431 karma · joined January 15, 2022
Sounds like you haven't spun up a large project recently :) Anything Maven build times are terrible and Go isn't much better once you start bringing in a ton of dependencies and codegen frameworks for stuff like protobuf and dependency injection. Java builds can easily take 30 mins and Go at least 3-4 mins.
Don't even get me started on MacOS Docker IO performance. Every time something gets faster we fill it up with more inefficiency.
It reminds me of a famous racial bias study taught in "Leadership" courses in which the authors found that people had slower reaction times to pictures of black people and came to the conclusion that this meant we must have some innate bias against black people. Zero attempt to control for the image brightness, contrast, or any other potential explanatory factors.
I think you'd be surprised at how low the bar is. And how people either 1) don't care about actively improving or 2) don't effectively learn from their mistakes. For a lot of people their career is just a way to get paid. As long as they don't get fired that's enough for them. And for other people they never developed a growth mindset and a habit of introspection, or they treat mistakes/failure as a painful memory to be avoided rather than something to be learned from.
We just went through a massive market adjustment. COVID forced a lot of layoffs and hiring freezes in March 2020 (even in tech) and all the COVID-boom stocks like Zoom, Peloton, etc. have all crashed 50%+. Valuations in private funding are being cut as we speak due to interest rate changes. But salaries for senior engineers have only gone up.
> self-taught coder with no degree and a poor understanding of security may come to an end
This was never a common outcome in the first place, despite what blogs and bootcamps might have you believe.
I don't think you've experienced what "caring about education" truly means. I mean that you are held to a high standard from a very early age. No B's allowed or you get an ass-whooping. You are expected to rank highly in any competitions or standardized testing. You're expected to take the most challenging classes possible and do well in them. Your parents constantly compare you to those better than you and motivate you to become better than them.
Those are much higher standards than what you're proposing, which is to just give them tutoring. They're things that you don't get by funding more resources, but by a certain form of family cultural norms. You can't buy culture with money.
Unfortunately you can't really fix students not caring about their education. America doesn't have the type of shaming culture Asian countries have where class rankings are publicly posted and low scorers are socially stigmatized.
> historically you had to go somewhere where those better jobs are
There are plenty of good paying (maybe not FAANG's 500k salary but 6 figures nonetheless) jobs in Chicago, Atlanta, North Carolina RTP, Columbus, etc. The biggest contributor to social mobility is getting a good degree at a good school. If you get any engineering degree from any decent state school - doesn't matter mechanical or computer or chemical or whatever - you're making good money.
No, the point is that as a city we should be able to choose, not individually. I said if my local election decides we should be able to funnel our property tax dollars to vouchers then we should be allowed to do that. I don't mean each individual gets to decide what line-item taxes they're paying that year.
> WHile special needs may be segregated, they are still funded by the general pool, you completely failed to address his argument
I said we should separate the funding for special needs because it's fundamentally a different cost structure and hides inefficiencies in the non-special needs costs.
> You also seem to say criticize his opinion for not being in a school this decade, so are you arguing that maybe people who are say, more expert in schools, should make schooling decisions and not just any old person, say someone handed a voucher
I think people whose kids are in school should get to decide. I criticized his opinion because it seems like he's trying to impose his one-size-fits-all public option when he's neither a parent nor a student. The US has never been a technocracy.
> Instead of fixing a sinking boat, it just figures out a way for some to get to lifeboats
Curious how you think we can do better. The US spends the most out of any nation on education per capita and has among the poorest outcomes out of any developed nation. More money doesn't fix the sinking boat, it just lets it take on more water before it sinks. Vouchers aren't perfect but I think they're better than pouring more money into a black hole with no accountability.
There's no inherent reason why I shouldn't get to decide how my own property taxes are spent. If my city decides through an election that those property taxes should be given as vouchers, why shouldn't that be allowed? You're proposing taxation without representation.
> collect more tax dollars so that disabled students have access to segregated education and somehow that will show us who is making too much money
Local tax dollars, which are raised by local elections approving those tax dollars. It also sounds like you haven't actually been in a school this decade because special needs students are _already_ segregated and take separate classes with separate teachers.
> You have invented the idea of accounting and presume that it is impossible that it will not show you are right
If I'm wrong then the tax dollars all flow back to public schools anyways. That's how a market works.
> It begins with the assumption that public organizations are poorly run and then uses that assumption to conclude they are poorly run
I don't see why we shouldn't give parents the choice to decide themselves whether those public organizations are in fact poorly run. And speaking from experience growing up in public K-12 and a public university, a lot of these organizations _are_ poorly run.
