munksbeer

I am also so grateful to hear this in response to my comment.

As far as I see it, I use the term "online fathers" in a rather cynical manner. In real life, I interact with parents who are struggling, I know some who are suffering from depression (I'm lucky to belong to a sports club where some dads unload). This is real life.

But go online and you'd think you're some sort of freak for not being completely transformed and having unconditional daily joy from being a dad.

By the way. The last week has been a good week. I've had a lot of work stress, but my children seem to have somehow sensed it and they're being extra kind to me, giving me lots of hugs and just wanting to be with me. It feels WONDERFUL. Like you, I love them more than I would have ever known, would literally die for them. But it is also ok to admit it is very hard, and there is a big loss of self and other aspects.

Keep going!

You may not have sat around twirling your moustache but you have actively been involved in an industry where the goal is to automate stuff that people would previously do manually. That is the entire point. Which, if you believe the message on many threads/posts here, puts people out of jobs.

I don't believe it is that black and white. Yes, automation eliminates some jobs, but overall moves everyone (on average) further up the productivity line, which improves lives, again, on average.

That is why we live like kings now compared to people of the past.

But circling back to the point, if AI does the same thing, eliminates expensive manual coding and other similar work, that is essentially the same thing we've been doing to other people for decades.

I agree. I'm a father of two, and my existence didn't suddenly get meaningful when I had children. I always found it meaningful, only in the sense that I get one life and want to experience as much as I can while I have it. That is a big part of why I chose to have children, it seemed like basically *the* fundamental life experience. But for me, I didn't experience this sudden big gain in meaning that a lot of online fathers seem to have.

I also wasn't prepared for a bit of a curve ball and I have experienced a loss of self that hasn't recovered or been compensated for yet.

I often wish I felt like a lot of other online fathers, but I take comfort in knowing there are a lot of others out there like me who struggle with parenthood. I hope I figure it all out in time!

A big part of this will be in-group signalling. Humans always do this, starting at the school playground. They adopt the habits of what they consider to be their in-group. It is why so much of the material (blogs, essays, comments on blogs, etc) come across as infuriating to the average reader.

In my opinion, verbosity is often used to swamp an argument, so brute forcing correctness. Just so I can swipe the ~~insult~~ critique more broadly, you often find the same on philosophy forums. You won't get engagement if you try to distil their arguments down to more concise points that are easier to debate or refute. You need to use the in-group signalling of lengthy posts, complicated language and appeal to authority.

(Just so you're aware, I'm aware, this is going to really annoy some people, nevertheless, I believe it is true).

How can you measure this? It's a cli where I type text in, and the tool fires it off to the model and runs commands locally. The model might be slow, but how would I notice if the cli was slow? Serious question.

Claude code works well enough. I don't encounter many bugs, and I use it for 6-12 hours a day.

What actual bugs do people have with it, and why do we think it is worse than a human coded tool?

I completely disagree with these assertions, but boy do I wish you would get your wish.

I'd love for the government to print a bunch of money eroding the value of my mortgage debt. I feel sorry for everyone who don't already own houses, because it'll push them even further out of their reach.

> And, yes, this is (capitalist) economic orthodoxy, the part of capitalism that rich people hate

No it most certainly is not, despite what MMT subscribers claim.

Don't use analogies to argue on the internet. Analogies can never be perfect, and this just gives people the chance to focus the argument on those imperfections in the analogy, rather than stick to the main point.

I wonder...

If I had inside information, and didn't want to make it obvious, I'd just take the opposite side of any bet for candidates I knew wouldn't win.

For a number of years I lived near "Mole House" in Hackney, London. The tunnels the guy dug there were ultimately illegal (no consent) and filled in. I wonder what the story for this house is, how he obtained permission to do this.

They are absolutely not to express disagreement? You want to hide opinions that you disagree with so other people don't see them? Christ, infantile.

> LLMs have been much more helpful for learning about mathematics topics than Wikipedia for a while now.

I can't imagine anyone but someone extremely gifted at first parse understanding learning mathematics from wikipedia. No effort is made to make it understandable for the average reader.

Do you remember Steorn? Orbo?

>In a post-AI world there’s a mountain of high quality work being published by people who actually know what’s going on. You can probably make a discovery with chatgpt right now, but why should someone who’s got a ton of things to do already read your article? You’re free to put it online, but why should you be free to force someone to read something?

But aren't you literally just proving what I'm saying? The original argument was that everyone should have to post through peer reviewed journals, I said that is probably gatekeeping too far, and your response above just confirms my suspicions.

> Second of all, it’s extremely aggravating to read all these software people criticizing mathematicians, who almost universally have low salaries and who chose to go into this profession because they care about contributing to human knowledge.

I probably agree with you, except I have never and am not criticising mathematicians. I am only saying that there are quite a lot of reports around that the academic world is fierce and that sometimes there are high barriers to getting something recognised.

No idea if it is true or not, but my personal opinion is that it isn't going to matter much in the future. If it exists, then people will work around any gatekeeping.