compiskey

Society made religion optional through scientific inquiry. It can make America optional too as no theory of science suggests it’s existence is immutable law.

It’s going to be a real adjustment for you to accept a lot of people are without sufficient this or that in our society and you’re not really going to bat for them.

You have freedom to choose without coercion. Nothing makes your sensibilities sacrosanct to anyone else.

I wasn’t boosting past software. Doing so would be banal nostalgia.

I’m saying the doing matters, not the software; we throw it away and regenerate it all the time. It’s disposable ephemera.

It’s literally just the creative process that matters.

Maybe it’s a bit literal but I see lots of people at computers planning updating just like I did 20 years ago.

From the IT workers context a lot has changed but the end user outputs are still; video game, chat app, email app, todo app, fintech app, dating app, state management DSL.

AI isn’t going to change the outputs so much as minimize the people and code needed to generate them. Because we’ve mined the value prop of desktops and phones to death.

Materials science, additive manufacturing, biology, are outputting actual net new knowledge. Consumer facing IT is whittling a log into a chair leg, grabbing a new log, whittling a chair leg… but faster!

Apple employees have the freedom to create without coercion. You would need to lobby to change law, not preach to the choir here.

That’s what Spotify and Musk are doing; trying to manipulate public perception to influence politicians.

The problem they have is Apple is the crown jewel of US tech corps. Spotify is not and politicians are well aware Musk is a poser with money. Epic, Spotify, like Jobs once said, sell features not products.

Gabe Newell has called generative content “an extinction level event” for traditional media producers and distributors. Epic and Spotify are an AI breakthrough away from irrelevance. Why listen to them except as anything but an appeal to rapidly outdated economic traditions?

They can join the protest rotary phone makers, and horse and buggy businesses are pulling together.

I agree with your analysis of how I see things.

I disagree that I am “caught up” on anything.

I have a preference that’s been refined over time. Not a psychological error in perception.

If you stick to arbitrary software industry definitions. As a hardware engineer first, it’s all “monolith of electron state” to me.

Agreed. My point is I am not going to see a marketer as aiming for the same goal “as an experimental physicist.”

To borrow the Lindy effect; whether someone likes the jacket in color A or B is of such short lived value it’s a huge waste of the resources that went into the pipeline needed to come to the conclusion.

Here’s an A/B test; rethink logistics to increase customization of outputs or continue to create design jobs who define what’s trendy and acceptable?

Advertisers and marketers use the equations but measure contemporary trends.

Science is more “what’s true if humans didn’t exist.”

Marketing is more “what widget generates more revenue?”