BlackCherry

The latest stats I can get are from 2009, but it looks like Microsoft had over 95% of the OS market share in 2009. This was a bad take.

It also demonstrates how disconnected from the average person he was if he almost only saw OSX, when the market was 95%+ Windows.

This article codifies general power structures within organizations: who trumps who when making software decisions in an org and sells that status quo as some sort of useful rule of thumb, when it in fact has no utility at all.

You can have a high IQ while having wrong axioms or bad facts.

Those humans who recalled incorrectly could have a 130 IQ, proving my point above and making your ad hominem reddit speak luddite insult fall flat.

NYC apartment’s lack of square footage is going to make it super inconvenient to store the containers as you await the next delivery and container pickup.

But the cows eat the grass a lot faster than it would be rotting right? So wouldn't the speed of the methane entering the atmosphere be faster?

Nope, I’m reading the actual article and using the author’s definition of innovation: creating technology that makes our lives better as human beings. Not a small group of people making something that makes them a ton of money regardless of it being innovative as per the definition above.

It’s fascinating that you are at the very same time not understanding what he is saying, absolutely illustrating exactly what he is saying.

You’re confusing being good at business/marketing with being innovative.

I think on average you're right. As the project grows, these generators lose some of their initial value and speed.

If I were to use something like this, it'd be for rapid development initially for prototyping purposes. Then I'd transition to something more bespoke as needed.

If you know all your requirements up front, then starting bespoke from the beginning may be the better route.

Stop thinking about work as something you do from 9-5. Start planning your day around a more organic schedule. I work in 1-2 hours spats throughout the day, interspersed with working out, cooking, reading, watching youtube, etc. You need to integrate your work and life, rather than thinking of them as separate to get the most out of working from home.

Just to add some context to the people who put this presentation together back in 2019-09-11:

https://www.nscai.gov/about/commissioners

Eric Schmidt, Chairman Schmidt Futures

Robert O. Work, Vice Chairman TeamWork

Safra Catz Oracle

Steve Chien Jet Propulsion Lab

Mignon Clyburn MLC Strategies

Chris Darby In-Q-Tel

Eric Horvitz Microsoft Research

Andy Jassy Amazon Web Services

Andrew Moore Google

William Mark SRI

Gilman Louie Alsop Louie Partners

Jason Matheny Georgetown University

Katharina McFarland Chair, National Academies of Science Board of Army Research and Development

Ken Ford Florida Institute for Human & Machine Cognition

José-Marie Griffiths Dakota State University

In fact, people can't accurately identity peoples faces, there have been many convictions of people based on people recognizing faces in a line up, and their recall of said persons face being completely wrong.

So by your own logic alone this technology should be dismantled.

You defer to a fantasy utilitarian argument, where the material interests of the average human right now should be subjugated to possible technological advancement. This makes your moral and ethical compass devoid of any humanity. This is truly a horrifying set of morals you have put forth.

Public shaming didn't work, literally at all. The article was released literally today, and the program was ended before anyone knew about it other than reporters. And this won't deter other corporations from employing this technology.

We absolutely need legislation to permanently stop this. The free market is not going to magically pop up a competing brick and mortar that doesn't spy on us and/or sell/give our data to other corporations/governments.

This is incoherent. He speaks on cultural/political/economic issues that he has very little actual interest or knowledge on and comes to very obtuse and banal conclusions. The IDW's schtick is to make your "common sense" feel scientific through flawed logic and appealing to your identity by saying words/phrases like "reason", "logic", and "free speech", without actually practicing the tenets of any of them.

The IDW constantly touts the need for experts, who stand in the face of political correctness, while hypocritically not being experts themselves in the subjects they always want to talk about on public platforms.

To relate this back to technology, it's very similar to designing apps. Everyone feels like they are an expert app designer, simply because they can identity that something feels off about an app, and because they use apps everyday. In fact, they aren't expert app designers, and they are simply identifying problems that most people can identify, and have no real solutions to offer. But because the pain of using the app is shared by many people, a lot of people latch on to loud mouth non-experts for pointing out the obvious and making them feel smart.

Yeah this is excellent. I wish he would produce more of this content, rather than his diet-right "mAh FrEeSpeCh" normie political commentary. I've actually heard he was an excellent evo-bio professor by former students. What a waste, but I guess it's cool he gets to hang out with Rogan now, so good for him I suppose.

Agreed. That’s why I put “promoted approaching” rather than “approached”. But you’re 100% correct.

