HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

FD3SA

2,099 karma · joined January 11, 2011

submissionscomments
FD3SA··on Suburbs rethink mass transit to court millennials
White, black or otherwise, you are quite susceptible to the tyranny of the police state [1]. The young man in that link was murdered in cold blood because he pissed off a cop. It was premeditated. The cop is still working actively on the force with zero repercussions.

Cops have a license to kill with impunity. The race hysteria is used, ironically, to maintain the status quo via the clever bit of propaganda that "white" people are not at risk. Statistically, "whites" are less at risk, but only because they happen to be the richest demographic. As the article I've linked shows, the cops go after the weak and helpless, regardless of race or creed [2].

1. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/what-i-did-af...

2. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014241278873238488045786080...

FD3SA··on The Contraindications of High Tech Medicine
A very longwinded story which could have been condensed to the following: A computer aided prescription system is not a super-intelligent AI doctor. Like any other software, it will have bugs and errors. I would expect a physician who uses technology extensively to understand the basics of software, along with its shortfalls.

There were a dozen medical professionals who failed to do their jobs in screening the patient's medication before administering it.

I'm always amazed when people rely on technology as a full crutch, and deem the task the technology now performs to be "useless". So for example, if I get lost on the road, knowing the sun rises in the east is useless because I have the entire world mapped on my phone. But wait...what if my phone has no reception, or if the battery dies? Whoops, turns out basic geography isn't so useless after all.

Technology is not an excuse to become clueless and incompetent.

FD3SA··on Amazon Home Services
My experience matches yours precisely. Certain viewpoints here are ruthlessly censored, to the point of insanity. The justification is always "that is so wrong as to be offensive", which of course is absurd to a community that purportedly values free speech.

If the views are so absurd, why not allow them to stand and be downvoted? Why the need to flag and ban?

For example, regarding the Pao issue, numerous reaction articles from differing viewpoints were instantly flagkilled.

I find that HN is a group of clever people who conform an extremely narrow ideology.

FD3SA··on Amazon Home Services
>And I tend to down vote when I see commentary like this, because regardless of what else you have to say, this type of commentary is what hurts conversation.

What absurd nonsense. If we are having a rational discussion we only care about what he has to say, not how he says it.

Leave the doublethink and doublespeak for the politicians, it doesn't belong here.

FD3SA··on Debunking the Myth of the Job-Stealing Immigrant
Doctors, lawyers, nurses, and the majority of other professions have very powerful guilds which ban the practice of their trade without a specific license only obtainable within the country of practice.

You don't see local hospitals posting H1B openings for physicians, because the American Medical Association would eradiate them off the face of the planet.

Want to practice in the US as a foreign trained MD? You have to apply to retrain here, with very specific restrictions, and compete against thousands of other expats. You will never be competing directly against American MDs.

This is in direct contrast to the tech industry, which has exactly zero licensing bodies with the ability to dictate who can practice within the profession. Hence, H1Bs galore.

People always make the mistake of comparing highly regulated industries to tech. They couldn't be further apart. A commenter on the Pao case raised this exact point: maybe women are too smart to get into a dog-eat-dog industry like tech! Women sure as heck have no qualms about law, medicine or nursing! Three professions with excellent guild protections and career stability once an initial licensing hurdle is passed.

For better or worse, tech is the wild west of professions. All things considered it's absurdly risky to get into, but for the few superstar talents, it's very lucrative because there are no barriers to entry. For the above average vet with 40 years of experience though, it can be a nightmare, as an eager H1B will sign up for indentured servitude any day to escape third world poverty.

I wouldn't recommend the tech industry to my kids. Too much volatility and risk. You're better off having a steady profession, and pursuing bootstrapped startups on the side. If your idea gets traction, you can always stop practising your profession and return at a later date. That's the beauty of guilds like the AMA, you'll never be thrown under the bus for a quick buck, because the status of an MD cannot be devalued.

FD3SA··on On Saving the World and Other Delusions
This reads like a self parody. "We're making the world a better place...[1]".

The modern capitalist society is not designed to "make the world a better place". It's designed to justify the status seeking behavior inherent in mankind, and allow the few winners to enjoy their wealth without being vilified.

