its also trading one problem for another. when manually coding you understand with little mental effort what you want to achieve, the nuances and constraints, how something interacts with other moving parts, and your problem is implementing the solution
when generating a solution, you need to explain in excruciating detail the things that you just know effortlessly. its a different kind of work, but its still work, and its more annoying and less rewarding than just implementing the solution yourself
for anyone with children, dont waste their time with traditional school, that path is stone dead and is leading nowhere but the abyss of the permanent underclass
apologise for inflicting this era on them and teach them to be entrepreneurial, teach them how to build, teach them rust on the backend, teach them postgres, teach them about assets maintaining value while money loses its
tell them to never under any circumstances take on a mortgage, especially not the 50 year variety. tell them to stay at home for as long as possible and save as much as possible and put it into assets: gold, silver, bitcoin, monero
they must escape the permanent underclass, nothing else matters
Despite everything, I like it that humanity exists. I want humanity to continue to exist. I reject any notion or attitude that would, taken to its logical conclusion, result in the extinction of humanity. And, even more so, that would result in the extinction of my family and lineage. For your sake, I hope that this is just edgy horseshit that you will soon grow out of.
Let's see if I will grow out of it. I am curios as well. I currently think the opposite—that humanity is inherently flawed, and that the vast majority of humans will always live miserably.
Friendly reminder that, on a planet of eight billion (and climbing) people, many of whom live in places with too much heat and not enough food and water, not everyone has to have children. And that's okay.
The math has a few problems then, because it seems rather difficult for me to have .1 child. Actually, it's impossible for me to have any children because I am a single man and it is not biologically possible.
> Hence, the "on average". For any 10 couples, they should have 21 children. If some have fewer, the rest have to have more.
This would seem to agree with "not everyone has to have children" - mathematically speaking you can quite simply put a couple zeros into the equation and still arrive at 2.1
> Sounds like a "you" problem.
I have no problem with the situation at all as I have never in my life had an interest in having children. I'm not sure I even see the changes in birthrate as a problem; people can adapt to demographic changes. But if it is a problem, then it must be some sort of systemic one and I doubt the answer is to try and apply pressure to individuals to have children by telling them to think of the economy or that it is some sort of societal obligation.
>This would seem to agree with "not everyone has to have children" -
No, but there are some fools who might conclude that just one person has to have millions of children.
>I have no problem with the situation at all as I have never
Oh, you have a problem. You just can't see it yet. While younger, your problem is that you will shoulder an ever-increasing burden as fewer younger people support many more of the elderly in generations past, until you yourself are then elderly and the few young people simply can't support you at all. A stagnating economy, defense insecurities to make the 20th century look tame, it all goes to shit.
>and I doubt the answer is to try and apply pressure to individuals to have children
Yet you're apparently happy to see people try to pressure the hundreds reading the comments here to not have children.
>For population to remain stable, everyone has to have (on average) 2.1 kids.
I never said I want the population to remain stable.
>Any lower than this, population starts shrinking.
Yes, and?
>Children grow up seeing all their role models have less than 2 (even none at all), internalize that as normal, and then they won't end up having more (at least on average), and so it becomes a death spiral.
I'm gonna need a big, fat citation here, hoss.
>Extinction looms.
Oh, come on.
>You're probably trying to be friendly, but if you are you're just plain wrong. And if not, well, then you're secretly sitting there in glee at the prospect of human extinction and hoping at least a few people fall for your "friendly reminder" spiel.
What a remarkably uncharitable interpretation of what I said. I don't particularly care what happens to humanity; its existence, or lack thereof, doesn't really affect me one lick. One day, I'll be dead, and it won't matter to me anyway. I think it would be neat if we could clean up our act and stop destroying the planet, maybe have the Star Trek future we always imagined, but I won't be terribly put out if the human experiment ends, and neither should you. Please don't project your feelings onto me.
