This systems helps to build more houses. But you can only build more houses if there is a place to build them. It doesn't matter how cheaply and quickly you can build the house if you can't find a reasonable place to build it.

This is today. Eventually there will be a recession, or a downturn, or a rainy day, and we'll have to drop those pledges because of "they economy". Everyone in the room profits, while things get ratcheted a little tighter for everyone else.

Someone needs to get their press secretary or some other trusted person in front of a microphone to say that this isn't true, and we don't have to do anything, and it would cost business too much to fix. Think of the poor stock market!

Unfortunately, they'll be unemployed because if they can't do better work than an AI, why hire them?

I write 600-word responses to technical questions in emails. Then I go back and edit because nobody asked for an essay.

But this isn't a "younger generations are weak" issue. We only notice this with younger people because they are being asked to do it. We have entire generations who skip right past explaining their position to insults, because they don't actually have any rationale for why they think what they think. They've never actually sat down and thought about it.

Many of these techbros miss that the point of the economy is to provide a context for human livelihood. We could build a perfectly decent Earth without any AIs at all, if we decided to. For humans, there is no point to Earth without humans.

I could understand making an argument for some sort of evolutionary thing, though I wouldn't agree with it. But right now, today, that is also a dumbass argument. In a human-scale apocalypse (high-death-rate plague, nuclear winter, asteroid, etc), AIs will be among the first things to be discarded. Regardless of the current status of AIs or where they'll be in the next few years, we are a minimum of decades aware from AIs being self-hosted, even if you just give up all semblance of stewardship of the the ability of earth to host biological entities.

There are currently exactly two SMRs in operation in the world, neither in the US, and there are over 100 designs in the air. Contracts are not success, deploying actual working reactors is success.

On the one hand, Apple grabbing other people's revenue stream.

On the other hand ... Patreon's entire business model is to stick their fingers in other people's revenue streams. I was so excited about Patreon back when I signed up over a decade ago. Aggregating micropayments and then efficiently disbursing them! Awesome! But AFAICT they have turned into a cozy wrapper around credit-card fees, plus they keep trying to turn themselves into a social network or media platform or something of the sort. I mean, great, everyone is trying it, but why should I shed tears for their problems?

A weekly gathering uses Meetup. Meetup SUCKS, but they layer in all of these appeals to getting a subscription, because ... I guess they we get access to the Prime Suckage? Like, do they have an entirely different set of engineers and managers running a parallel system which is much more user-centric?

I can't imagine this will be any better. Facebook is terrible in so many ways. I am willing to pay for a YouTube package to get out of YouTube's ads, but over time I'm gradually realizing that doesn't solve the core problem (productive YouTube watching is a contradiction in terms). I _might_ be willing to pay for a Facebook package which had no ads, no AI come-ons, and didn't surface rando rage-bait to me, but I suspect their offer will be the existing Facebook but moreso.

Oooh, ooh, or if they had a version of Facebook where they didn't run scammer/counterfeiter ads, where the scammy sites are re-using the original IP holder's exact marketing materials to sell their counterfeits. Hahahaha, imagine!

The fact that the person can contribute as both the employer and employee isnâ(TM)t really where the win is. The win is where the employer is actively trying to provide positive perks for the employee. Many major tech companies have equally as good 401k provisions (where you can reach the statutory max) because they are trying to provide good perks without increasing salaries. But at other companies, the 401k can have meager matches with annoying vesting provisions and terrible load funds.

The point of hiring is not to hire people who know the answers to riddles under a time limit. The point is to hire people who can get up to speed on the job reasonably quickly, work well in concert with their co-workers, and then grow the position and product and company going forward. Honestly, the best candidates for most tech jobs won't be bothered to optimize for your particular interview - I'm not saying they'll outright fail, but rather they have many opportunities, so for them the interview is a mutual affair. They are also interviewing you, and if you interview them in your asshat persona, they will likely just move on.

Mostly, they just coast on monetizing stuff they wrote decades ago. What lets them maintain their positions is not their crack software teams, it's their business relationships with other companies that their users need to interact with. And lobbying. Not clear how AI is going to do much for any of that.

People may report security holes faster, because the fix will generate more holes, while unrelated maintenance might provide a shorter lifetime to any given hole. Churn works to the favor of attackers.

I already have a pulldown which lets me send email from five different aliases that deliver to my gmail inbox. In Settings under "Accounts and Import" there's a "Send mail as" section for setting this up.

Say what you will about whether this is justified or not, but calling this an "open-source group" is a disservice. Open-source advocates will happily go on for hours about the problems caused by closed-source software, but almost never encourage violating IP, because open-source software itself relies on vigorous IP protections.