949 karma · joined January 10, 2019
> So practically speaking, the options are follow the market or find a different line of work if you don’t like the way the market is going.
You're correct in this, but I think it's worth making the explicit statement that that's also true because we live in a system of amoral resource allocation.
Yes, this is a forum centered on startups, so there's a certain economic bias at play, but on the subject of morality I think there's a fair case to be made that it's reasonable to want to oppose an inherently unjust system and to be frustrated that doing so makes survival difficult.
We shouldn't have to choose between principles and food on the table.
I think this comment[1] above really highlights what bothers me about modern shows and movies, but in short it's not the high def, it's how it's used.
I've ranted about this so much to friends, it's so distracting to me.
I have the hypothesis that some of it is due to how easy (or easier?) it is to quickly review footage to tell if the focus is set right when it's so aggressively shallow, but regardless of the "why" the monotony of it drives me crazy.
I want to see the environments the characters are in, I want the visceral grounding of the feel of that environment. I watched "Portrait of a Lady on Fire" and it felt so primal, and watching how intentional the sound design alone is I can see why.
> In such environments (visual and aural), nothing seems real and nothing seems like it matters.
That's a great description about the strange disembodiment I've felt in modern shows for a while now.
This is the thing that worries me about AI/LLMs and how people "profess they're actually really useful when you use them right": the cliff to figuring out if they're useful is vertical.
"You’ve still come out ahead even if you take over fully."
I just finished a weeklong saga of redoing a bunch of Claude's work because instead of figuring out how to properly codegen some files it just manually updated them and ignored a bunch of failing tests.
With another human I can ask, "Hey, wtf were you thinking when you did [x]?" and peer into their mind-state. With Claude, it's time to stir the linear algebra again. How can I tell when I'm near a local or global maxima when all the prevailing advice is "I dunno man, just `git reset --hard origin/master` and start again but like, with different words I guess."
We have studies that show people feel like they're more productive using AI while they're actually getting less done [1], and "throw away everything it did and try again" based on :sparkle: vibes :sparkle: is the state of the art on how to "actually" use this stuff, I just feel more and more skeptical.
[1]: https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...
I don't really think it's "collusion" so much as it's a question of incentives. Most Western countries want cheap/captive labor, and immigration policy is one way to achieve that with a very long historical precedent. (Much of the Western US railroads were originally built by a predominantly Chinese immigrant workforce; earlier, the colonies relied heavily on Irish laborers as well.)
How much of our labor is comprised of immigrants, documented or otherwise? We've seen what happens when we make it difficult or impossible for cheap labor to make it into farm fields with Brexit: fruit rots on trees and farmers lose piles of money and grocery stores go without berries for the season.
Similarly, what will happen when cheap labor for hotels, construction, landscaping, or manufacturing dries up?
To be clear, I think the status quo is also bad: those jobs trend towards being exploitative, and immigrants are easier to exploit than native populations (generally speaking), my point is that there's been historical economic incentive at the population level to encourage immigration.
> They must have known it was deeply unpopular, yet it was still done.
Realistically something as complex as "immigration policy" is not going to boil down to a single straightforward cause. Similarly, while it certainly was "deeply unpopular" with certain portions of the population, it's absolutely popular with other portions. At a minimum there's been strong humanitarian arguments that resonate with many people, at least in Europe: what else are you going to do with thousands of people fleeing a warzone?
Similarly, the American Dream is so widely known for the promise of being able to make a life there regardless of where you come from. I vividly remember my civics textbooks in US gradeschool being proud of our immigrant heritage and how much newcomers had contributed and achieved there.
Additionally, this is one of those cases where there's counterintuitive forces: restricting immigration leads to a larger undocumented population [1]. If the state's goal is to drive down the number of undocumented immigrants, then it's incentivized in part to make it easier to legally cross the border.
[1]: https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2024/offering-...
Canada is also in the midst of an immigration crisis. Western Europe has been debating how to deal with a steady stream of "refugees" for as long as I can remember being conscious of the news.
