w4ffl35

I think it's about 1 year away not 10

It's rather well known tech accounts.

Possibly but I've been at it for 20 years - this is the first time I've experienced a drought like this.

Interesting thanks

Are jobs being consolidated? Businesses starting but just don't need employees? AI can't do the job yet - is it people with little to no programming skills trying to ChatGPT their way through it?

The phenomenon seems to extend beyond California. I see many job listings constantly updated on Wellfound and elsewhere. Are these actually ghost jobs?

Thanks for responding, but this isn't super helpful - my experience has been that it is next to impossible to get a job interview as of the last year or so.

This is anecdotal, but it matches up with what I'm seeing people on social media say.

I've already built things like this. Cool paper but I build things, put them to the side, never write a paper. Sometimes tweet about them. Then I see a paper later about some similar thing and the crowd goes wild. Not a complaint. Idk what else to say.

Excellent job. I'm a huge advocate of offline first, privacy forwards apps - consider open sourcing and making it fully offline.

This person revived an account they haven't touched since 2018 in an attempt to convince ME SPECIFICALLY that there is nothing wrong with the original repo maintainer. They gloss over my arguments, use logical fallacies and are generally antagonistic in a way that is not immediately obvious. You be the judge, dear readers.

At any rate, this person has failed their cause and has actually made me double down on the conspiracy theory :)

I have a 2080s and build my ai software for it and above. 4090 is a good purchase

I have no question about the downvotes, bud. You're very verbose. Still not sure why you revived an account you haven't commented with in 6 years just to run cover. I find you to be a highly suspicious individual and I really have nothing more to say to you.

Thanks, but you assume too much. I outlined the circumstances under which i would require a background check, so you might want to reread. any other questions?

I am running an open source project. Yes if someone was eager to help and was making changes to things that involved security, I would make them doxx themselves and submit to a background check

I'm not starting a harmful rumor. People are asking legitimate questions in order to paint the whole picture. Being gaslit is very weird.

> I don't stalk your socials

I mentioned it because you called my intent into question.

Why are people running cover for the maintainer of a repo that just tried to backdoor sshd when others are asking legitimate questions?

Additionally to the guy's above point, replacing him after this incident would complete that play

Actually my solution as outlined on twitter was to enforce non anon commits, and i stated it is a bad idea to replace him, so try again.

And, as stated above, I don't think he's malicious, it's still something that must be considered. Sweeping the possibility away is weird.

Is it normal that when I try to uninstall xz it is trying to install lzma?

Clearly a human is even better at it.

Why is a random tweet with no substance on the home page?

Why the downvotes?

Very good!

Why the downvotes on the above comment? I was asked and answered, I'm totally within the hackernews guidelines, down voting my above comment is not within the guidelines. Downvoting out of spite like that is more like what happens on reddit.

Turning?

It was predictable, just like the reddit comments section.

> I find it very difficult to reconcile w4ffl35's rampant individualism (which noticeably characterizes or differentiates the US from that of almost every other country I've been in

Collectivist thinking doesn't mean you are correct. You don't need to reconcile my "rampant individualism". I don't care if I were the only person on the planet who thinks this way (I'm not though... not by a long shot) - my opinion, life philosophy, religion and political affiliation all align. You might not be familiar with this sort of philosophy, and you clearly do not like it, that's fine,. You are entitled to your individual feelings on the matter. Still doesn't make me wrong.

Objectively though: no one owes anything to society. I can take my education and my creative works to my grave and the Universe doesn't care. Your original argument was from a moral high-ground that doesn't exist.

> I'd have bet on that if it weren't a certainty—no good if bookies' odds were only even money. :-)

I held these beliefs long before reading anything by Rand.

Also, the original premise of this entire argument, OP's post:

-----

    "My content is mine"

    How much of your education and upbringing did you get for free? You were brought up and educated by society to be in the fortunate position of being a content creator. You are now suggesting that you owe nothing back to society in return. 

-----

This person is stating that you OWE society something back for what you were given "for free"

First off, my stance: yes copyright is a monetization scheme. Good, I'm glad. That's what I'm after as a creator.

1. Education isn't free, if this person is referring to the State. I'm assuming it is an American as this discussion is about Copyright law. Taxation is theft by the government. The DOE is a waste of those stolen funds. The people attending also pay taxes. It isn't "free".

2. Even if education is free - let's say given - the person who got it for free received a gift. They are under no obligation to do anything with that gift.

3. I already stated that actions have consequences and laws have enforcers. A responsible person takes responsibility for their actions. A victim blames others. Either way, they both face the consequences of their actions (or not) with or without laws. I'm not sure how "no obligations" has translated to "no consequences" or "no responsibility" in your mind.

