tremere

There is tremendous upside. You can look like a rockstar at the new company and propel yourself upwards with that momentum.

Wasn't trying anything, I was legit curious about places where intellectual conversation happens. I suppose you are right that exposing such places to air will risk their integrity, then you'll be left in the same situation as me. Forget I ever asked.

I share this sentiment. Whenever I see his name I end up reading his article and whether I agree with him or not, the quality of content he puts out sets a very high bar. Whenever he writes a comment on HN it's one of those rare instances where I'll stop and read it carefully rather than blaze through it. Jeff is truly a gem in the community.

FWIW I did not expect bad news since I didn't see a date range after the name in parens.

Humor me. Recommend a filter for me to get me started. It doesn't even have to be that good and if I'm disappointed I won't be able to reply anyway.

I have taken out the word "outside" from my post, because you seem to be addressing a very minor component of my overall message. Please note: My main point is that pure, intellectual connection is almost nowhere to be found. It is drowned out in a sea of shit.

While I did criticize HN in my post, I will note that it is sort of a last bastion of intellectual conversation. I believe the motives are not as pure as before, and I lament that. There simply is not a space for intellectual conversation for intellectual conversation's sake on the internet anymore. It is all twisted.

The site was rife with perverts, Neo-Nazi propaganda, CSAM distribution, and honeypot operations. I think people are idealizing what it was in recent years, believing it was the same fun as in the early 2010s. It was an absolute shitshow.

The owner acts like Omegle was about innocent curious internet explorers asking cute questions and spreading knowledge. Bull shit. I never met a professor on Omegle. The most common encounter is a pervert who quickly ends the chat. I probably would have needed to sink 300+ hours on the platform in order to meet one. And by the time I would have met this professor, I would most likely have gained nothing from the exchange. Therefore, in my experience, I have found such innocent encounters to be the exception. By far. There is no corner on the internet where that happens organically. Even on HN, where comments are verbose and technical, it's only because of the perceived clout and proximity to VC money. The open connectedness of the internet has little to do with it.

If you access Tor, which is considered the peak of anonymous interconnectedness, you will also find a draught of intellectual activity. I would love to find intellectual discussions occurring on Tor, if anyone knows one please let me know the onion address. (Pro-tip: it's an impossible quest.) Instead all you will find are CSAM, scams, and honeypots.

I have found that my life has gotten immeasurably better since I generally stopped using the internet. The reddit API lockdown woke me up and I realized pretty much everything on the internet is garbage. Even HN is of lower quality than before, with the average post being a flex of one's social status rather than a helpful tip from one hacker to another.

Fuck all this noise. The internet is so full of low quality social content that it is overall not worth using for social connection.

Call me naive, but I don't see why we need Kant's ideas of noumena and phenomena when we have Plato's Allegory of the Cave and Analogy of the Divided Line. In my limited experience, Plato's philosophical primitives prove more useful for thinking about whether LLMs possess intelligence and what reality really is. In my opinion the most groundbreaking contribution of Kant is adding in the a priori and a posteriori distinctions to how belief is constructed. Even so, nothing of Kant's work impresses me more than Plato's allegory.

>adorable, tiny

Or maybe, just maybe, realize your consumer preferences are not universal and are in fact the minority view

Agreed entirely. Even more glycemic foods than sugar (which is only half glucose), are not a metabolic problem. I started eating pasta, white bread, and white rice and have been able to lose weight. People on this very forum will tell me that what I do is impossible, but I'm done taking the advice of bots and people who aren't fit. I am downright skinny now. Go ahead and downvote my post, after all HN is an echo chamber full of IYIs and shills, is it not?

No, I think it's fine and honestly I can understand the need to compulsively use AirPods especially among the anxiety prone. Forcing people to endure the noise of the world, which is increasingly inorganic and terrifying, just because you insist on them listening to you in a subservient manner, is very strange and the sort of insistence I would expect only from narcissists. I personally wear my AirPods Pro at all times when in public because it makes it that much easier to tolerate it. I have transparency mode on so I can still listen to you, probably better than without AirPods.

If the person is listening to you and responding just fine, then the AirPods are not a problem. If the person is obviously distracted then you have cause to ask them to take them off. Simple as.

From a decision-making standpoint it seems difficult to argue that you made the wrong choice. At the time when the $99 kits were ubiquitous, 23andme seemed like a solid, reputable company.

Back then, few people had the mindset of, "if they own my data, they own me." But we're starting to see it take hold.

reddit is a funnel away from establishment media toward sites like bitchute and obscure conspiracy groups. Every shadowban is a new alt-right acolyte.

You're a fool if you think that the way reddit handles content moderation does not create angry people.

I don't know if I necessarily agree, especially with D = decoupling. However I do like the idea of dead simple code. Often I'll find code written by self styled haxors who omit curly braces and nest ternary operators because they can. That's great but it ends up biting you in the ass.

The code itself should be treated internally like part of the product and it should be easily extensible, of uniform style, and written so safely that if a child added a line to the code it wouldn't break it entirely.

This is especially true of languages that support macros. If inclusion or modification of macros in your code cannot be done, it is probably a bad sign. When writing code to be resistant to hardware attacks for instance there is a different style that must be adopted entirely, if everyone is writing the fanciest for-loops fathomable then it becomes inefficient and a risk to code correctness to mutate the code to resist classes of attacks. This is terrible and not worth it just because an elite haxor wanted to write a for loop in a single line.

In my view, we need to stop putting all notions of intelligence on a pedestal. In my opinion, it interferes with productive science. It's useful to know that mentally rotating an object is a task that allows you to sort people by IQ, roughly. It's less useful to have studies that say "aww it's okay if you take long to solve hard problems, it's actually a sign of intelligence." It just creates cope.