Want to make the world a better place? Start thinking about a steady state economy, a steady state lifestyle and a minimal consumption, minimal destruction society. That means minimizing energy usage, consumption and waste. This the complete antithesis of everything modern capitalism stands for. I'm sure this isn't gonna go over well here, as we have quite a few dyed-in-the-wool Randians, but its the truth.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-GVd_HLlps

FD3SA··on Why do Americans not drive diesels?
> Ford decided to drive from England to Munich and back to see how many miles he could squeeze out of a single tank. To extend the drive, Ford kept the windows up and the air conditioning turned off, but otherwise drove about 65-70 mph on the motorways and autobahns. By the time the tank ran dry, Ford had covered 1,013 miles and got to within 70 miles of Calais on the return route. That's an average of 57.4 mpg at 59.3 mph.

Since when do drivers optimize for max miles per tank of fuel? 57.4mpg is extremely low compared to a Tesla's 97mpge [1]. Diesels are great, they just won't make sense when the 35,000$ Model 3 comes out.

1. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2013_Tesla_Model_S.sh...

FD3SA··on Why do Americans not drive diesels?
A little late for that. Tesla`s Model 3 is coming in 2017, and as great as diesels are, it won`t hold a candle to the efficiency of a pure electric drivetrain. Tesla`s supercharger network will be vast by then, so range won`t be a problem either.

A place like Canada could use diesel, due to our brutal winters, but most of the USA is basically tropical in comparison. Electrics just make sense there, because of the weather and the automobile culture in general.

The age of the fossil fuel personal car is entering its last decade.

FD3SA··on SpaceX's New Spin on Falcon 9
I completely agree, and if you look at my past posts, I am quite cynical with most modern companies precisely because I understand that human primal impulses, such as the insatiable drive for status and wealth accumulation, tend to completely sabotage any potential for innovation.

Musk's companies are two of the very few exceptions to this universal empirical reality, and as such underscore the need to try and understand what makes them (SpaceX and Tesla) different, right down to the psychology of the executive team and founders. In my opinion, nothing is more important for the success of a company than the psychological foundations of the executive team and investors. They set the incentive structures, and their subordinates do their best to carry them out.

In most companies, the incentive structure is to get paid as much as possible by playing office politics. Hence, we get golden parachutes, "cost-centers", and an obsession with stock price and quarterly profits.

FD3SA··on SpaceX's New Spin on Falcon 9
"It's about a 30% increase in performance, maybe a little more. What it does is it allows us to land the first stage for GTO missions on the drone ship."

I am constantly blown away by SpaceX. This is an absurd level of improvement for an already mature, commercially successful rocket.

If even 1% of the world's companies in other sectors worked this well, I can only imagine how much our quality of life would improve. Musk seems extremely adept at applying the best of software development practices to hardware design.

Some things that stand out:

-Extreme streamlining of the product range

-Complete control of the design, prototyping, testing and manufacturing cycles achieved by keeping the entire process in-house

- Optimal product iteration roadmap, which balances maximum improvement per iteration with minimum time-to-market

I think Musk should open an engineering management consulting firm, and hire a few smart people to analyze SpaceX and transfer some of its engineering management methodologies into a set of training modules. I'm usually of the opinion that good management is just common sense, but the degree to which SpaceX is outdoing its competitors suggests they've made a significant breakthrough in their engineering/management processes.

FD3SA··on Any stories of employees with equity successfully taking home over $1m? $500k?
A complete ad hominem. You did not address his point at all, which was quite valid.

Have a read over this [1], one of countless studies which supports the original commenter's assertion that wealth and status accumulation tend to the be prime directive of every individual who has even a modicum of either asset.

If PG and YC truly cared about entrepreneurship in spite of their own best interests, they would be working tirelessly for a worldwide basic income which frees talented individuals from the whims of VCs, incubators, and employers alike and allows said entrepreneurs to fully focus their energies on bootstrapping their ideas with maximum freedom over their time, equity, and strategic decisions.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9226268

FD3SA··on Drones and the rise of the high tech assassins
You are hopelessly mired by incorrect facts and perceived motivations.

