PetoU

if you like, the business model is called Innovation-as-a-Service :)

That's perfectly aligned with capitalistic motivations

that's only partially true.

AI can innovate in synthetic-realm of novel ideas, while real-world novelty will remain untouched.

There are different types of novelties

before you had a lesson that every engineer has to start with writing C, yet most of modern devs never did.

Seniors should be prepared that Seniority will mean different thing and path of getting there will be different too.

Just like there was a shift from lower lvl languages to high level

fwiw 90% of software is reinventing the wheel. 80% of devs have an itch to "rewrite from scratch".

AI will deduplicate all of this

In my view, you are very lucky you can ask this question. It means you don't have external stimulation big enough to not have time to think about these matters. I don't want to be silly, but if you'd be hungry, jobless or having a lot of stake at risk, your brain would imidiately switch to "get shit done". So much for external motivation. Internal motivation, thats another story, which everyone need to figure out themselves. Still struggling myself.

I think that jewelry should have a property of showing off, so hidden private key wouldn't work that well. You need to have some mechanism how to show status. And that nicety factor was driven mostly by women decorum.

"swap your liability for Bitcoin, which drives up the price of Bitcoin at the margin"

Or any other altcoin available on Bitfinex.

we need to go more meta. Who design a consensus about how to build a consensus ?

tldr someone ? :D

I see this events roughly the same. The romantic emotional turn against rational enlightenment, can be seen nowadays. In a broader picture, you could see this oscillation of rational / irational (objectivists / subjectivists ) cycles all over history. Someone surprised by this events seems ignorant of history, and how people can actually behave.

Your experience could serve as limitation to your view of the world. Younger ones without the baggage of experience, has greater chance of discovering new approaches. Due to this, population with changing generations, might be more intelligent than one without these clean slates.

imho usually the best books, are those complex ones, which I read for 4 months. Because after every page, 15 new questions arise, where settling them takes time, and then internalization of that wisdom takes time as well. And I don't even mention, that best books get better after re-reading.

In this light, 300 books in 4 years, seems quite a lot...

same for me. Doing CRUD apps is fine, but how can I apply that in biotech ?