serverholic

I’ve found that there are a confluence of factors that make “built in rust” important to me.

First of all, Rust is relatively new so this tells me that the codebase is likely new.

Secondly, I think rust tends to attract smart people who like programs to be small and fast. Case-in-point meilisearch is a simple, single binary download.

Both of these together indicate that a project has a higher chance of being freshly written code, by smart people, that is small and fast.

Before I get a bunch of we’ll actually’s, I’m not saying these things are true 100% of the time.

Still feels gross to look forward to advertising.

Why does it have to be a trade off?

I don’t think he actually cares about mimicking humans, I think he just wants a truly intelligent AI system that can learn in a sophisticated way like humans do.

I think that’s actually pretty doable. Take for example flying. We don’t build airplanes that flap their wings because we have a deeper understanding of flight that allows us to build flying machines far beyond the capabilities of any animal.

Likewise, once we understand the mechanics of intelligence we should be able to build something that can learn that is completely computer based.

A good analogy is perhaps a config file for a computer program.

My interpretation is that Carmack is essentially confusing a config file for the computer program itself, then saying "look how small it is, this shouldn't be that hard to reverse engineer".

I'm not even talking about culture. DNA is only useful because the laws of physical reality are built a certain way. Without that context the information within DNA is meaningless.

You can’t just say that a human comes from a gigabyte of information. That info is fed into a massively complex physical system, which he is ignoring.

I’ve come to strongly resent the techno-utopian mindset that unfortunately plagues the tech world.

Tech for the sake of tech with zero thought about how it will affect humanity.

You know taxes can be viewed as socialist because it's a wealth redistribution system. Same with social security, Medicare, etc.

Not everything "socialist" has to be extreme.

This feels like a bad faith comment. You could have commented on systemic issues with these corporations but instead you fixated on one example.

[flagged]

Likewise, I hope some day you’ll be able to handle nuance instead of regurgitating what the blue team tells you.

No that's a common far-left cop-out. I don't follow many right wing sources, I closely observe how people talk and act, offline and online, and think for myself.

In-fact I follow mostly left-wing media and I consider myself a true leftist because I think everyone should be treated equally, and power dynamics aren't as simple as man = has all power, women = has no power. But that's exactly the narrative that the left is pushing. I guarantee that if you were to post online even the simplest thing like "women have some power over men" you'll get dogpiled by people calling you a rapist because they can't handle nuance.

I also call bullshit on your explanation for male suicide. Male loneliness plays a major role, and it's partly due to the fact that we collectively put women on a pedestal in our society. Which again goes back to lack of nuance. Something like 30% of men haven't had sex in the past year, and women generally find 80% of men unattractive on dating sites. There is real data backing up my position.

I think it's just as strong on both sides, the difference is intention and outcomes. The right uses this to reinforce their own power. The left uses it to try and correct injustices but ends up creating problems because of it.

Take a look at feminism for example. It started as "hey women should have equal rights", which is good. But now we see far too many people treating men as a monolith and demonizing them. So now we have a narrative that women = good, and men = bad. I see this all the time on social media from the left and it has to stop. Male suicide rates are far too high right now, and I partly blame this narrative and the lack of nuance that caused it.

I don’t think it’s limited to religious people or republicans. I see it on both sides.

I do agree that it’s partially due to programming. If you look at movies for example you’ll see this black and white thinking. There’s a good guy and a bad guy and it’s all very simple.

What I’ve realized is that people in general are largely incapable of nuance.

- Things are either bad or good.

- Only one side can be right which means the other side is automagically wrong.

- Multiple things can’t be true at the same time.

- etc.

Spare me. Life being shitty yesterday doesn't mean it shouldn't be better tomorrow.

Btw, that 5 day work week was fought for by people who were ALSO likely called spoiled children at the time.

Now do the same for corporations. I'm sure it'll come out to more than that per person.

Only if we keep everything the same. Then yes, you’re right.

Surely you have more imagination than that.

> We can't just all work 4h instead of 8h and expect to maintain our standards of living

Do you really think we are using our resources and technology efficiently? Because that’s the implication here. I think that’s frankly absurd.

People programmed from childhood to obey authority and do what other people ask have issues when those things go away. Big shocker.

Perhaps we can raise people to create their own paths.

Why do we have to keep chained to them though? Why shouldn’t the goal be to liberate people so they can do what they wish with their time?

There are a lot of assumptions going into the framing of your question.

Just to start, you’re assuming we are using our resources and human labor efficiently.

I disagree that we’re undoing the moral underpinnings of society.

I think humans have an in-built moral compass but sometimes that compass gets warped and distorted by our environment.

Name a society that hasn’t valued love, friendship, family, etc.

I think you’re right. Religion isn’t the only answer, it’s just the answer that people are most familiar with.

I understand that but it doesn’t justify why it had to be a bad work environment.

I find it interesting how quickly people will defend their own exploitation.

You don't become super wealthy without doing something shady or being a greedy asshole. It's just not possible to beat out the competition and accumulate that much wealth without taking morally questionable shortcuts.

Here's a short list of things that super rich people do:

- screwing someone over

- treating people like robots

- lying/deception

- taking advantage of people in poorer countries

- taking advantage of tax loopholes

- bending the law

- buying off politicians

- bullying people

- etc.

Thank you. I purposefully tried to make my comment as easy to agree with as possible but apparently there are a LOT of people in denial because it got downvoted to oblivion and flagged.

I’ve noticed a distinct lack of caring regarding social responsibility in the tech industry even though we are some of the most privileged workers in the entire labor force.