yellowpencil

Im not the OP but most people outside of HN don't have multiple offers to job hop between FAANGs so the choice becomes "make money to survive or not".

A positive change for sure but what about the kids who were stunted developmentally during that time?

In a nearby elementary school they are now touting teaching kids “AI literacy”. At an age where they don’t even have enough of a world view to understand anything related to it. Such an asinine idea, and of course it will be at the expense of something non-trendy.

It seems like public education suffers from so much “idea cascade” now and jumps from one fad to the next. Educational paths are more and more left to chance than organized thought.

A friend of a friend has been in a rough patch with her spouse and has been discussing it all with ChatGPT. So far ChatGPT has pretty much enthusiastically encouraged divorce, which seems like it will happen soon. I don't think either side is innocent but to end a relationship over probabilistic token prediction with some niceties throw in is something else.

Them being a charity isn't an automatic license to use anything on the internet?

I'm in a big city and that is certainly not the case. I can submit preferred locations but ultimately there is a very opaque selection process and there is no guarantee made other than a seat somewhere in the system. I know some families who were on a waiting list for years to go to a school in their neighborhood (less than a half mile walking) and were only able to get in this year because of seats opening up due to city exodus.

EDIT - to add, what does this solve in the Cambridge, MA situation where the entire district has removed advanced Algebra?

In public schools the only way to "vote with your wallet" is to relocate, the next best option which is less disruptive to a family is to opt out of the school system if the means are available.

What other options are there?

Dogma I'd guess.

See Cambridge, MA as an example.

https://www.boston.com/news/the-boston-globe/2023/07/18/camb...

The US federal budget deficit for the month of June was $228 billion. Money is being spent and the money printer is running no problem. The administration clearly does not view this as an important issue.

Who is “we”?

If there are “externalities” brought upon the state due to separations, ie strain on public services (crime, welfare programs, school, healthcare, etc) doesn’t the state have an incentive to do so?

Playing devils advocate here.

Which company does Twitter use to send these SMS messages, Twilio?

Somewhat tangential but an acquaintance at a Fortune-500 level company mentioned to me they are converting tons of currently salaried employees to hourly. These are white collar desk jobs at corporate HQ. I have to infer theres some sort of cost-cutting (wage theft?) motive behind this. Are these types of tactics becoming more prevalent in the white collar world?

Agree - any propagandist paying attention the last couple of years is acutely aware of the contemporary efficacy of labeling "Science" as a manipulative stiumuls. Run a few biased "analyses", pay for placement in a journal and/or get promoted in a few clickbait news rings, syndication through social media...inception into the minds of millions with relative ease.

I think you're conflating short stints/job hopping and resume gaps. How does a "temporary period of non-employment" preclude someone from "providing more value to your company"?

There are infinite reasons why someone might take time off. Its arguably far more responsible to do so than continue employment and lower the priority of employment obligations in your life while you tend to other aspects.

That's true to some extent but has nothing to do with "resume gaps".

> a long gap is a warning flag on a resume.

Sorry but it's not at all. How dare they not spend every waking moment wage slaving away!

People live their lives, this type of thinking shouldn't be normalized. What other subconscious biases are lurking here? I assume the follow up to this is "Hiring is hard, there's not enough good candidates".

Not op - think it’s more along the lines of “humans evolved with nature as a constraint” and industrialization has the ability to remove that constraint.

VC got their IPO, thats all that ever mattered.

it was kind of funny to see the PR campaigns ramp up - placement in news articles, podcast interviews with the founder, partnerships with fast food chains.

after the smoke cleared there was never any real demand, just hype. a bunch of people made money, rinse repeat.

because they literally can't. ignoring the $1B budgeted cost, they are also facing massive execution risk. adobe is signaling their confidence in their ability to innovate/execute with the acquisition price - zero confidence.

even in the very unlikely event they were able to build a product with feature parity, with little operational blunder, on budget/on time, they still need to market it and get enough paying users to match the $400 million in revenue per year which Figma currently makes.

figma raised $330+ million over the years...have there been any public breakdowns of the VC/founder/employee equity split?

Just my opinion, but your original comment comes off as comically dismissive of what Figma has done.

Adobe, a company with literal billions in cash and thousands of engineers, wagers 20 BILLION dollars that it is not easy to compete or replicate what Figma has done. In fact, they attempted to compete with Adobe XD and "lost".

The founders of Figma started working on the beginnings of it in 2012 (perhaps indirectly) and launched in 2016. They also raised 330+ million in VC money to make it happen.

I'm a bootstrapped at heart and love the idea of small companies outmaneuvering giant elephants but suggesting one could outdo Figma, with relative ease, just doesn't sound likely.

All that said, if you truly feel like you can, get out there and do it! Theres billions of dollars waiting for you.

> antitrust battles against Big Tech will dominate the next four years of economic policy

Almost zero chance this happens, imo. Big tech spent _heavily_ on Democrats (98% of contributions [0]) and the Democrats have complete control for the next 4 years.

an awfully prescient allocation of funds.

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/02/tech-billionaire-2020-electi...