hikawaii

We are trying!

Cars get ever more fuel efficient, there's more investment in public transit than ever, Britain is interested in nuclearizing again, carbon offsets are widely purchased and many of our most energy hungry companies are finding ways to go to less or zero emissions.

Continuous carastrophization and disrespect for things people actually are working quite hard at doing, with implicit blame for "those other guys" to boot is how you make people try less.

Large efforts to transform the economy are quite difficult and take a long time. Transitioning away from fossil fuels entirely may be the single most complex international effort ever attempted.

You can say that all the bad guys at oil companies want more cars and more profits - but the reason they are so profitable is that energy consumption is directly related to quality of life, and until 10 or 20 years ago - fossil fuels were the way to get it.

It can and does happen at the local shopping mall, where middle schoolers too young to drive a car play hooky and go to the mall.

"Car centric urban design" is the catch all ill and if we just fixed transit it would go away.

Except it won't, because all the social factors that make car centric urban design preferable will still be there.

We do, they're called parks and playgrounds - and no one went there even in yesteryear.

Religious spaces have some extra spice, as does the local mall where middle schoolers do random shoplifting to be edgy.

The bit about ad revenue was actually specifically called out here as probably not the story.

The interesting part to me is the overall positive sentiment towards tech in general, because you are right - at least for specific companies, sentiment as reported by a local poll of people I play games with, Elon and FB are the literal devil.

It's the same justice system.

The unfortunate fact is that as the prosecutor in the OP lays out, it is not State's job to make sure every single legal advantage is pressed to the fullest.

Acquiring solid legal representation is a big financial barrier, but that's something we do help with as a society - there's public defenders, then there are civil programs for people up to 400% of the poverty line.

Yes, because the entire reason competition code was adopted in the first place is people graduating with prestigious titles that could not write code.

He's bringing out the men made of straw because there's a culture in many places, including my work, of YAGNI.

We did not properly federate many of our services and aystems, it is costing us tons of person hours to work around or deal with as our org chart grows. However, it's exactly the kind of thing that unlike Facebook - it is difficult to get metrics on how many dollars it will save or create, so it doesn't get fixed and people still wonder why anyone would care enough to fix it.

It's often not about learning more, the techniques and methods in Casey Muratori's streams are often very well understood and even taught in school.

Dismissing people as just being there for the paycheck - that's you and every other developer.

The number of people who produce useful OSS projects because they just like the project and aren't filling out resume points to hope bigtech senpai notices them is astronomically small, and usually the sort of political project nobody wants to touch.

The corporate sausage making machine is merely only doing what it's customers want, for the price they'll pay, nothing more, nothing less.

A lot of these are good impulses but also feel like an unfunded mandate, like rear back up cameras being mandatory - obligating everyone pay a thousand dollars more every year.

The feel good comes from the DOT, the cost gets paid by the customer.

What is and is not acceptable for minors to access is decided by parents or by politics. This is pretty standard and applying 1A concerns is weird.

That really depends on the reader. ElasticSearch is a company, and made its product open source as a growth strategy, it worked!

However , it is difficult in general for these open source companies to compete with Amazon's managed offering. The managed offering and its support staff eliminates the need for the tech service contracts that many of these companies to depend on.

ElasticSearch closed down the license and said "nope, no open source anymore because we have to make money". This was bad for the community, but not AWS fault

And if it wasn't AWS, it would've been Google. These sorts of open source development paid support contract based companies are having a hard time in general competing with the cloud.

I think it's fair for AWS to criticize Elastic for violating their ethos to make more money, but it's also pretty clear that the reason their OSS business model didn't work was managed cloud services like Aws.

Absolutely bless.

People are mad about whatever dumb thing Elon did with Twitter this week.

Even when applied to Twitter, the question presents itself:

Are you really happy with what it was before?

The only path from "then" to "better" is through "doing lots of stuff, some of it stupid".

Pushing back on the "late capitalism" vibe, the market cares about certain things over others because people have a limited amount of everything and wish to spend it on things they want - the way you make billions of dollars on a video game is by getting millions and millions to buy it. This is, nominally - a good thing!

There's places where it falls down (mtx gachas, where individuals tend to all be overvaluing gambling dopamine in the same systemic way), but like - teenagers want to talk to their friends, not learn to code and if they did they have a perfectly usable computer

They make their money selling ads against product that they are incapable of creating, because aren't CallMeKhris or Linus or whoever.

