Full title: Reckoning with the Political Economy of AI: Avoiding Decoys in Pursuit of Accountability
18,119 karma · joined January 24, 2012
Most countries lack the capacity to build these capabilities in a way that provides any return on investment. Rather than everyone trying to achieve "digital sovereignty". I'd argue that a better approach would be to try to ensure the survival of free trade and a rules-based system of inter-state relationships.
> every country should make their own peter thiel and Elon musk
The social and political environments that led to the emergence of these two individuals are probably not things for states to aspire to.
I agree. The stewardship of Java seems rather lacking - particularly when compared to that of .net, where MS etc. mostly seemed to make the correct decisions from the start.
Does Java even have any value or mindshare at Oracle nowadays? The company seems to be a datacentre/compute business at this point, with appendiges for its legacy activities and a vast overhang of debt.
I sometimes wonder if the only parts of Oracle that are still profitable are the Legal and Lawnmower divisions.
250k is good money. I'd stay, accrue experience and contacts, bank some money. The startup probably won't work out anyway - they usually don't. And even if it does, 3% equity is too low for the financial and personal sacrifices you'd have to make.
tldr: seems like the wrong time
There might be some value to some people in knowing how much lifespan they have left. But actually seeing your future self die seems like it would be horribly traumatic, as your present self would carry on living afterwards with that knowledge. And anyway, each of us will experience our own death eventually.
People, specifically children, are dying:
"infant mortality has doubled to 9.9 per 1,000 births; childhood cancer survival rates have fallen from 85 to 65 per cent; and essential medicines are available at only around 30 per cent of normal supply levels." [1]
Are you fine with that?
[1] Children are dying as US sanctions push Cuba to the brink, warns UN human rights chief https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/06/1167671
Without in any way minimising the amazing scientific and engineering achievements of the team and the rover: we need crewed space exploration because people on Mars would be able to do the above in significantly less than thirteen years. Or, to put it another way, would do much more science in the same amount of time.
The 6502 and Z80 could use 16 bit addressing to access up to 64kb of memory. The 6502 had various other addressing systems, including iirc 8 bits, but none of them were wider tha 16 bits.
Take your pick: Anxiety over the possibility of redundancy and consequent financial precarity. Concern about our children's futures - their education and careers. Sorrow over the loss of the craft of software construction, with the potential for reduced autonomy and creativity. The atrophying of human cognition. Disgust at the excessive hype. Dismay at the environmental impact. Worries about the social and political impact, including further enabling authoritarians. Horror at the inevitable use of AI in warefare. Just plain exhaustion at the rate that the world is changing.
Like you, I'm a software engineer. 30+ years. I find the technology of AI genuinely facinating. I also enjoy making software.
> do people realize that code is just a means to an end?
This has been extensively discussed here and elsewhere. Its obviously a simplification, but some people prioritise the end-result: the product. Other people prioritise the practice of building the thing: the art/craft/engineering of coding and software construction. There seems to be a certain amount of mutual incomprehension between these two perspectives.
> At some point, execution speed starts to matter more than the elegance of the code.
Ultimately, I think that financial pressures will mean that software inevitably becomes much less the product of a craft and much more an industrial mass-produced product, extruded by AI. So, if you're frustrated by current contrary attitudes on HN and elsewhere, then perhaps you just need to wait a few more years.
What are the factual errors?
See also: Learned Helplessness; Stockholm Syndrome.
(I'm not Danish or Greenlandic, so this is just my reading of the situation.)
That would require the (politically unlikely) agreement of the Danish government. See article 2 of the relevant treaty [1]:
"...establishing and/or operating such defense areas as the two Governments, on the basis of NATO defense plans, may from time to time agree to be necessary..."
> The only reason Trump wants Greenland is he's not all there -- Greenland looks big on the map so he's fixated on it.
I agree that that is part of it, but there is more to it than that.
Musk is a prominent Trump/MAGA supporter, and Trump has threatened to annex Greenland by force. SpaceX is part of Trump's Golden Dome project, and one of the reasons that Trump wants Greenland is to site ICBM detection and interceptor systems.