“Faith-based health care provider” is one of the saddest euphemisms I’ve heard in a while.

I agree with the overall sentiment, but I’d like to add two points:

1. Everyone starts off as a code editor, and through a combination of (self-)education and experience can become a software engineer.

2. To the point of code editors having to worry about LLM’s taking their job, I agree, but I don’t think it will be as over the top as people literally being replaced by “AI agents”. Rather I think it will be a combination of code editors becoming more productive through use of LLMs, decreasing the demand for code editors, and lay people (i.e. almost no code skills) being able to do more through LLMs applied in the right places, like some website builders are doing now.

Yes! Fuck this individualistic “you should cycle instead of taking the car” language. We need collective investment in mass transit, because not everyone can bike to work, and even less people want to do it in the rain.

It’s also such a funny contradiction: a big part of the free market model rests on the idea that well informed consumers can vote with their wallet, which should reward good businesses and punish bad ones. Yet it is very difficult to argue consumers have ever been informed enough to make this work, which is in large part due to advertising flooding communication channels with noise, and also because it is unreasonable to expect a consumer to be fully informed for the hundreds of purchases they make on a daily basis.

Why not dual-boot with steamos in that case? Sure, some things may not work out-of-the-box now, but work is constantly being done and at least won’t regress like the step from W10 to W11.

Yeah in this case I think it’s more a case of “hey this guy looks kind of like my son”. In this case I think it led to a miscarriage of justice, but I think in other cases that kind of thinking could protect against excessively harsh punishments. In the end I think it comes down to inequality. Bigger inequality shrinks the pool of people judges can intuitively relate to, which in turn makes judgements more unequal.

I think that’s just the comfortable position for humans. Questioning what you know to be true is hard, and the more fundamental the fact the more uncomfortable it is to doubt. Which is also why religion is so attractive.

That’s a great saying about wisdom, I’m going to use that some time.

Even though I haven’t run anything Debian based as a daily driver in about a decade, I still recommend Debian based distro’s to beginners. With Ubuntu being so widespread it just makes sense, because whenever you search for “how do I install xyz on linux” it’s going to be a guide for Ubuntu 99% of the time, which should work on other Debian based distro’s most times.

Yeah if there’s one thing that wouldn’t be easily explainable to people from the 70’s, it’s the lack of technological optimism in the current zeitgeist.

I agree that it’s editorialized compared to the very neutral way the survey puts it. That said, I think you also have to take into account how AI has been marketed by the industry.

They have been claiming AGI is right around the corner pretty much since chatGPT first came to market. It’s often implied (e.g. you’ll be able to replace workers with this) or they are more vague on timeline (e.g. OpenAI saying they believe their research will eventually lead to AGI).

With that context I think it’s fair to editorialize to this being a dead-end, because even with billions of dollars being poured into this, they won’t be able to deliver AGI on the timeline they are promising.

State capitalism, but yes.

IMO this should be the case for everything developed using public money, looking at you, pharmaceutical companies…

It is bias laundering though. They hide behind an “objective” algorithm, which was trained on a huge dataset of past biased hiring decisions.

Agreed, and I respectfully disagree with everyone else replying to you.

Relying on your car for your job is a much wider criterion than driving as your job. In car-centric places like the US (outside of the big cities) that’s probably 99% of the population. Couple that with the piss poor social safety net and losing your license literally means starvation.

This still doesn’t mean I endorse or agree with people driving distracted in any way. If revoking someone’s license meant removing them from the road but not destroying their life, I would do that in a heartbeat.