Many posts above have alluded to this fact, but I'll repeat it since it may help you in the long run.

Neither of the two American wars being waged in Afghanistan and Iraq are for traditional reasons. There was no threat to the US. This has everything to do with the Military Industrial Complex, and its iron grip on American foreign policy.

The MIC requires war because that's how they sell their products. I would have expected that on a site like HN, this would be obvious. President Eisenhower prophetically warned [1] against the MIC, as he clearly saw how a positive feedback loop would form between private military contractors and US foreign policy, inciting conflict after conflict in order to keep customer demand high for their products.

Although you have obviously been thoroughly steeped in the propaganda offered by these two organizations, who could never acknowledge the truth of their actions, to any rational observer there can be no other justification. The US as a whole has everything to lose, and nothing to gain, by slaughtering defenseless civilians in an impoverished developing country.

Big defense contractors and the politicians they bribe, however, have everything to gain. And they are winning. This is one of the many failures of democracy, one that requires extreme oversight and prosecution. Sadly, we are primates, and we will succumb to our natures sooner or later.

1. http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

FD3SA··on How one man made 22 games in 22 years, mostly from his basement
Indeed, I didn't comment on multi or dual classing because that just changes everything. I haven't played any of the 3rd/4th/5th edition games, so I am unfamiliar with those rule sets. But I wouldn't be surprised if multi and dual classing were heavily nerfed. They really are just too much...unless your character is actually a demigod.

But again, the fact that they allow you so much freedom in creating your character is incredible. You can even triple class! I sincerely miss this kind of freedom combined with the incredible depth of the AD&D 2nd ed rules.

I'm looking forward to Pillars of Eternity, but I'm quite sure that mechanically it won't be nearly as fun as BG2. Those developers just know better than to implement such insane mechanics again. Which is why it won't be nearly as entertaining.

FD3SA··on How one man made 22 games in 22 years, mostly from his basement
Low level wizards are incredibly weak, and are basically free kills for anything, fighter or otherwise. It's only if they survive into high levels that they become demigods. Most of the spells I mentioned aren't available till the very end of the game.

This makes sense, as mastery of the Weave grants powers that are physically impossible to perform within the world's natural laws.

Magic by definition is bending/breaking the rules of the universe, and as such it should feel like it if you spend the countless hours needed to master it and persevere to the end. It took me dozens of hours of reading the spell descriptions from scrolls to just understand how spells interacted and worked together. It would have been far easier to say "screw it" and go with a fighter or paladin that focuses on disrupting enemy magic users. But I stuck with it, and am glad I did because using the magic system in BG2 is immensely satisfying. It requires an absurd amount of knowledge and expertise. It rewards future time orientation, patience and planning over impulsive "give me whats best right now".

Fighter and wizard wouldn't be very different if they were equally as effective from level 1 to level cap. They'd just be the same class with different variations of the same skills...which is exactly what happened in WoW.

Furthermore, unless you're soloing BG2, you have a party of six consisting of a variety of classes. Therefore, you'd never have to re-roll as a mage, because there would be a mage in your party ready to make up for any magical shortcomings you may have as a fighter. Your role then becomes keeping him safe and taking care of the less magically inclined enemies.

The MMOification I mentioned also has this issue of only allowing you the control of one character. This means all characters must be jack-of-all-trades, because otherwise someone will have to be stuck doing the less sexy roles such as tanking, healing or buffing/debuffing. Or in the case of the BG2 wizard, being completely useless for half the game.

Multiplayer game design has a long way to go before it reaches the wonders achieved in the past decade in single player games.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that enemy wizards also turn all of your strengths against you, because the player does not have any particularly special powers that enemies are denied. In fact, the player is at a far lower level for most of the game than enemies encountered and must rely on wits alone to survive most fights. There's a mod (Sword Coast Stratagems) that enhances enemy AI, and it is universally acclaimed as making BG2 into one of the most difficult games in existence. Every fight becomes a high stakes chess match...one small mistake leads to instant death. Aside from Dark/Demon Souls, I don't know of any games that come close to this level of tactical difficulty. I find these experiences to be immensely rewarding, and have a hard time playing mainstream games because they seriously lack this element.

