Are we talking about the most in demand or demand in general? I was saying there is a measurement of demand.
Apple is an example of high quality demand and they're a trillion dollar company
766 karma · joined February 10, 2020
Apple is an example of high quality demand and they're a trillion dollar company
Should've know when they said interpreters and compilers.
Incidentally I replied with sarcasm to theirs as well so it all works out.
And sure, if your follow-up is "that won’t change," I get it, but that doesn’t mean the open nature of programming is the problem.
>At the end of the day the masses will finally get tired of the fuckery of programmers doing whatever they want and start putting laws in place, and the laws will be passed by the stupidest people among us.
I agree laws will pass eventually but it won't start from the people. They rarely even think or hear about software security as something other than an amorphous boogie man, and there are no repercussions so any voices are easily forgotten. Eventually, it will be some big tech corp executive or politician moving into government convincing them to create a security auditing authority to extract money from these companies and/or shut them down.
I'm sure we can find some holier than thou types to fill chairs with security auditors for the new "SSC" once it's greenlit.
"Class Immobility" (95% of users unlock this without trying!)
How to unlock: Be denied access to an accredited education. Work twice as hard for half the recognition. Watch opportunities pass you by while gatekeepers congratulate themselves!
There are people who would buy a $160 toaster (I've seen different estimates closer to $130, I'm not sure how you calculated yours) if they knew it would last 50 years today.
This shift has more to do with what businesses want than with consumer demand. Companies moved toward manufacturing goods that don’t last as long, increasing demand by ensuring products deteriorate sooner, giving them more opportunities to sell.
>Some things do get better with time, home appliances are the best example. They consume on average less energy today, are lighter, have more safety features, etc.
While that’s partly true, putting a smart screen on a fridge doesn’t necessarily make it better. More often, businesses make changes to improve their bottom line, not to create better products overall. More durable materials were used in the past, and I would rank durability high among the most important features of physical products.
You're definitely right about the difference and thank you for mentioning it.
I do think that the point of the article can still be applied to both types of business. The point I take from the article is more about not missing out on your identity or thinking your britches are too big, which could be applied to startups as well.
They're definitely classified as small businesses but they're on a different track. That being said I think both "tracks" could learn from each other despite having different problems. They can even share goals.
You might not need customers initially if you raise 200 Million for your AI startup, but eventually you will, unless you maintain escape velocity or sell. I think it's more likely that chasing word-of-mouth marketing is an excellent goal for all companies and thinking you're above that will increase your risk.
I think it's interesting to talk about how "act your size" can also be wrong. Sometimes fake-it-til-you-make-it is the goal. Contextually you should hold both ideas to be true and apply them appropriately.
Maybe you just thought the original post is a vague platitude and you don't want to give them the satisfaction but maybe we can share some of what we've experienced.
One thing I always think about is hiring generalists vs struggling to maintain departments you can't sustain. I understand businesses think this way, so it influences how I think about applying to roles. I'm currently in a generalist role and when searching I always look for smaller businesses because I find my impact is higher, and repetitive work is my greatest fear.
You basically dismissed someone for making a fair comparison because they didn't give you a concrete example like: A local coffee shop remembering customer names vs a large chain with a impersonal script.
Giving an example in this way is not a requirement, you can use your brain as well. Unless you just didn't read what they typed thoroughly enough and mistook their point.
What percentage of the dumbest will be boosted? What makes a person dumb? If they are productive and friendly, isn't that more important?
What percentage of the dumbest will fall farther or abandon heavy learning even earlier?
Most students would find getting their hands dirty in this way more valuable than reading about something from start to end.
Another problem is there is so much in technology, I just can't remember everything after years of exposure to so many spaces. Not being able to recall information you used to know is frustrating and having AI to remind you of details is very useful. I see it as an amplifying tool, not a replacement for knowledge. I'm sure there are some prolific note taking memory tricksters out there but I'm not one of them.
I frequently forget information over time and it's nice to have a tool to remind me of how UDP, RTP, and SIP routing work when I haven't been in the comm or network space for a while.
We all know that this technology isn't magic. In tech spaces there are more people telling you it isn't magic than it is. The reminder does nothing. The contextual advice on how to tackle those issues does. Why even bother with that conversation, you can just take the advice or ignore it until the technology improves since you've already made up your mind about the limit you or others should be willing to go.
If it doesn't meet the standard of what you believe is advertised than say that. Not, "workarounds" are problematic because they obfuscate how someone should feel about how the product is advertised. Maybe you are an advertising purist and it bothers you, but why invalidate the person providing the context into how to utilize those tools in their current state better?
There is a lot of information and accuracies left out of this article to create a viewpoint when mostly the writer is nostalgia baiting.
The fact that they mention NEETs using Pornography and Video Games as supplements for relationship and achievement is a signal. Some people might do that but do you think most of these people would have done other decidedly sexy things had these things not existed? What is your argument? Even if it was true should we then force these men, who don't get attention from women, to do nothing but chase women and fail because it's "romantic", the world does not revolve around you. This woman sounds like those people who denigrate video games and pornography then watch 30 hours of trashy reality television a week and don't see the irony of their own behavior. We get it, your boyfriend won't pay attention to you because your relationship was poor in the first place and now you have an issue with others enjoying themselves.
Also, nothing is stopping you from being spontaneous, nothing is forcing you to look up the menu before you go to a restaurant. That is your active decision that you're crying about as if it's what everyone is forced to do. I have no issue being spontaneous and actively choose to not look stuff up all the time. People like this are the same type of people to try and police others behavior but never discover their own flaws or ignore double standards because it benefits them, and yet decry others are living terribly.