Sure, why not? I'd like to live in a system where the interest of the nation and the people are above your or someone else's ROI. I'd like to live in a system where if you try, like Elon Musk, to amass so much influence on the nation for your own benefits - you're gonna be Jack Ma'd.
> I'd like to live in a system where the interest of the nation and the people are above your or someone else's ROI.
Democracies are much closer to that than dictatorships as they don't need to care about the people and never did.
Crazy that you like a system where somebody can just get kidnapped. It never just affects the "right" people, but also a lot of other people. China is jailing and kidnapping a lot - easily tens of thousands of more - of their citizen to sustain control.
Someone else making the decision for you is a good description for laws, which we decided a long time ago we would in fact have. It's weird how people come out of the woodwork like this when those laws start to point at rich people.
Stupid obsolete laws that stay on the books forever is seemingly the American way and occasionally we refresh them with new even stupider laws that were obsolete before they were even proposed.
I never assaulted anyone, nor wanted to, just realized that I wasn't thinking healthily about the opposite sex. Maybe assault is the extreme end of the way I was going? At least that's what I always assumed. I don't know, but I think acting on such thoughts need even less empathy than what I had.
Don't get me wrong, I was being horrible and probably made someone or two uncomfortable.
Good thing about therapy is you don't get judged like the responses I get here.
I don't find it at all hard to believe, especially if the perpetrator is impaired with drink etc. Just as a drunk driver may fail to see a pedestrian that's in front of them, but that's not an excuse.
I think it's rare for people behaving badly to be fully aware that they're behaving badly, and proceeding anyways. Humans are constant rationalizers, and where sexual consent is the issue, there's a lot of ways for people to tell themselves it's okay. I've heard men say horrifying things in all seriousness. "You need to be a little forceful so she can say 'no' and then give in." "I kept going and she stopped saying no." "Women have rape fantasies, so they actually want it to happen"
I did not read it as OP assaulting women, but rather likely objectified most women as objects to fuck rather than people. (Sorry if that sounded blunt)
That's not what I got from his writing. That's normal behavior by both men and women. What OP described is manipulating them for his sexual pleasure, including making them do "non-conventional" things.
Take a look at any dating apps, there are hundreds of millions of people objectifying people. Being good or bad doesn't change the fact it's normalized.
it being normalized doesn't make it normal. the critical point here is that it should not be normal, and the only way to make it not normal is to say so. coming out and repeating that it is normal only helps to normalize it further. in my circles it is not normal. but in part that is because i stay away from people who think it is normal. and it could be that i am in the minority, but i hope not. either way, this needs to be called out and opposed, and my complaint to you is that you are not opposing it.
Well, you might want to revisit your beliefs on how folks' in the US experience their world.
There is certainly no excuse for bad behavior, and it is certainly the case that for many folks they absolutely know what they are doing.
If your point is that people are culpable for their bad behavior regardless of their claims about knowledge, then I agree.
At the same time most of the culture that raised me runs on people denying to themselves what they are doing, ranging from highly individualistic sublimations of the "fundamental attribution error" to renouncing culpability for their direct work at building the torment nexus.
The entirety of the mode of production here relies on ignoring how we exploit the people around us in almost every exchange so it's not at all surprising to me that, looking towards the OP, men in this culture commonly are able to hide their bad behaviors in layers of fantasy so deep that they aren't able to consciously understand how they are treating their lovers.
I don't know your context here, but if that kind of self-deception is news to you you might want to review the behavior of the people you're around (or your own), because either your threshold for bad behavior or your perceptions of peoples' capacity for self-delusion is perhaps a little low.
For me the greatest thing about KDE is that once you have it, you don't miss anything from any other DE or OS. It has everything! I find gnome and the new gtk4 apps definitely more beautiful but I end up running KDE always.
I ported a moderate sized java project to golang. Test suite runs order of magnitude faster now. There isn't much change in terms of the architecture. Pretty much the same algos and data structures. The whole dev tooling runs on a 16 gb mac without swapping now. I used vs code for both
IME they're both in a place where Rust is maybe ~40% faster for a decent CRUD web application server, but with go you need to write much lower level code to get there (e.g. using composable generic iterators will ruin your allocations, so it's all manual for loops). You can write idiomatic high level Scala and get the same performance. Which could be as simple as the go compiler offers no ability to force inlining and has way too low of a complexity threshold, but that basically makes reusable code unusable in high performance situations.
The whole go team's philosophy tends to also revolve around assuming their users don't know what they're doing, which is annoying. Like an inline keyword: thinking you know better than me doesn't mean I'm not going to inline it; it means I'm going to manually write it inline myself in the code, and then think the language sucks because it's tedious, error-prone, and verbose. Or they tend to mark lots of stuff private for no reason, and e.g. with TLS 1.3 they just ignore your config because they think they know better, etc.
Isn't this mostly about java cold start costs? It might be that other people are optimizing for steady-state performance, not transient startup performance.
One particular test was running for 20 minutes, doing repetitive calculations, hopefully enough to get jitted. It finishes much much faster now. I could have profiled to check what was going on but the test was simple and the dev tooling and the ram usage was a major concern for me. Also gradle upgrades were painful.
Java tooling taking up a lot of ram was a major motivation for me. I have done a lot of Scala as well. I don't think either Java or Scala in the real world beat go on performance for most cases. I don't doubt that in some cases jvm can do better but at least before Valhalla delivers all the promises, in real world, I am doubtful.
I have been a Java/Scala user almost for the majority of my career. I doubt I would pick jvm over golang going forward though. Also not having to deal with OOP is a plus.
I am not sure I understand your point. It's a meaningful comparison based on my situation. But even if it isn't, what are you arguing for? I change my use case rather than the tool/lang? Sorry if I misunderstood.
Right now the AI companies are selling their product at a loss to try to get us hooked. I think it's fair to describe the current situation as "unreasonably cheap", though free is a bit of a stretch.
It will be interesting to see what happens when human developers become cheaper than token maxxing AIs.
Interesting because by then codebases might have become so complex that these can no longer be modified, maintained nor understood by humans, so replacing AI with HI (human intelligence) will simply no longer possible.
That then represents a certain vendor lock-in or Mafia stand off: either keeping paying or have all the code go up in smoke.
Certainly not everyone will be facing this dilemma, but it certainly isn’t sci-fi considering the track-record of big tech.
Will the LLM tools be able to maintain this pile of code either? In my experience there seems to be some complexity maximum to a project that, once reached, the LLM tooling doesn't seem able to manage it either.
I keep wondering about this western worldview where they keep equating a militant failed state with the largest democracy in the world. I can't fathom why they do it.
Last 5-6 years: COVID surge in HN brings in more people
Last 3-4 years: General rise in AI topics which have broad appeal and brought in a lot of people
Last 2-3 years: More overtly political discourse on HN bringing in more people
Last 1-2 years: Bots start coming in, some are very obvious, but they have gotten better and better to the point its hard to tell anymore.
Last year: Sharp rise in shallow redditor-style comments, especially in cultural/political discussions comments that are snarky but contribute little to discussion outside of affirmations like "Laws are for poor people"
That would imply that the complainer has nothing useful to add to the discussion, whereas just saying that the website is probably ai generated and off putting to them is valuable info about the project.
I feel sorry that democracies are failing their citizenry like this.
reply