FD3SA··on How one man made 22 games in 22 years, mostly from his basement
Definitely. And it has to do with the MMOfication of everything.

I'm playing Baldur's Gate 2, and the things you can do as a player in that game are just absurd. You can stop time. You can be permanently invisible and kill bosses without ever being detected. You can summon extremely overpowered monsters.

It's honestly so refreshing to have unique abilities. World of Warcraft ruined a generation of RPG design because devs believed that everything had to be "balanced", whatever that means. So we have a bunch of uninspired game mechanics in a pretty shell.

I'm glad to see there's people still acknowledging that games do not have to be fair or sane or balanced. Their beauty is in their madness.

And yes, a wizard who can cast Project Image, Spell Immunity: Abjuration, Spell Immunity: Divination, Improved Invisibility, Time Stop, Abi Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, Power Word: Stun and Power Word: Kill is not comparable to a Fighter with a big sword, and he shouldn't be. Attempts to make the two "balanced" just become absurd, as World of Warcraft has shown.

FD3SA··on Stop Using LinkedIn
Agreed with all of your points, but I'd like to add that your employment history is very personal and can quite often be used against you in ways you wouldn't imagine ahead of time.

Just like any personal information, its best to keep it as private as possible and default to a "need to know" basis. The era of naively optimistic voluntary sharing of sensitive personal information ended when we saw the potential consequences.

Potential employers want to know where you worked? They can ask you themselves. I'd also like to know who the board members are playing golf with, what their future capitalization plans are and if/when they plan on jumping ship. Too bad none of that will ever be shared with me. So why should I share intimate details of my past?

Information asymmetry is power in the modern world. It is foolish to relinquish it voluntarily.

FD3SA··on How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
There is a widely observed empirical correlation between out of wedlock births and poor outcomes for children, who grow to be dysfunctional adults. This is was the first article from google when I searched the terms [1]. An excerpt:

"However, results of the study conclude that compared with "traditional families," parents of fragile families are more likely to have become parents in their teens, more likely to have had children with other partners, more likely to be poor, suffer from depression, struggle with substance abuse, and to have been incarcerated."

Aggregate crime may have decreased, but it is because we are still in the unraveling phase of widespread monogamy. Once its vestiges have fully eroded, then we will see the results.

1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lavar-young/children-out-of-we...

FD3SA··on How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
My mistake, I should have been more clear. The current "political correctness" paradigm along with all of its associated hate mobs is a ferocious status competition as a result of the unmet sexual and pair-bonding needs of singles.

Single males and females are different, in that females hold out for the absolute highest status man for as long as possible, whereas males try to poach any female who meets their minimum fertility requirements. Both end up frustrated as dimorphic sexes have different sexual optimization strategies which are impossible to satisfy simultaneously.

What's important to note is the psychological state of singleness, and its resulting anxiety, is far more damaging than the actual lack of intercourse. In the past, religious and social institutions attempted to prevent this by encouraging early marriage and enforcing it with strict penalties. In the past few decades, all of this has changed rapidly along with the development of effective contraception.

This confluence of factors has thus lead to fiercer competition for each sex as they double down on their strategies, both of which involve status as the main currency. Males attempt to hoard status, and females attempt to attract it. As such, we see far more ruthless status posturing and attacking, of which this article lists many examples.

I did not believe my comments to be controversial, as any cursory glance of the relevant scientific literature will reveal the mundane facts I've stated. However, it appears my statements trigger an immune response in a group of HN readers, for reasons that I can only guess involve discomfort with the somewhat disturbing reality of man's evolutionary origins and predispositions.

I commend you for asking a question rather than reflexively recoiling in disgust. I do believe we will have to confront our natures eventually. Running from the mirror rarely works long term.

FD3SA··on How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
Humans are sexually dimorphic primates. Primates form status hierarchies spontaneously. Status is zero sum. Higher status males mate with the majority of females. Low status males do not reproduce at all.