> When the charter schools get to pick the students they want and leave the the more expensive students to the group that is required by law to educate them they haven't improved. They haven't innovated, they've stolen from the public and claimed their moral superiority for doing so
You mean just like how gifted programs pick the students they want and leave the more expensive students (in dollars per student graduated or however you want to measure it) to the group that is required by law to educate them? You seem to assume that charter schools automatically haven't shown any improvements in outcomes when you say this.
I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and say let's wait and see how they do. I think parents are more than intelligent enough to select the best school for their kids. I'm happy mandating that charter schools be nonprofits if that reduces the grifting but I think we need choice. The other alternative is I move to where the good schools are and pay $$$$ for a house in a good school district. I think one is definitely going to help more people than the other, don't you think?
UPS is unionized and notorious for paying very good wages. The difference is that UPS doesn't deliver to a lot of rural (unprofitable) areas. That _is_ something the government should be funding through USPS. On the other hand the travesty that is the USPS delivery vehicle procurement process shows maybe we shouldn't always rely on government for everything.
> I would argue it didn't - the ideology of industry better than government just changed the rules, broke the system, and claimed a victory.
In this case industry also created a market where there previously wasn't one for your educational funds. Your local school district no longer has a monopoly on tax revenue for schools and is forced to improve to compete. I would argue we should be explicitly subsidizing those disabled students you're talking about rather than implicitly have everyone else pay for them. Then you can split out necessary costs (accessibility, etc.) vs. costs that need to be cut (school is paying admin too much, etc.)
I'd also add that government tends to magnify these distortions since it gates access to a lot of demand behind a bidding process that's heavily politicized and reliant on lobbying. So the market as thought of in economics doesn't really exist anymore.
Take a look at these comical slides from Softbank back when they took over WeWork after it collapsed: https://news.crunchbase.com/news/the-best-slides-from-softba...
Why would petty theft and robbery be divided by population? My risk of getting my bike stolen is 0 or my phone taken at gunpoint if I stay inside my home. It is non-zero if I go out. And it increases the longer I stay out. So measuring crime per person-hour of going out makes intuitive sense. Restaurant reservations is merely an imperfect proxy for this.
> Straw man. Everyone knows that all crime creates anguish for the victim and is to be avoided. If a person compares the effects of the pandemic to the opportunity of types of crimes, it doesn't mean they love the idea of larceny. Come on. Better faith in arguing please
Except the causation for these crimes is lax prosecution caused by 1) DAs who are politically motivated and 2) Prop 47 / similar regulations in other states. Unemployment is at record lows and there's a record worker shortage driving up wages. You cannot possibly claim the "effects of the pandemic" are causing increased property crime when unemployment has been so low for so long.
> Better faith in arguing please
Ironic, coming from a 15 minute old account whose only comment is this response.
The idea that larceny (petty) theft doesn't matter is also a big reason why you think there's no crime wave. Petty theft is the crime most often encountered by everyday citizens. People don't like having their property stolen. I don't know why you refuse to acknowledge that.
Notice also that these loans are undercollateralized. DeFi lending requires overcollateralization which often is not appealing to HFT's executing low-risk arbitrage trades that make a few bps of profit. They need big leverage to make decent money. In our normal financial system banks are willing to lend them money, but in DeFi nobody does undercollateralized loans.
[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/08/us/politics/new-york-mask...
From the article:
> For the first four months of the 2022 fiscal year that started Oct. 1, the Treasury reported a deficit of $259 billion, a 65% decline from the year-earlier deficit of $736 billion.
At $120B a month basically the entire deficit is being printed away.
I don't ever remember thinking of drug dealers at any school I went to as "ambitious". Some drug _users_, yes, but they never stole stuff to fund their drug habit. It was more like recreational, responsible alcohol for them. And now that we all have careers it's pretty clear who was actually ambitious and who wasted their parents' money.
Price of rent is a function of housing supply and demand. Rent control just pushes the costs to less visible things like security deposit, maintenance, etc.
It's clear that Prop 47 and the general mentality that property crimes don't matter and prosecuting them is racist has failed.
Or alternatively, NSF favors grant applications that mention it and toe the party line, so everyone begins to add more and more garbage to their application to optimize for grant acceptance.
Generally if something is so profound that it disrupts the status quo we quickly see it take over. For example the smartphone. But there still isn't a scientific consensus on diversity despite the well-known liberal lean of college campuses. And companies pay lip service and it almost seems that the most successful companies implement DEI programs _after_ they become successful, implying that it provides no competitive advantage.
If you grew up in a shitty high school, you can go to a community college and then transfer to one of these state schools. I know for certain California has excellent policies that favor CC applicants transferring in. There are multiple ways in the door if you apply yourself.
Perhaps consider that a student that can't even get into a state school has no business or ability to write code at a level that would merit a 250k salary. The bar is on the floor.