scottious

Do you also support legalization of hard drugs? Why not have a heroin store in every town. The customers are very loyal. Let people waste their money on drugs, it's not my place to tell people what to spend their money on. Who knows, maybe we'll get heroin ads on the subway. In fact, let's let cigarette companies also advertise again! what could possibly go wrong?

A better way to think about it is that all letters in the musical alphabet are represented in a musical scale. Some are sharp or flat

D major: D E F♯ G A B C♯

D minor: D E F G A B♭ C

Db major: D♭ E♭ F G♭ A♭ B♭ C

Db minor: D♭ E♭ F♭ G♭ A♭ B♭♭ C♭

I'm genuinely surprised that you don't know lots of people who enjoy living in a city for its own sake and not only because something is keeping them there.

Well, nice to meet you, I'm a city dweller who works from home and can technically live where ever I want. I choose the city because I like it and I want my family to have nice things. I like walking to the kid's school and not owning a car and being close to amenities.

"do people really like cities? I am not so sure"

Just look at real estate prices in New York, SF, Boston, etc. Yes, people REALLY like cities. Even the wealthiest people who can afford anything still choose cities

"If there is no longer a reason for people to live close together, decentralization is the most likely outcome."

Umm what? Humans are social animals and many people LIKE living in cities in close proximity to other people and close to amenities. I do not see a future where we decentralize and spread out because of AI.

My 10 year old brain was blown when I discovered the Buddy Holly music video on the Windows 95 CD. I just couldn't comprehend the idea of a music video being played on a computer. Felt like magic. Such different times.

I wouldn't say social media is just "filling a void". I feel like it's more accurate to say that social media is exploiting weaknesses in the human brain for profit and causing harm to individuals and society as a whole. I'd even say that it's preventing people from filling that void because it's sucking away people's time.

Imagine if a tobacco executive said "you remove cigarettes and people will just replace it with alcohol or other drugs or another vice altogether". It may be true for some people but overall we've reduced harm by fighting back against cigarettes

That kind of algorithm doesn't show you anything besides the messages in your inbox. It's never making a decision to show you X instead of Y, it's just deciding the ordering in which you see them.

Modern social media is choosing from a vast pool of content and the algorithm's entire goal is to maximize engagement for monetary gain (at whatever cost to society). There's only so much "engagement maxing" you can do with an email sorting algorithm especially if the premise for an email inbox is that you'll always only ever see your emails and nothing else.

The whole "running destroys your knees" thing is a very persistent myth. Running can cause temporary knee injuries, especially in beginners. In the long run it actually strengthens your knees. There has been quite a lot of research on this but unfortunately, it's still in the cultural zeitgeist that running is bad for your knees

Of course, every person is different. Anecdotally, my knees and hips are so much stronger now than they were 15 years ago after running over 20k miles.

I actually do run every day. I've only missed about 4 days so far this year. Anyway, 3 days of running per week is certainly better than 0.

I'm not saying we should ban stuff.

I'm saying that we could enact policies that encourage better habits by default. For example, we don't have to build car-dependent suburbia. Car-dependency is a choice we made. We've largely outlawed the building of walkable cities through zoning codes. There are literally millions upon millions of people who are forced into car-dependent suburbia and stuck with 9-5 jobs where they have to spend 1.5 hours commuting. It's no wonder people find it difficult to exercise. Add kids into the mix and it becomes almost impossible to find the time to drive to a gym to exercise 5 days a week. Many of these suburban cities are openly hostile to people not in cars.

That whole thing I just described is a series of policy choices. We can't save people from themselves but we can encourage better lifestyle choices. People would walk more if there were more stuff to walk to. People would bike to work if it were made possible.

Also, honestly, a world with fewer cars would be a much better place.

For those who are inclined, I recommend running instead (even if you think you aren't a runner)

My body has been completely transformed from 15 years of running. I'm 5'7" and 135 pounds at age 41. My face looks thin, I have a better body than most 20 year olds. I gave myself the best gift that I could possibly give myself.

If they could distill 15 years of running (5x per week) and put it in pill form, I truly believe it would be the most valuable thing medicine has ever created.

All it takes is 45 minutes per day for 5 days per week. And you can actually have fun while doing it! It takes a long time to get to that point but it's so worth it.

It is a bit crazy that everybody seems to agree that diet and exercise are important, and yet it seems like society is hell bent on making those things very hard to do well.

I went to the mall recently (big mistake) and I had to get lunch at the food court. I don't think there was a single gram of fiber across the 10 or so restaurants. So much of America is drive-thru garbage. Yup -- you don't even have to stand up to get your Big Mac. You can endanger other people by eating it while you drive.

We tell people to get exercise and then force them to have 9-5 desk jobs that have a 45 minute car-commute each way. And what's so much worse is that people are paying a ton of money for that car that's slowly killing them. It's not entirely their fault though -- that's just the way our society is set up. Walkability is a luxury only the rich can afford.

Then, 20 years later you show up to the doctor and the standard course of action is to prescribe a bunch of medications. The doctor says "you should exercise more and eat better" and many people just don't.

So much is broken.

Exercise really is a wonder drug. The best of the best!

If only doctors could prescribe it and have people adhere to the prescription.

If only American culture weren't so car-centric and our daily lives involved some natural amount of exercising. We've built a society where only the privileged few can walk or bike to work. It's just too easy these days to barely move in our normal life. Drive to work, drive to the store, drive the kids places... you literally have to specifically schedule exercise (and ironically, many people will drive to the gym to walk on a treadmill).

It's not that simple. Owning a home is not just a better version of renting. It's a whole different thing with pros and cons.

