nyghtly

"This 2019 internal report obtained by Haugen says that the parties feel strongly that the change to the algorithm has forced them to skew negative in their communications on Facebook ... leading them into more extreme policy positions." (8:07)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-whistleblower-frances-...

Although the above statement is from a group of European politicians, it's not hard to see the same story playing out in the United States. Take the Covid-19 pandemic, for example. The impact of partisanship on this issue is as clear as day:

"There's A Stark Red-Blue Divide When It Comes To States' Vaccination Rates"

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/09/1004430257/theres-a-stark-red...

"Ron DeSantis isn't anti-vaccine. But he has started standing shoulder-to-shoulder with those who are."

https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2021/09/15/des...

The whistleblower part is internal Facebook research showing that the algorithm is known to be harmful (for example, politically polarizing and hate-mongering) in it's current form. In addition to that internal research, she also revealed during the 60 minutes interview that Facebook used a "weaker" version of the algorithm during the 2020 election cycle in order to prevent disinformation. The weaker version was replaced with the high-engagement strategy after the election. Notably, the Jan 6 insurrection occurred when the high-engagement algorithm was being used.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-facebook-files-11631713039

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-whistleblower-frances-...

You're leaving out the most important part: cooking with gas.

"Natural gas and propane stoves can release carbon monoxide, formaldehyde and other harmful pollutants into the air, which can be toxic to people and pets."

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/indoor-air-pollut...

"Gas stoves can generate unsafe levels of indoor air pollution"

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2020/5/7/21247602...

I think it's worth considering that Uber is the first nation-wide taxi service that we've ever seen, and they were only able to accomplish this via subsidy. Is it really possible to continue operation at that scale, while simultaneously losing their competitive edge versus local taxi companies? Why is it that no other taxi company has even come close to nation-wide? I don't think an app is sufficient to bridge that gap, and Uber doesn't have anything else to show in the innovation department.

Taxis charge more.

And if Uber had their way, then all the taxi companies would go out of business because Uber is so much cheaper. And then Uber would raise their prices up to what the taxi companies were charging. It worked for WalMart. It worked for Amazon. Unfortunately for Uber, I think they may have missed their window. People aren't starry-eyed about tech like they used to be.

So you're saying that the only reason you didn't take a taxi everywhere before Uber was because the drivers are smelly? Well maybe you have money to burn, but most other people don't. If Uber charged what it really costs to operate their services, then you would see a massive drop in riders. It doesn't matter how much less smelly you think they are compared to taxi drivers.

Uber makes sense to riders at subsidized prices, but it stops making sense once they start charging what it actually costs to provide that service. The reason we don't take taxis everywhere is because they're expensive and infrequent. Creating an app to handle dispatch didn't magically change this reality. The hardest parts of operating a taxi service (maintaining a fleet of vehicles, hiring and retaining drivers) have not gotten any easier, except in the case of Prop 22, which is an unfair advantage for Uber compared to other transportation providers.

"But I can do it in one line."

Congratulations, you are the best coder.

"The big picture: Only the U.S. and Eritrea tax people based on citizenship rather than residency. For most countries, if you are a citizen but don’t reside there, you aren’t taxed in that country."

Sounds like we need to start taxing based on residency.

This headline might as well be click bait.

It's important to remember that this is a proposed amendment. It won't pass unless the infrastructure gang supports it. And it's very unlikely that they will support it, because that would mean that the bill isn't fully funded. Not being funded would kill the bill, because the Republicans who support it are demanding full funding.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/03/senate-bipartisan-i...

It's depressing to watch as the unaccountable ruling class wastes all of our money on pipe-dreams and vanity projects. Meanwhile, the world is on fire.

And what do I mean by "our money"? This is what I mean:

'Included in the many people that Bezos thanked Tuesday was “every Amazon employee and every Amazon customer. Because you guys paid for all this.” Bezos has said he finances the rocket company by selling $1 billion in Amazon stock each year.'

The fact that Blue Origin exists in the first place is evidence of the insane levels of wealth inequality that now exist in our society. At this point, everything that Bezos does is an affront to our sensibilities. The King is riding on roller coasters while his serfs are peeing in bottles.

https://apnews.com/article/jeff-bezos-space-e0afeaa813ff0bdf...

