be sustainable.

The people need to take care of themselves first, then their family, then their immediate surrounding, then their region and their country. Reversing the dependency on a large scale is not sustainable. Someone's right is someone else responsibility, for someone to receive money, someone else has to provide it. The government is a middleman in this transaction that wastes a substantial share of the value in the process.

I think what you are trying to say is that future will look bleak for drivers. It does not mean humans in general though. Drivers will be replaced by more cost efficient and often more reliable robots. But the upside is lower prices, more free time, less stress, less accidents. So it would be a net gain for most of the humans.

It also gets a bad rep because of Oracle.

Nice idea.

Why not a single character for hours and minutes? It could make a cool watch face.

"If, say, a US adversary creates a great-looking video of the US president doing/saying something really heinous (...)" Did we not see enough fake stories about US presidents already? The DeepFakes are not really needed to falsely accuse a politician, or to wash away the compromising material. The media can use anonymous sources to claim anything bad about any public figure without consequences. Also, they can ignore and diminish any compromising material, effectively shielding the subject. It is all about who controls the media and subsequently the narrative. DeepFake may or may not be used in court though.

Well, let's merge both narrations: they need to, if they choose to pursue the leadership in the global market ;)

And a religious person would say that we should follow ten commandments. Should we make it illegal not to follow them? Should we move toward punishing the sinners by law? I am against immoral behavior but it does not mean I am for banning speach and art, quite the opposite. The Christian culture is crumbling and is being slowly replaced by a more repressive one. And it is worrisome to say the least.

"Let's pay them." Ok, with whose money? I am all for good pay for everyone. The problem begins when we detach the pay from the value created by the worker. In many cases worker may become too expensive to hire. So trying to force business to pay more may result in less people having job.

Yes, it is similar to how creating inflation by the government is just a way to tax poor and the middle class, without actually rising taxes.

CPI measures a basket of goods and these will differ from country to country. But, let's assume the US government does a good job on estimating the increase in the consumer prices for an average citizen. Still it does not address the problem I mentioned about printing money, which is dissolving the value of money. If that was not true, as I mentioned earlier, we could just print the money and have eternal vacations.

The question is why we do not see the negative effects in the reported CPI. One explanation is a deflationary force that mitigates the inflationary moves. The long term stable deflationary force is an increase in productivity by technological advancements. But I do not think it can keep up with the printing press.

Define arcane. You can type "man dd" and acquire the required knowledge, it is not hidden. Whatever the intention was the syntax is simple and pleasant to use, at least for me ;)

> "no other ..."

Do you realize that anyone can make a cli tool with whatever syntax they like? :) Also, see "man xm", which uses quite similar approach. And there are probably many other examples.

> arcane and bizarre command-line syntax

It is not arcane, you just have to read docs, like for every command line tool. Different cli applications have different syntaxes usually influenced by their domains, eg compare find, tcpdump, iptables, cut, docker.

> Housing itself, like stocks, is considered an asset and is not part of inflation.

The CPI is an arbitrary indicator set and counted by the government in secrecy, the same entity that has the incentive to keep its value low. Even if someone trusts the government, it does not mean they should trust it completely.

* https://www.forbes.com/sites/perianneboring/2014/02/03/if-yo...

* https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2020/08/31/is...

As I mentioned before printing money not backed by the creation of value diminishes the value of money. Otherwise why bother working. The government could print money for all of us and we could party all the time. The printing press was invented quite a while ago, I wonder why no one come up with this solution earlier!

The debt is a burden and increasing it, increases the burden. You can argue of utility of increasing the debt in bad times, but then it should be decreased in good times. If it is not happening then there is something fundamentally wrong.

There is the CPI, but it does not represent all prices. House prices and stock went up a lot, in many cases to irrational levels. The young people without a house feel the pain. They will inherit the national debt as well. Now the commodity prices steadily increase. Add to it increasing wages and more expensive imports and we will see rising costs of production and in consequence the CPI.

The money printed to finance the government debt is not backed by a production of value. It just increases the money supply, while not increasing the amount of goods that one can buy with that money, hence by nature it is inflationary, ie it makes money less valuable. The market is complex and the effects may be postponed in time by years, but the fundamental mechanisms persist. The consequences are negative and sooner or later we will see them, or it is likely that we are already deeply affected.