This is a remarkably shortsighted position and ignores the many, many other factors at play, e.g. the US's relatively high wealth / currency stability.
I strongly appreciate how much decision fatigue Rails avoids by just offering you so much batteries-included stuff. I tried getting into Django and immediately spun out fretting over what ORM or migration manager or caching system to use. (One of my coworkers who is a huge Django says I'm nuts and that Django offers those things too, so I may be misremembering.) Rails being as opinionated as it is saves so much thinking effort along those lines.
I think both of those facets make it extremely appealing to, as you say, anyone greenfielding code, and are the exact things that make it an absolute trash fire to maintain anything of appreciable size.
We're constantly fielding incidents due to something being undefined or unexpected nils or other basic typecheck failures.
> it just optimizes for a set of values that I don't happen to share anymore
That is a lovely way to put it, I'm gonna steal that
I work at an enterprise running Rails (you've heard of us, if you're in North America). Discussions about rails abound, and my opinion has distilled into "I love writing Ruby, I loathe reading it"
I don't intend to ever travel to Russia or North Korea, but that's not some trivial anecdote about modern life, those are regimes so hostile to rule of law and individual safety that it's not reasonable to travel there.
What if there's a conference you want to go to, but it's in the UK? Or you have friends you want to visit? Or family, or whatever.
That's also an egregious degradation of the UK's position with regard to Western-norms around personal liberties, which itself is worthy of remark.
I crossed the US-Canada land border with a non-US friend to go to a birthday party a while back; they sent us to secondary so my friend could get their passport stamped (their previous visa had run out). CBP took the opportunity to search our car and tried to convince us they found weed before letting us go (neither of us use it).
Another time my wife and I (both citizens) were crossing and the border agent gave us a hard time for having different last names.
I can't imagine what it's like for people with less privilege than I, but I'm already to the point where I stress about crossing the border. I bring a spare phone, wiped of anything interesting, I let my partners know when I'm at the crossing in case something happens; Paranoid? Possibly. But the potentiality of something going horribly wrong is through the roof, and there's increasingly little recourse. Yes, citizens especially should be insulated from this, but we're seeing egregious violations on so many fronts I don't want to trust that to hold.
What is a "reverse commute"? Is that just going into the city at the opposite time of day from normal work?
Also, 45 minutes one day (1.5hr total) is a rather large chunk of the evening to spend in transit for "evening fun."
> I got so lucky to buy one when I did (2020) due to interest rates.
It's funny, I remember thinking that people buying in 2020 were nuts because none of us knew what the economy was going to do, and it turns out that those who did buy came out ahead. I cite this among friends as one of the many ways in which I feel like being cautious with money has been the wrong choice (e.g. maintain 6mo-12mo emergency fund, don't make large purchases in periods of uncertainty, etc).
I've a (now ancient) sys76 galp2 that I still use, but I'm confident that I'm gonna get a Framework to replace it.
Guy made a CVE style disclosure page about all the issues he'd experienced with his EX90. This feels related.
I think it comes down to the sheer amount of pressure I felt within religion to be a certain way while also being told I could never be that way enough to achieve satisfaction in the eyes of god, and outside of religion I'm just another person in a flawed world trying to do my best.
--------
At the risk of being redundant, death within religion isn't an end, but yet another beginning. Eternal life is the reward for being a diligent disciple, where that means internalizing one's inherent flawed nature and inability to be redeemed but through death in devotion to god... which is a hell of a weight to carry throughout ones' life!
The Christian ethos is woven through with constantly being judged. And forgiven, yes, in theory, but still there is a constant undertone of "you cannot avoid making mistakes, and the mistakes you make are so offensive to god he wouldn't want you anywhere near him, but for magic religion reasons you've been redeemed by god doing something so terribly debased that it outweighs all the awful mistakes you've made."
Death (and "everlasting life") is no reprieve from this, but a form of stick that weighs heavy over you all through your days. You must work to save those around you, or they'll be eternally lost. You must cleave to the teachings of god, or at the very least belief in him, or you'll be eternally lost.