Oh, please. I took a greater risk driving to the grocery store this morning. Bezos's spaceship took 15 test flights before it got the all clear to carry human passengers. You know how they say that "there's no safer way to travel" than flying in an airplane? Well, now there is.

"After 15 successful unoccupied test flights to space since 2015, Bezos finally declared it was time to put people on board. The Federal Aviation Administration agreed last week, approving the commercial space license."

And when it comes to Blue Origin's success, the credit should be given to Bezos's existing fortune, not to his business prowess, as much as that played a role in the growth of Amazon.

"Bezos has said he finances the rocket company by selling $1 billion in Amazon stock each year."

https://apnews.com/article/jeff-bezos-space-e0afeaa813ff0bdf...

To be honest, I don't think your assumption is that far off. The way that Gabe talks about this device, I feel like the purpose is simply to extend the PC gaming market, which is essential for Steam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FXgDAF6QpM

The way that Gabe talks about the console is really interesting. From what I understand, the purpose of this device is simply to ensure that gamers continue to buy games on PC (i.e. from Steam), even as desktop PC gaming becomes less and less relevant in the wake of an increasingly mobile landscape.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FXgDAF6QpM

I have to say, the PR guy at Kaseya deserves a pat on the back for this headline:

"Kaseya Responds Swiftly to Sophisticated Cyberattack, Mitigating Global Disruption to Customers"

Given that most people don't know that the Y2K bug was real, I feel that this is a category of bug that will plague us forever. And it's already happening more often than once per century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem

Musk has already backtracked on accepting crypto at Tesla, citing environmental concerns. A cynical person might assume that it was just a publicity stunt in order to pump bitcoin.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57096305

Doing the right thing is bad for short term profits. Thus, government regulation in our industries is inevitable. In fact, I would argue that it's the only way to ensure consistent reliability. There's a reason why Facebook is pushing for regulation. They know that it can't be stopped, and in that case they would prefer to be the one's writing the regulations.

The opening of this article had me recalling an old TED talk: "People don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it."

Of course, the author here isn't really selling anything, at least not to the lay man. He's writing niche articles for a niche audience. That is to say, not me.

https://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_insp...

It feels like buying stuff on Amazon gets worse and worse every year.

I have one interesting observation about one part of what you said: I wouldn't say that tips will go down. If anything, COVID has shown us that tips actually go up the less service that we get.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/tipping-for-online-orders-becam...

I think this is more than just a difference in technology. The entire culture of restaurant dining is different in China. The greatest example of this is the fact that servers in China will always wait to approach the table until they are called over. This is quite different from the American approach in which the servers always come to us without being asked.

Regarding the "cashless trend": Isn't this technically illegal in the United States? That is to say, all businesses are obligated to accept U.S. currency as payment, which includes cash.

If the reduction of developer wages led to the increase of wages for other workers, sure. But of course that won't happen. The reduction of wages for any class of worker will simply lead to further consolidation of wealth.

This is a very good point.

I think you're on to something in the context of globalization. There are many incredibly talented tech workers globally who can't get paid what they're worth because they lack access to employment with the wealthiest employers (because of strict border policies and the lack of visa sponsorship). If they had the freedom to migrate, then they might choose to seek employment in another country with a supply shortage, rather than enter the black market.

Before I became a software engineer, I met with an acquaintance at Google. Her first job was working on a big AAA title. While she expected it to be a dream job, it turned out to be the worst job she ever had. By the end of it, the crunch time was so intense that they worked 7 days a week for a full month before launch. Her advice to me? Stay as far away from games programming as possible. Any other programming job out there will pay you more money for doing less work.

Here's the full speech for anyone who took an interest in this excerpt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI

In my opinion, it's one of the best graduation speeches of all time.

I agree. The implicit messaging is: "If you care about your career, then you should freeze your eggs. We'll pay for it, so no excuses." It's like they're admitting to the fact that pregnant women will be discriminated against professionally.

What a horribly dystopic conclusion. You can't bio-hack your way out of the consequences of hustle culture. Every working adult should have sufficient personal time to support their family (or start one). The fertility industry is a symptom of a corrupt culture in which childbearing is punished.