But he spoke the truth

Money needs to have a return, even internally. Saying "we can afford it" buys you goodwill, but the same way employer goodwill towards employees shifts with the wind, so does consumer and employee sentiment.

People do not generally pick their grocery cart or smartphone based on how the brand makes them "feel". Upper middle class professionals with six figure plus salaries might, but they are far in the minority.

Do we know if CoPilot X was trained on AGPL, not just GPL?

Additionally I'm not sure if AGPL does anything.

I suspect the ethics and such of licensing when large fractions of work are training AI and using AI need to be worked out rather than getting mad at any individual.

What does copy left look like for AI?

They've only "cornered" access to LEO because they vastly outperform the competition in almost every conceivable category. That should get you a short term monopoly.

Then that means that office politics optimizers were able to make Boeing, Lockheed, and NASA look like jokers at something they'd been doing for decades.

If I thought this about SpaceX management and ex employees was representative of the culture as a whole,I would throw out all the modern books on managing tech organizations and go all Taylor immediately.

The right way to think about this is that right now, "health insurance" is a subscription service to Healthcare, and is treated like one.

The problem is that due to highly variable costs between people, everyone has to play games to try to sucker everyone else into paying their fair share, because if they don't, they don't get paid at all.

Reworking health insurance to be insurance would fix this. HSAs are a step towards this, but not enough of a step to start seeing consumers actually change behavior based on price.

This is just patently false. There are lots of major metros in the US that are plenty urban and walkable. SFBA is desirable because Google is there and willing to pay any amount of money for real estate.

"The man who literally built AWS has no idea how to run a software company because I'm mad about RTO."

Not really. If they had all the leverage pay would be zero and hours would be infinite.

Having to take any transfer at all adds fifteen minutes to a trip, scheduling issues and a life pattern that routinely had me in Fremont, Bellevue, etc.

Went to SoDo a fair bit and that was always an extreme chore despite the short distance.

Walking .8 to whole foods and back with a weeks worth of groceries wasn't unlivable or anything, but I had to pay 50% more for food to even get that close.

Today, I walk like a quarter mile for groceries basically whenever I'd like and don't have to deal with city traffic.

The point is not Seattle bad or transit bad, the point is that despite a design with many more "car centric" elements, I have an easier time walking and biking here than I did there - so you can't lay all urban problems at the feet of cars and assume that pro density urbanism magically fixes them.

I put my car in storage, it was doable but it wouldn't have been without uber, going anywhere via transit would've involved at least one twenty minute transfer.

I mostly just hoofed it everywhere, but it did limit my access substantially.

Meanwhile, unless it's very cold or I'm going to a different city I have much less of a need for a car in my more rural locale.

I was exagerrating a bit, it was like 1.5, and no the corner store doesn't count.

Yeah I live in a place where the walkscore is like 30, and am able to get more places I need to go via walking than when I lived in downtown Seattle.

They're even adding a bike and walk link to the carmall on the outskirts of town, connecting it with the rest of the city on a traffic separated trail.

Meanwhile, in Seattle it was 2 miles to get to the grocery store and took all day while dealing with city car traffic.

The problem isn't "car centric" design, the problem is that nobody is designing anything at all.

The big issue here was with financing political spend as a corporation, and the finding was that there is no law today that stops corporate political spend.

The reasoning was along the lines that because corporations are people, and most organizations in the US are technically corporations (yes, even nonprofits, ngos, unions, clubs, etc) there's not really a way to subset out "large publicly held international conglomerates" or "businesses in industries that are mostly supplying the government" from "all social, business, and political organizations"

The median income in king county WA is 100k, we can deduce that Amazon devs make quite a bit more than that from levels.

I was more inaccurate or perhaps outdated with the 1% figure, turns out it's 600k.

But in every possible universe, the devs at your "small shop" not making "the big bucks" are making two to three times the median income in the country with the most disposable income per person - which means your counterexample is very weak to the argument that you and your team are making more than enough to be doing more with your finances than "just" keeping the lights on, and to compare that to people in the US who make regular wages for sympathy is kind of egregious.

Given that the average mid level developer makes a salary and stock grant putting them well into the 1% (in USA) I find it questionable that the majority of people are "just" trying to keep a roof over their heads.