You are accurately identifying that he uses his identity to hide his class in order to increase his profits. This is what modern corporate diversity initiatives are in a nutshell.

It’s born out of a system that seeks to protect the owners of capital by scapegoating the workers and making it the workers problem, rather than the problem of the people with the political power and money to make meaningful change.

“it’s just a mindset”, takes all responsibility off of the ruling class and places it all on the backs individual. While I’m all for taking responsibility for oneself in a rigged system, I’m not going to pretend the system isn’t rigged and shouldn’t be fixed. Imagine if we promoted approaching flawed and broken software architecture like this.

I was just about to post this:

Communist bandit (Chinese: 共匪; pinyin: gòngfěi) is an anti-communist insult directed to the Chinese Communist Party. The term originated from the Nationalist Government in 1927.

This is direct censorship on behalf of the Chinese Government.

While it's true that lackey is condescending, it's also accurate. We have euphemized "lackey" with less condescending terms like "gopher" or even phrases like "you'll do what it takes". He clearly signaled in his follow up email that he was willing to do "what it takes" to "get in" with the company: "Does the team need an office manager, receptionist, coffee runner, etc."

His telegraphed servility is exactly in line with the very definition you posted.

To clarify "professional immaturity" does not mean personally immature/childish. It means he comes across as extremely green, new to the professional world, etc.

This blog post over complicates and mythologizes an extremely simple process. That is to not be embarrassed or ashamed to ask people you want something from what you can do to get it.

Additionally, this is survivorship bias. His emails sounded very professionally immature and while this companies leadership may have found it endearing, I could easily see other groups of people finding it off putting.

What this guys effort signaled to me is that he’s probably annoyingly overeager, but willing to basically do whatever I want him to do whenever and however long I want him to do it. In other words he’d be a good lackey.

If you want to shamelessly signal that you’d be a decent lackey for an obscure to medium startup this may be decent advice. And this may not be a bad thing, I know Casey Neistat’s employee Jack Coyne did something similar and it opened up a lot of doors for him.

It’s not the “corporations” as this abstract entity that are focusing on shareholder value as a top priority.

It’s the C Suite members, and it’s the board members... it’s a small group of people at the top who are trying to enrich themselves at the expense of the company and at the expense of the people who actually run the company.

I find this trope of Kings/Emperors being "poorer" than most people today, to be an extremely annoying trope. This trope is purely a rhetorical device used to justify inequalities, because "look you have a cell phone and infinite McDonald's deliveries on Seamless, you're richer than a King of old!" Meanwhile you're shackled to your job, shackled to your location, shackled to your apartment/mortgage, shackled to your debt, etc.

Comparing a physical space to a digital one is absurd.

Regulation will be used suppress speech and to further serve their paying customers: advertisers, politicians, special interest groups, corporations.

These platforms are already on their way to becoming sterile and for huge money incumbents, much like how cable tv is today.

If they have to be held accountable for the things their users do, they will simply wall it off even more, ban anything that seems slightly outside of the Overton window/status quo, and there will be absolutely no recourse for small content creators who are unfairly or wrongly banned.

My mother’s credit worthiness was terrible and I was denied on most loans and the ones she did qualify for were capped and not enough to pay for each semester.

I always had to go to my finaid department and beg for the gaps to be filled through various grants that were still available.

One year there were no left over grants and I simply had to drop out mid semester, which I still had to pay for.

In order to be able to write, you need to have something you actually want to say on something you are actually interested in. Writing, is about expressing ideas, so you need some sort of idea, and then you need strong convictions and opinions surrounding that idea. What you DON'T need, is to be unique, smart or good at the technical aspects of writing. If you believe this to sound wrong, just read an Op-Ed in NYT.

You also have to face the idea, that maybe you actually don't want to write. HN is obsessed with writing for the sole reason that it ostensibly builds clout and ultimately makes you more money and validates you as "an important person".

If after all of this, you still want to write, but you really don't have a strong opinion or idea, choose a topic, research it, and share it.

Also, again maybe you need to expand your interests and try and pick an ideology so that you have opinions on things. Listen to a lot of people/podcasts/books with strong opinions, form friend groups with people with strong opinions, fight them on their ideas by researching counters to their opinions. Take stances and argue from a position that you don't believe, etc. This could be anything from gender in tech, to free markets vs regulated markets, to TDD is good vs TDD is bad, to Remote is good vs Remote is bad, etc, etc.