4. Cooperation, yes sure. Words yeah, participation yep. I never stated any of the things you're attempting to put in my mouth. This is why I don't like humans, as I stated earlier. They're manipulative without cause (or perhaps with cause in this case?). I said I'm under no obligation to anyone etc. within the context of the original comment. But yes, I'll play the game and take it deeper: I'm under no obligation period. But actions have consequences as I stated before you tried to play gotcha.

5. "If the world collectively stops caring about the importance of educating the next generation on the basis that they themselves got theirs?" Another thing I never implied or stated.

I just wanted to reply again now that I have more time. I could go on but its a waste. Stop trying to gotcha me.

I'm under no obligation to society to do anything. I choose to play nice because it is beneficial to me. What if everyone thought like me? Who knows, I don't fantasize about such things.

> You used your alternative education path as a reason to claim you have no obligations to society

No, I'm saying that State education is not a reason for obligation and FURTHERMORE I have no State education so assuming that one has State education and basing one's whole premise on something be owed to society because of it is ludicrous. And I apply that sentiment to any form of education. It matters not where the education comes from - the only thing owed is money for the educational materials and labor involved in teaching.

> You can't justify an argument by claiming its truth or falsity. Assume I disagree with you, but would like to understand why I should agree with you.

Sure.

> Doesn't this create a huge issue if everyone decides to believe this?

Not my problem.

> If the world collectively stops caring about the importance of educating the next generation on the basis that they themselves got theirs?

not my problem.

> Where does the lack of obligation end? i.e. are you obligated not to steal, not to respect laws, etc?

Correct, I am not obligated to, but if I choose to violate those things there will likely be consequences.

> Obligation is a word humans made up to describe something that most cooperative animals do without the capacity to explain to themselves what it is they are doing.

Ok.

> Cooperative species that haven't developed language exhibit behaviors that are automatic and expected in what must be the set of traits natural selection arrived at. Humans are unique in that we've invented words to describe these social interactions. There are plenty of reasons to believe/understand that cooperation and certain principles of fairness, mutual respect, reciprocity, etc. are more adaptive for the survival of the group/species and coexistence with other groups.

Ok.

> It sounds like we disagree fundamentally one one key point: participation in society imparts implicit expectations on the participant. My core issue with your stance is that it is untenable if chosen by everyone, i.e. it doesn't scale.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I got nothing for you. You want to feel morally justified, go for it lol. As a free human, I'm not under any obligations.

I'll take this further since you really don't seem to understand what I'm saying:

There is no such thing as an inherent ethical or moral obligation to society. There are actions and there are consequences. There are laws and there are enforcers. Without enforcers there are no laws. Without consequences actions are irrelevant.

Nothing is written, in law or in "moral code", which obligates a human to give away their creations because they "owe something to society", as the concept of "owing something to society" is not actually a real thing.

Originally you said I am obligated due to my education (which you also reiterate here), however you've now shifted the goal post: I am obligated to society because I gained education AND because I choose to participate in it.

I say my education is moot, and I am allowed to participate in society with zero obligation.

> As a member of a social species of animal, why do you believe this to be true?

Because it isn't false. Where is my obligation exactly? What "obligation" does any animal have? I am most certainly an animal, but I'm an intelligent one and I choose my obligations rather than letting others choose for me.

Edit to address your other points:

> if you’re participating in discussions on HN using a computing device, you have obligations.

No, I don't. I can do whatever I wish.

> The value of those books is not primarily monetary. Those books have utility because they are transmitting the collective knowledge of our species; ancestors whose thoughts and discoveries are the basis of our lives today.

Who cares? I'm obligated because they recorded their knowledge and I studied it? No, I am not obligated, I am educated.

> Many people never stop to consider or admit their dependence on this ancestral knowledge, or their own responsibilities as a beneficiary of it. Almost everything we come in contact with (unless you disconnect and go to that cave), comes with implied collective responsibilities.

Again, no it doesn't. This is lazy collectivist thinking.

> Paying taxes is the minimum legally required level of contribution

Taxation is actually theft and shouldn't be allowed. This isn't a contribution at all, it is theft by the government.

> but far from the only required activity to maintain a functioning society.

OK - sure. I never said it wasn't. I also don't care - it's not my problem, not my focus, not my "obligation".

> You might say that you don’t like this society

No, I just don't like humans.

> or would prefer a different one

No, I just don't like humans.

> but the only solution to these problems is to involve yourself in the process

Involving oneself in the process doesn't imply "obligation"

> which is the only path to changing the status quo.

No, not really. One can make a big splash being outside of "the process".