If the only option is "infinite growth forever so I can prop up my 401(k)" and "human extinction", only one of those spares the rest of the planet. But I'm pretty sure there's a secret third thing, which is: the population lowers down to a more manageable number, and then everyone can have whatever stable birth rate makes sense.
Remember that humans aren't special. We aren't unique. Humanity is beautiful, but we, too, are part and parcel of this planet. We just got lucky and developed big brains and useful tools. We are not immune to the forces that govern other species and other natural processes here. One big meteor impact and that's it for another few million years, at least. The hubris comes in thinking that we deserve to exist, and not just exist on, but dominate this planet. That couldn't be further from the truth.
This is a weird take. There are plenty of ways to build a meaningful life that don't involve writing code or slinging emails and powerpoints for a living. The guy I call to do plumbing work has several kids and does fine for himself.
Chances are he smokes or gets drunk or beats his wife or any combination thereof, or other similar activities. This can be said about any person who works as a plumber, construction worker, or similar, their whole life. And I am not blaming them, this appears to be the sad reality and the nature of our society.
That is some hard stereotyping being generalised on a platform with worldwide reach. You may wish to rethink what led you to that statement.
Although, with that statement and others from you recently I'm guessing you have "lost your fucks and don't have any more to give" IE burnt out on it all.
Good luck, I hope you get to a place where you can not rely rely on shortcuts like stereotypes so much and have more energy to give to yourself and your life.
Yes, stereotyping. And? I said "chances are." What led me to that statement is my personal experience. Every time I go outside, I can smell somebody smoking weed on their porch. And it's not like it's the same person or the same porch. I can travel multiple kilometers and encounter multiple people doing that. So much for trying to get fresh air. Even without looking at any statistics, I am convinced that a very high percentage of people has some kind of addiction—drugs, alcohol, porn, gambling, god knows what. I had so many people proudly tell me how much they love alcohol, with no shame whatsoever. It's the same everywhere I have been.
Yes, its kind of a shitty way to approach life. Assuming that a plumber beats his wife is a really extreme form of classism and you sound like kind of a miserable piece of shit.
I didn't say that he beats his wife. Basically, I was arguing that people who do physical work, or just some hard work that anyone would hate, must be miserable, regardless of whether they admit to being miserable or not, and even regardless of whether you consider them miserable or not, because I don't trust your, or anyone else's judgement on that, because, from my experience, people only point out bad things about others when it is socially advantageous to them. I don't trust your claim that your plumber is 100% nice and happy, because it sounds like you are friends with him, and people tend to not criticize their friends and ignore their friends' faults, even when the faults are extremely obvious to a neutral third party. And people who are miserable tend to do bad things, such as, but not necessarily, beating wives.
This is a stupid assertion, plenty of people like being plumbers, or otherwise working with their hands. There no logic in your argument just classism.
I’m not friends with the guy, he’s just done good work for me at a fair price. I have a lot of respect for that, and clearly you don’t respect people who work hard.
That's great. The point is that you shouldn't disregard the probability of someone seeming "nice" while having issues in private. I don't think that is uncommon.
Also, I don't like how everybody assumes that being "nice" is a good thing. I prefer reasonable and logical people, because when talking to them, I can see that they understand what I am saying, whereas when talking to "nice" people, they have that dreamy aura about them, all nods and smiles, but no signs of comprehension. Like ChatGPT.
You have no basis for your assertion, it's just classism. You seem like some sort of cartoonish basement-dwelling weeb. You're not mr. fucking spock, get over yourself.
Crazy that you're getting downvoted. You're right about everything. Well, maybe about rust on the backend...
The world is fundamentally different than it was 50 years ago and the same boomer platitudes no longer make sense. We are going to suffer a global economic collapse in the near future (conveniently when the generations to blame are retired or dead) and it's going to reshape our world and what labor looks like.