We are descendants of 40% of males and 80% of females. As religious and legally enforced monogamy decline across all societies, we will see increasingly vicious status wars across all human societies.

This writer is double dipping for his status points, as not only did he specialize in attacking the status of others, but is now acting as the merciful lord who has chosen to forgive those sinful peasants. Clever.

Monogamy was an aberration and an affront to nature, because it forced average females to mate with average males, robbing them of their desire for the highest status male's genetic material. In the past, male resource provisioning was important, but the state has nullified that variable by providing for all.

Status reigns supreme. Defend yours at all costs. Oh, and the best defense is a great offense. Ah homo sapiens...such a fascinating species.

FD3SA··on Can worker cooperatives alleviate income inequality?
A co-op is basically the default corporation. As in, everyone shares the profits and liabilities equally.

This means that if you're making 1 million a year in profit, and you have 10 employees, everyone gets 100,000.

But it also means that if you have to pay 1 million a year as interest service payments on your bank loan, and your profit is 2 million, you still only make 100,000 per person. To address your point, the salary is set by every current employee based upon the financial condition and strategy of the company in real time. If sales are down for a quarter, salaries will go down. If the company is saving for a big investment, salaries will be lower. It all depends on how the owner-employees decide to allocate the funds. As such, you wouldn't so much be an "employee" looking for a competitive market salary, as the 25th co-founder signing up for whatever the current compensation/investment package the present owner-employees have decided upon within the financial strategy of the company.

Basically, expenses and costs are shared equally across the company. As in, every single worker is a co-founder.

This is an ideal model and I'm surprised it hasn't taken off more in tech. We are rapidly approaching the point where talent and capital are the two fundamental bottlenecks to innovation, profits and progress. Offering Engineer #1 one percent compared to the co-founder's 30% seems absurd in this climate. The engineer will just go and co-found his own company, and charge for consulting services.

The co-op is the natural end state of a capitalist society where the only means of progress is through hard innovation, research and optimization. This is the only solution when there is no more easy sweat-shop exploitable work which prints money.

Personally, this future can't happen fast enough. Most talented people I know are fed up with the tyrannical power structure of startups and corporations in general.

FD3SA··on How Elementary School Teachers Biases Can Discourage Girls from Math and Science
> What your argument is missing is any attempt to connect an empirically observable difference to the empirically observed disparities between fields.

Free will.

FD3SA··on How Elementary School Teachers Biases Can Discourage Girls from Math and Science
> To turn the empiricism around a bit: the gender disparity among those with perfect SAT Math scores is about 2:1, and is less in the whole 700-800 range. Given that most engineering programs draw from the 600-800 range, how on earth do you explain the 4:1-5:1 disparities you observe in these programs in the face of a much lower disparity in mathematical aptitude in the relevant range? Moreover, if the disparities are rooted in biology rather than sociology, how do you explain why the percentage of CS degrees awarded to women is half of what it was 30 years ago?

This is perfectly in line with the statement I made. Just because females with high SATs are more than capable of doing CS, doesn't mean they are interested in it as a career. This is most likely due to their innate predispositions for other types of work. This may be tough for lifelong programmers to understand, but the majority of computer scientists see this field as just work and nothing else. There is none of that Zuckerbergian passion that drives most programmers.

A great example is a guy like Elon Musk, vs a guy like Linus Torvalds. Both undoubtedly prodigious programmers, but one kept doing it even when he no longer hand to, and the other jumped ship onto his other, more pressing, passions.

From a personal example, a close female relative of mine is a brilliant girl who has outperformed me at every academic level. She chose to specialize in the medical field, because it suited her interests more. She is incredible at math and would have made an excellent programmer, but she just doesn't have a passion to spend the rest of her life doing it.

What my argument boils down to is this: girls and boys are biologically different, and thus they enjoy doing different things. Why are certain vocal groups trying to force them into roles which they may not desire? Equality of opportunity will not yield equality of outcomes when individual choices vary.

Edit: removed ad hominem

FD3SA··on How Elementary School Teachers Biases Can Discourage Girls from Math and Science
Interesting how the mainstream media keeps doing circles around these issues.