Since I left the church so many things of import that I felt I didn't understand now make much more sense; I struggled to comprehend how god could allow suffering, but now I see that the universe is just absurd and uncaring. While that may seem less comforting, I find the notions of bad things happening randomly less upsetting than there being an all-powerful being who cares about me but chooses to let me suffer for reasons that were never convincing, and as I've grown older sound more and more like an abusive relationship.
Through that lens, death is just a natural consequence of the world. Scary, yes, in the sense that I may not live up to all I want to be before my time is up, but I'm not pre-marked as eternally flawed and only redeemable through processes that do not make sense to me. Instead I know that I can only do my best, and that has to be enough, because I can't possibly do more.
I suppose the principle still holds: the "love" I have for those versions of those people cannot go anywhere, but that feels dissonant with not wanting to know these people as they are, or knowing the relationship I'm wishing for is otherwise ill-fated. In either case, the relationship cannot continue, and that drive the sense of grief anyway, so maybe I'm just splitting hairs.
Such is the complex nature of grief and of human relationships, I suppose.
My formal linear algebra course was boring as hell, to me. The ~4 lectures my security prof dedicated to explaining just enough to do some RSA was absolutely incredible. I would pay lots of money for a hands-on what-linalg-is-useful-for course with practical examples like that.
I thought the same thing as I left the church, but it's so ingrained in many people in ways they don't even realize.
Another commenter mentions the "just world fallacy," which I agree drives this sentiment directly: if you work hard, you get good things. If you got bad things, it's because you didn't work hard (enough).
There's lots of feedback loops that perpetuate this: survivorship bias, historic wealth (ye olde boomer-bought-a-house-on-a-single-factory-salary), startup CEOs. I find the description of the American poor who don't see themselves as poor but as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" to be incredibly true.
Additionally, in many cases the people who're the most affected have the least resources to make themselves heard, the classic "rich people don't have the same 24 hours a day as the rest of us."
So, yeah, to a degree it should be obvious to anyone who goes looking, but there's so many sociological effects layered on top of each other that make it counterintuitive to someone for whom the system is working well.
Chicago also has an underground system ("the Pedway") that's also mall-ish, but it's in fairly crap condition. It's got incredible liminal vibes, but is not the most pleasant to exist in.
[1]: To be fair, a commenter did mention Minneapolis
My current org has a terrible case of not-invented-here syndrome, and it's so easy to pitch new projects that solve something that there's already an existing tool for, or building a new feature. We would love to spend time just working within our existing systems and fixing crap abstractions we made under the deadline-gun, but we're not "allowed" to.
> [...] humans like to build the new, and nobody likes to maintain the old
I think this is certainly true at organizational scale, but most of the people I've met are change-resistant overall.
I would like to have a light in my stairs. It's hard to see at night in the winter. My solutions is going to be to spin up home assistant, a zigbee base, and some fairy lights on a 'smart' switch.
I could learn the skills to troubleshoot why the electrical connection is (apparently) bad to the lamp, but given that said connection is in the walls, my DIY skills are trash, and I'm scared of electricity, I'm gonna do the project that's more fun and lines up with some stuff I wanted to do anyway.
I have no idea why the lamp doesn't work, especially because the fixture at the base of the stairs does, but the landlord insists it worked before we moved in.
A friend of mine has been trying to get into law school for a few years; she's technically competent and plenty intelligent, but it's been hard going for her to get in, plus multiple years of education to even attempt the bar. All of that sounds like far too much sunk-cost to me to dally in and figure out if it's a path I would truly enjoy.
What ways could I engage with policy coming from a technical background that would serve as a useful stepping stone to a more policy based career, but doesn't require such an upfront cost as a law degree?
GPS is a passive technology, no?
Downloading GPS assist data obviously isn't, and plenty of phones use wifi scanning as a way to augment GPS position fixes, but this seemed a strange callout. Am I missing something?