shermantanktop

If you don’t start new ones, will you really finish the unfinished ones? Really?

It’s ok to admit that the beginning is the most fun.

I must live a very vanilla, sheltered life because I’ve never bought anything and wondered if a payment processor would object to it.

That’s almost always a delayed effect. Move software people around and the revenue effects aren’t instant. In a heavily R&D-oriented area it might be 2y or more.

Exactly, that's why en-us is different than en-gb, en-ca, or even en-jp.

I would assume that a company with the resources of an OpenAI or Anthropic would have already thought about this very thoroughly, based on Spectre/rowhammer/meltdown/etc. If a random HNer (no offense) can have a hardware 101-level thought, someone there would have that thought too.

But that assumption has been wrong before.

Faring well in general, sure.

I read it as: faring well in a work/industry/employment situation where expectations for velocity and quality pivot on the fact that 99% of your peers use AI, and 90% of those use it to do poor quality work quickly.

Now your boss is surprised your email took more than 10s to produce, and wonders why you are concerned about what it contains. None of your teammates are.

Would you do this work but not expect credit for your progress? Especially if your career depended on it?

Not many people create things and refuse to sign them, and believe in anonymous contributions to humanity. I’ve had coworkers present my work uncredited with the implication that it was theirs. Not many people would be fine with that.

There are a few, but not many. Suggests to me that what you call “gold stickers are actually important.

The argument against aggressive term limits that I’ve read: there are many people making a career in politics as a whole—lobbyists, influence groups, party committees, etc. They have a huge advantage over the term-limited elected politician.

I’m not a political junkie but that makes sense to me. The critters who get your vote are just part of the system that runs the place.

Hamming it up is an overlooked parental contribution to reading. Lay it on thick! Do all the voices, act like you don’t know what’s on the next page, be shocked and surprised. Kids love it.

That’s what they say about communism and anarchism and many other isms: if it’s not working, you aren’t doing it right. Every failed implementation gets the No True Scotsman argument.

Right, it’s everywhere, it makes the computers and managers and house happy. It just doesn’t sound good.

The problem with fines is that they don't actually disincentivize bad behavior by companies, as long as they are large enough to absorb the fine as a cost of doing business.

Time in the pokey is unpleasant for everyone.

That last bit is unnecessary. If pick development is accelerating, the lockmakers can do their very best in good faith to build the best, most pick-proof locks possible, no doctoring involved. And still those locks will be pickable eventually.

This reads like the typical expectant-parent confusion. The big mistake is thinking about a one-way flow of information from the parent to the child.

What really happens is that the infant is the teacher. The parents are reduced to sleep-deprived diaper-changers who serve a tyrant who can't walk or talk. Do that for a while and your priorities and worldview have now been reprogrammed.

The kid grows up a bit and now dad, who was so full of wise lessons, is suddenly watching the kid eat a caramel apple for the first time, or riding a tricycle, or going on a water slide. The dad has nothing to teach, the dad gets to re-learn the joy of simple things.

But like others say, just read to them, play with them, be interested in them as little people...the rest will take care of itself.

Sure, but resulting in a weak premise that gets thrown out in court?