When you start with flawed assumptions, you will never get an accurate solution. The hypothesis that vicious and systemic oppression of females since birth is keeping them out of Computer Science is hardly sound. While there may be an element of discrimination in all professions that tend to be dominated by one sex, I think it's time to look a little more closely at the situation.

Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. This means that on a genetic and physiological level, our sexes are distinct barring genetic anomalies such as Klinefelter syndrome and other rare conditions. Now as with anything that deals with biology, there is a massive amount of variation within each classification category, i.e. sex. This being said, we can and have done studies measuring the distribution (mean and variation) of tendencies for both sexes to find that they are quite distinct at a physiological level.

This means that when comparing the mean male adult brain to the mean female adult brain, the neural architecture is quite distinctly different. This has natural consequences in our behavior, predispositions, illnesses and life outcomes.

For example, it is found that the mean male does better on visuospatial tasks than the mean female, whereas females tend to do better on verbal tasks. Now all the usual disclaimers apply about cognitive testing biases and sample populations, but there is a slight empirical difference.

This is why in certain Nordic countries which pride themselves on being the most sexually egalitarian, the polarization of traditional careers is at a record high. For example, comparing two equally lucrative professions, on average men tend to study engineering and females tend towards nursing. As these countries have worked tirelessly to eradicate discrimination from their education, social, legal and professional systems, the only variable left to control for is personal preference which tends to gravitate towards sexual averages.

In conclusion, I find it often helps to frame a problem from an empirical point of view before assuming the cause and prescribing a treatment a priori.

Now, are all the developed countries in the world at the level of the Nordic countries in terms of sexual egalitarianism? Most likely not, though I doubt they're exactly Saudi Arabia either, which some of the more radical pundits tend to vociferously imply publicly at every opportunity.

Empirical and rational thought are gifts left to us by our ancestors after thousands of years of toil. I find it disappointing that we constantly fall into these irrational situations simply due to knee-jerk emotional outrage over perceived injustices. I hope one day rationality and empirical thought become the core education platform for mankind.

FD3SA··on YC for Hardware
Hi Rob, just saw FitGuard for the first time and it's a phenomenal idea.

I'd recommend getting in touch with motorcycle helmet manufacturers (particularly MotoGP and WSBK sponsors) because concussions are a huge issue in motorcycle racing. As your site states, concussion severity is very abstractly diagnosed without data, and your product can make a big difference. The doctor has a tough time deciding whether the athlete is fit to race if he's had a crash and a concussion, and it ultimately comes down to a qualitative decision made by the rider and doctor. Data can definitely help save lives here.

If I have time for the track this season, I'll definitely sign up as a tester. I've never had a concussion, but I sure as hell would want to know how fast my head decelerates after a crash before getting back on the bike.

Good luck, and cheers on a great idea.

FD3SA··on Why Learning to Code Is So Damn Hard
> And she noticed an interesting pattern, those children usually come from families of engineers, mathematicians or software developers.

This is a serious issue, there was an article on HN a few years back on how the concentration of children born with Autism in SV is something like 10x higher than elsewhere across the nation. They concluded that its most likely due to a severe case of assortive mating between mathematically gifted couples.

People wanted to know why evolution didn't continue to make us smarter? There's your answer...there's an upper ceiling imposed by biology. The way our neural architecture develops puts a damper on how much abstract reasoning we can do before we sacrifice our basic survival mechanisms (i.e. social interaction).

Autism is one of the most fascinating conditions from a medical perspective, but its absolutely terrifying when the majority of HN (myself included) is at greater risk of producing autistic children.

Guess there was a reason why people married their secretaries...

FD3SA··on Why Learning to Code Is So Damn Hard
> . Some of the problems we end up working on are extremely difficult, yet because we are idealists, we go around telling everybody that everybody can do it, probably out of sheer enthusiasm for the things we do, because we believe the world would be better and maybe because we want to share with others our passion.

This right here is the money quote. This is why I am very wary of taking a position as a "developer" or "programmer", and not a consultant. Computer science is one of the most intellectually demanding professions in existence, yet a bunch of kids who are talented try to stunt and make it sound easy. It's like the world's greatest Neurosurgeon posting his surgeries on youtube and saying "anyone can learn, come to my bootcamp!".