I just hope that my generation will be kinder to future generations than the last.
this is the end game of capitalism, where the greed driven pursuit of profit wins over social maintenance and development. we see it very clearly with the incredibly socially damaging mass immigration to replenish the slave class and maintain the mythical GDP growth, which is only "necessary" because the native slave classes have been squeezed out of breeding
new grads will be fed to the meat grinder with no regards, its a closed shop unless you know someone
i tried to watch it but like AI in general, it was extraordinarily boring. neural nets are really cool technically, but the whole AI thing is just getting old and I couldnt care less where its going
we can guarantee that whether its the birth of superintelligence or just a very powerful but fundamentally limited algorithm, it will not be used for the betterment of mankind, it will be exploited by the few at the top at the expense of the masses
Hi, I’m genuinely curious about your writing style. I’m seeing this trend of no proper casing and no punctuation becoming vogue-ish. Is there a particular reason you prefer to write this way or is this writing style typical for a generation? Sincere question, not snark, coming from an older generation guy.
This is the writing style of this generation. I've just scrolled 6 months of my conversation with a friend in his twenties. Not a single comma or period to be seen. I mean on his side.
it signals high status and nonconformity. the reader intuits that a sigma male is speaking and he doesnt play by the rules. hes not bound by the constraints and regulations of classical reality. hes dangerous
but seriously, its just more comfortable to type. apostrophes and capitals are generally superfluous, we'll and well the only edge case, theyve, theyll, wont, dont etc its just not necessary. theres no ambiguity
i only recently started using full stops for breaks. for years, I was only using commas, but full stops are trending among the right people. but only for breaks, not for closing
I grew up in the Internet at that time, and it's certainly not how I type. So you might want to be more specific about which sites or subcultures you think this style is representative of?
I’m certainly no authority but i tend to write the same way for casual communication, came from the 90s era BBS days. It was (and still is) common on irc nets too. Autocorrect fixes up some of it, but sometimes i just have ideas i’m trying to dump out of my head and the shift key isn’t helping that go faster. Emails at work get more attention, but bullshittin with friends on the PC? No need.
I’ll code switch depending on the venue, on HN i mostly Serious Post so my post history might demonstrate more care for the language than somewhere i consider more causal.
If you watch on there's a bit where they decide to give away all the protein folding results for free when they could have charged (https://youtu.be/d95J8yzvjbQ?t=4497). Not everything is exploitation rather than the betterment of mankind.
that sort of mentality is typical in researchers, but the powers that be will be thinking about profit and control, mass layoffs and AI governance in conjunction with digital id, carbon credits etc
every technological advancement that made people more productive and should have led to them having to do less work, only led to people needing to do more work to survive. i just dont see AI being any different
Do you know how long it took us to get to this point? Massive compute, knowledge, alogorithm etc.
Why are you even on HN if the most modern and most impactful technologie leads you to say "i couldn't care less were its going'?
Just a few years ago there was not a single way of just solving image generation, music generation and chat bots which actually able to respond reasonable to you and that in different languages.
zig is not cool at all, its ugly as sin, and has zero use case other than mingling with legacy c code, and who in their right mind wants to be doing that
its a hipster language, absolute insanity to use it when rust exists unless you have that very specific c related slave work to do
Uncalled for and subjective. Certainly plenty of people call Rust's syntax ugly. Discussing syntax and not semantics is a waste of time.
> has zero use case other than mingling with legacy c code
So it has a use case?
> who in their right mind wants to be doing that
Some people have to.
> absolute insanity to use it when rust exists unless you have that very specific c related slave work to do
Some people do.
What's the need for such emotionally charged language in your comment?
I have my own reasons not to use Zig at this moment. I want enforced memory safety and am waiting on 1.0 to see what the language finally looks like. Until stabilization I certainly won't be using it in production. But that doesn't mean the project is meritless, that experimenting with language features before then is wrong, that making a language suitable for specific niches is a bad idea.
I don't see Zig as a replacement for tools that would have been written in Go, Java or C#, and I would rather we had less memory unsafe software out there, but it is a clear step function ahead of C.
Just like I and many others spend a lot of time trying to make Rust the best it can be, their team is doing the same.