Your mortgage is the lowest amount you'll pay. On top of that you have to manage the upkeep of the house, which costs both time and money. Lots of people go through phases in their lives where they move around and owning just doesn't make sense for a few 1 to 2 year stretches.

On the other hand, rent is the highest amount you'll pay. You generally don't have to worry about upkeep, and you're free to move. The commitment is lower and that has real value for certain people at certain stages of their lives.

I rented for 6 years in different areas until I figured out what I liked, and then I bought a house. Those 6 years weren't just wasted years. Those were very valuable years where renting really made the most sense.

I agree that there are some quirks to music theory but ultimately I think it's a very good system that was been refined over hundreds of years.

As for your point about A->B being a larger interval than B->C. There are two half-steps in the white keys (B->C and E->F) because there are two half steps in the major scale! This way, you can play C to C with all white keys and get a major scale.

A major scale is probably one of the most fundamental building blocks in western music theory and it's encoded right onto the keyboard layout itself.

The oddities of music theory are no more strange than all of the strange things in the English language that we just shrug about and move on once we learn it.

the job description of a junior engineer can change. junior engineers can use AI to make themselves more productive too

Fair point. I don't know the answer to that question but we definitely live in one of the worst timelines right now.

I understand and sympathize with the motivation here... but not all software engineering is bad. The best job I've ever had was working on cancer research as a software engineer. Brilliant biologists need engineers to help them run their analysis at scale to make discoveries. It was a non-profit, people genuinely cared and the org was good. Pay wasn't FAANG competitive of course, but my point is that not all software jobs are terrible.

I agree. This is one reason why I want gas prices to go to $10/gallon. It will hurt, but maybe we'll start having some serious conversations about our awful transportation system and city design

Cycling is great for many reasons, but I feel that the biggest boost to my well-being was giving up driving.

The vibe I get is that he's saying "you poors are just jealous of the billionaires who are smarter and richer than you, so you want to take it away from them"

The comparison to _literal super heroes_ from comic books definitely made me roll my eyes

My problem with billionaires is that their gains are in part from exploitation. I just don't believe that one person can actually produce billions of dollars of value all by themselves. They extract that value from other people and our whole system is structured to promote this.

There are probably millions people who could have been Mark Zuckerberg or Bill Gates or Elon Musk or whoever. A million people with the right skills who maybe were born a few years too late or didn't have the right connections or just didn't have rich enough parents. It's a little too "winner take all" for my taste. And then those few winners end up having disproportionate affect on politics and issues that affect us all. It's just not a great system.

But I'm not arguing for stopping the internet or stopping cars from existing. I think both of those things have great applications that shouldn't be ignored.

All I'm saying is that many technologies are a double-edged sword. They can have wonderful uses that make life better, but they can also make life worse in some ways. The Internet and cars are two perfect examples of that. And by the time we realize the harms of these technologies, it's too late.

So perhaps the challenge with any technology is figuring out how to reap the benefits without letting things get out of hand.

cars are not exactly a success story. Both of your examples (cars and internet) are things that had some great applications but also have been mis-used or over-used.

cars: people now live completely car-dependent lives and drive way too much. our infrastructure cannot handle people driving so much and it's extremely expensive and bad for our health and terrible for the environment

internet: well... obviously... social media and all the harms that come with that.

I saw a comment by an anonymous Meta engineer who said that it's difficult to leave when you see $2m worth of unvested stock sitting in your account. How many years would you be miserable for $2m? Many people can be easily seduced by that amount of money

I don't know... I might have said the same thing about email/text/phone spam but it has only proliferated to the point where it's a constant stream of garbage. Email, text, and phone calls are almost completely useless at this point. Sifting the signal from the noise is a non-stop effort.

I think people who want to push a certain narrative might just set up a quick bot and tell that bot to start posting on Reddit or whatever and just let it run. Why not? Little effort on their part and they might actually have influence. The same reason why spammers apparently think sending me 10 text messages per day about a loan I've been approved for. It probably does work 0.0001% of the time, but that's okay if it's all automated.

> “The mere fact that the conference is happening is already a success,” said Claudio Angelo, senior policy adviser at Brazil’s Climate Observatory, a network of environmental, civil society and academic groups

The bar has been set so low that talking about it is seen as success now.

Sometimes I think the only way we'll really make meaningful progress is if we simply run out of fossil fuels. Unfortunately, we're just too good at getting them and too motivated to do so.

I miss the optimism too. What drew me to tech was how it felt like we were trying to make people's lives better.

These days, it feels like tech is primarily interested in extracting value from us. I guess this is nothing new. Profits at any cost, and all that.

I don't know, I'm just kind of sad about all of it. Even though my smartphone is like 100x more powerful than my first computer, it still feels like something was lost

It's frustrating that it's hard to know what's going to be good quality.

I bought a base layer years ago that basically fell apart after 1 month. It was like it was made of tissue paper. I bought a different one that has been AWESOME and has lasted 4 years so far with no signs of wear.

I feel like a lot of the ideas are over-attributed to him. Tesla already existed, electric cars aren't really a revolutionary idea. He's a hype man and he does the hype stuff well. Cybertruck was a pretty unmitigated disaster. self-driving is not really working out as he promised. I still remember arguing with people in 2020 who thought you'd be able to sleep in your car in a few years. Seems like Waymo is beating them to robo-taxis. Hyperloop was a bad idea.

Starlink + reusable rockets... alright, not bad, but not exactly a "world changing bet". Seems far more hyped than anything. So he gets credit for just combining the idea of reusable rockets to send satellites into space? okay fine.

He had a lot of money and threw a lot at the wall to see what stuck. If I were a betting man, I'd bet against his "next big idea". He'll over-promise and under-deliver.