Absolute nonsense. It probably has to do with them trying to signal competence for mate selection...If that's the case, I've got news for you boys, CS is never gonna get you laid. Money on the other hand, most definitely will. So focus on your boatloads of cash, not how "easy" CS or programming is, and leave the dignity of your profession untarnished.

FD3SA··on Replacing Middle Management with APIs
And yet, in the natural world, you will find that taking their lives will be quite difficult, and will reveal the forgotten strength they possess which the modern industrial economy does not value: survival.

It is easy to get caught up in hypotheticals, and forget that we are all primates in rags scrambling to survive.

FD3SA··on Your waitress, your professor
> Since when did we become entitled to a well-paid job?

This is a funny mindset. Since when were you entitled to claim large swaths of this planet as belonging to an arbitrary group of people, and subsequently feel entitled to this land's resources and bounty and the rights to dictate how it would be reaped and exploited in a very arbitrary manner as defined by the current so called "modern society"?

You have the cart and the horse backwards. Humans are primates, and we fight for our right to live. If a group of people is impeding that right unreasonably, they will face the consequences.

Don't be naive, and don't take this snapshot of the present era as an axiomatic law of the universe.

Nature is a cruel mistress.

FD3SA··on Evan Spiegel's Email Memo
I care about frat boys being funded at the expense of people with actual ideas. I care about a generation of technologists that has been sold out because a bunch of smooth-operator, manipulative invaders have come in and outcompeted true technologists for funding and coverage, and the VCs have let it happen. If they were worth their millions per year, they simply wouldn't. If they could actually spot talent sufficiently well to justify their obscene salaries, they wouldn't be funding frat boys. I react strongly because this nonsense is very bad for the world.

As much as I wanted to believe in this vision, I've realized that the sole purpose of a so called Venture Capital Company is to provide an investment upon which they expect a large return. This usually entails all manner of searching and sifting (YC, etc.) to find the best potential status signallers, which can then be presented to Wall St banks who put on the finishing PR touches before a big IPO for the ignorant masses.

We are both technologists at heart Michael. That's why we have to leave SV behind. A long time ago, during Shockley and Wozniak's era, it was about science and technology. That has changed, and it will won't return for a long time.

Today, progress in science and technology is in the dilapidated workshops, the ignored academic labs, and the rare R&D corner of a dying company. It's not in SV.

I've always taken an evolutionary perspective to life, but it wasn't until I spent a few years in the "workforce" that I truly understood man's depravity. Your writing was therapy for me, but also a resounding validation of my evolutionary perspective on humanity's behavior.

It is the rare individual that manages to understand his biological impulses and how deeply they affect his behavior, and attempts to transcend it. The vicious lifelong status hierarchy battles, the ruthless mate seeking, the negative sum destructive competition. It's the law of the land.

You and I, and others like us, will forever be outcasts. I consider myself a curious traveler, put into the body of a primate so that I may truly empathize with their struggle. But I can never be one of them, because I see the futility of it all. I see that the only purpose of our species is to transcend our limits through deeper understanding of our universe, and to build more powerful tools and technologies which serve us in achieving this end.

Alas, it was not meant to be Michael. See us for what we are, and let go of the hatred for our collective failures. Instead, live life in the footsteps of those great travellers who came before us [1]. Take heart, for we are not alone [2].

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tijxMHhuwGQ

2. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/

FD3SA··on Evan Spiegel's Email Memo
Wow, is all PR speak from SV companies so absolutely vacuous?

This guy sounded much more intelligent in his private memos. This crap sounds like a teenager's diary. So many "feels" and "hurts" and "angrys"...really seems like he's writing to a bunch of young teens.

I don't know how people work at companies like this. Between this and Marissa Mayer's children's book reading at an all employee meeting, I'd get fired twice for laughing out loud and calling the CEO of the company a blabbering idiot.

Anyone care to unravel the mystery of teen mystery PR speak?

← PreviousPage 3 of 14Next →