omginternets

If you're a junior dev, I'd urge you consider that there is a difference between software engineering and the digital factory. The author seems to work in the latter.

IME, the people who say such things as "college won't prepare you for the job" or "CS doesn't matter" are invariably the ones who find themselves grinding away at REST endpoints and becoming embittered.

You’re pretending it isn’t a political slogan and that the meaning doesn’t extend beyond the literal sense of the words.

I’m wondering why you’d do that.

Are we just going to pretend they’re not political slogans?

The statement was perfect until that last line.

People are ignoring (or pretending not to know?) that these are political slogans. They signal allegiance to a rather prickly segment of the political left.

I've always thought of it as an attempt to engineer peer-pressure. Build institutions that recruit like-minded people in the hopes that when faced with tremendous pressure, the group can force individuals to fall in line around a predetermined principle.

Find another place of employment? I'm being fairly serious, with the obvious caveat that switching jobs isn't something you can do at the drop of a hat.

We are lucky enough to have two tools at our disposal:

1. Cultivating the spirit. This is slow and has a high abandonment rate, but it is second-to-none in terms of living a fulfilling life. It is worth pursuing, but is unfortunately ill-suited for rescuing people who are in the midst of a mental-health emergency. It should be thought of as "prevention".

2. Cultivating psychoactive substances. This is riskier than the first option, but it has two main advantages: (1) with some precautions, it is immensely helpful in connecting people with their spiritual lives and (2) in an emergency, it is reliably effective. This is on par with the discovery of antibiotics, in terms of medical significance. It should be thought of as "intervention".

Why anyone would willingly renounce the use of either? On what principle? This is obscurantism.

Quite. How do you propose to do that?

And more importantly, how do you propose people who struggle to do this reach that acceptance?

This is like running away from food because of McDonald’s…

The problem here is acceptance of one’s mortality. What solution do you propose?

I think the transcendent experience has a lot to do with it.

I share your assessment, and have further observed that the financially insecure are over-represented among the get-rich-quick crowd. Rich people are by and large good at not losing money.

Yeah I mean… it’s clunky but it does get the job done…

And?

The parent post is talking about hiring professional censors, which strikes me as caring a bit too much about the jokes of a 15yo.

Does it not work, or are you just saying it could be better?

How long have you been feeling it?

I don’t understand. It seems to be doing exactly the job you specified.

Is it really off the table to do both?

Note: I'm not convinced prison should be off the table.

I think the hard part of this for naive young people is that you have to actually do some investigation. This should be front-and-center during your interview process. When they get around to asking if you have any questions for them, you should take that opportunity to see if this is a serious place.

Just let clever 15 year olds write "penis" on the jumbotron, for crying out loud!

Have you tried exercising (>2h before you go to bed, IME), staying away from screens 4h before bed, and dimming the lights 1h before bed?

That was a life-changer for me.

>They may decide something that is not ideal.

I don't follow your argument. That same problem applies to legislators and regulators.

Also, I don't see any legal novelty. Same shit, different tech.

That tracks. Thanks for helping me get a bead on this!

The concept of "Fair Use" is well-established. Impersonators are safe, provided the work is "transformative".

Satire is the textbook example of fair use.

That makes sense, thank you.

Follow-up question: presumably, a state actor with dominion or leverage over a CA can coerce said CA into issuing a certificate, right?

Can you help me intuit what a suspicious certificate might look like in practice?

To me, these kinds of events support the idea that no AI-specific law is needed. AI is already illegal to use insofar as it's used to commit a crime, and it's already subject to tort law.

Seems like a bad thing? Why are there two separate workstreams?

>It cost money to run and the customer base pulled its funds in favor of better choices.

Again, you're presenting things in commercial terms, but this was never meant to be a commercial enterprise.

>Postal banking is often advanced as an idea for a public service that will eat Wall Street's lunch to the benefit of all.

That is a silly idea, but it seems you're ignoring the good idea. Again, this idea is: pay for a service that ensures Americans always have minimum viable banking. Upshots include: poor people can participate in the economy and in some cases, pull themselves out of poverty.