You perhaps have a unique neurotype that wouldn't experience the intended positive revelation from the reveal. You are still ruining something for many more others than you are helping.
Please consider accepting what your critics are telling you, and remove the spoiler.
I think it's academic since the edit window for the comment has closed.
I do have some sympathy for the frustration. I don't think neurotype has anything to do with it. Struggling to phrase this in a non-spoilery way, but I think individual experience really depends on where they are in the game at the time of the reveal. I almost quit because of this as well - very glad I didn't.
This could be explained without spoilers though. Something like "There's a moment in the first few hours where you may want to quit. DON'T. Stick with it, I promise it's worth it."
That's fucking bonkers that nothing in the system could see this as unusual and worthy of throttling. The embarrassment of this -- that a company LITERALLY SELLING machine learning services and expertise -- cannot spot such a thing... This should have led them to deal with this internally and refund it. Just... Wow Google.
and the notifications can be delayed because the spending system is not updated in real-time, so even if you have a Cloud Task triggering on spending to disable the project it may be too slow and several thousands may already be spent.
Bunny.net purports to have a pay-as-you-go prepaid credit system that sounds like it works the way people want, and with their description of the way it works probably being sufficient to be legally enforceable if it turns out that it actually works differently and you were to end up with a surprise bill from them. And evidently it really does work that way; see this post from a couple weeks ago: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47676416>
The only other provider known to work that way is NearlyFreeSpeech.NET, which serves a completely different market segment (so much so that it might as well not even be considered the same kind of product/service).
I suspect there might not be love for this angle here, but there's something else that follows this format: God. Spirituality. Religion.
I'm not religious is any traditional sense, but I'd argue that it's not always the hallmark of a bad dynamic when a system always asks of you to do inner work when failures happen in contact with the real world. Sometimes that's a healthier mode than the alternative -- externalizing the blame, and blaming the system (or the god).
I suspect there a very abstract game theoretic conversation that could be had about this :)
> I suspect there might not be love for this angle here, but there's something else that follows this format: God. Spirituality. Religion.
Yes, and that's because God, spirituality and religion make fuzzy truth claims and can be used to argue for and justify anything. God can be used as the excuse to start a genocide and the inspiration to stop it, spirituality can be the way for wounded people to work with their trauma and the vehicle for people without scruples to sell horoscopes or some shit, religion (the same religion) was used to justify and uphold slavery and to fight for its end.
They are containers for our politics, our lifestyle, for who we are and for who we hope to be.
The Agile manifesto is a series of statements in the form "we like X more than Y." It doesn't say anything. To make it mean anything you have to project onto it a framework of interpretation that exists independently of the "sacred text" itself.
So yeah, they are similar, and that's because Agile, sociologically, works like a religion.
when it comes to some diets, some only work if you follow them wholeheartedly, like meat only diet, one speck of peppar might be enough to cause an inflammation. But generally you can't take a process that worked well for another person or company and apply it on you or your company. Like for example a training program, you can't just take a training program from a professional athlete and reuse it on your kid and expect him/her to become as good as the pro. Programs and processes are very individual tailored.
I still doubt that your average person would see any real health benefits from eating only meat, even if they ate enough organ meats to actually get all their vitamins and minerals (the lack of fiber is a particular concern) but I guess you're right that there's a version of an "all meat died" that doesn't promptly kill you through malnutrition, you got me there.
It's really a hard-core diet and not for the average joe, the health benefits however are great: Fat loss, especially around your belly (because belly fat act as a protective barrier, and will go away if you don't eat carbs) and the inflammatory processes in the body will go down a lot. You will look more healthy and feel stronger. Just make sure you get enough calories, so you need to eat a lot of meat. You have to spend hours every day just eating.
A process that fails when you slightly diverge is process that fails. Because all human orgs diverge from stated process here or there. Including army which puts huge amounts of resources into making people comply with everything.
From the perspective of a Canadian, this feels like an absolutely mad-cap crazy comment. What did you live through?
EDIT: with as little judgement as I'm sincerely trying to have, I would strongly recommend reviewing your information diet and neurotypical predispositions to investigate why you might believe this. (E.g. I am predisposed to support an underdog, and need to gutcheck myself on that regularly)
Sure. Just like Hitler offing himself; just an expression of trust in the system! "Oh no, I lost in the marketplace of ideas, time to make the ultimate concession!"
> I’ve never said that just because you’re invoking the Nazis you’re losing the argument. If you’re going to compare somebody to Hitler or the Nazis or raise the specter of the Holocaust, be sure you’ve got your facts right. But there’s nothing categorically wrong with Biden’s — or anyone else’s — comparison of Trump calling people vermin or talking about blood poisoning to Hitler.
Trump went because House/Senate Republicans at the time hadn't yet done the 180 they have since; the support wasn't there. It has nothing to do with his faith in the democratic process.
But in the end he went. The system worked exactly like it was supposed to. There is room to challenge results, that keeps the system honest. When he lost the challenges, he willingly stepped down.
This is exactly how the system is designed to work.
I understand the visceral hatred of Trump, but I don't know why every conversation about him has to degrade the same way this one has, with people using emotional-manipulation like evoking Hitler.
He tried for a redo of the Brooks Brothers Riot in the US Capitol. He demanded the Georgia governor change their result. He recruited a slate of fake electors.
In no world was his transition of power lawful and orderly.
Yeah, Trump is not normal, not playing normal politics. He's the worst form of opportunist.
Like yesterday, does anyone actually think he thought he was posting a meme about being a doctor? No, he was faith testing whether he could LARP as Jesus, and he couldn't. He's the fucking worst form of liar, as he even deceives himself. He's a mentally sick man, and a society that excuses his behavior is sick as well.
I believe that when people are in high contact with things that look to the uninformed like serendipity, it's a sign of something in them as a sensory organ, and something they are tapped into in the information environment... though perhaps we don't have good enough language to label it yet.
Whatever a "sense of smell" is for information (and surprise, and comedy, and aliveness...), this confirmed to me that Stewart Brand totally has it.
I actually loved this, and felt moved. While reading, my mind fired rapidly through dozens of personal memes (i.e. tags for my regularly trod thought-paths) that I keep in my knowledge-base. This is the 30mb text corpus where I log all my work and peer conversations and thoughts, and (amongst other things) where I think through what I would consider my spiritual practices... my sensemaking around complex systems, including Daoist teachings. This text basically entangled itself with the work I am doing at the outer edges of my own knowing, where I am working on my rawest and most fragile but precious thoughts.
I don't think this is trite, I think there is something in this that is in contact with "living structure" (in the Christopher Alexander sense[1]), and much exists outside the edges of the text.
To those who dislike this, I am genuinely curious: Would you say you dislike metaphor? Do you tend to feel disconnected and lacking resonance with poetic writing?
EDIT: I experience this writing as giving me many quiet A's, or perhaps a smell of A's in a given direction of thought. I interpret others here as getting either B's or U's, in the sense of this A/B/U system: https://openresearchinstitute.org/onboarding/A_B_U.html
Agreed, I found this essay engaging and emotional. While I can see why the unusual style might not be someone's cup of tea, I don't agree at all with the criticism that this is bad writing. It had a Haruki Murakami ethereal feel that I am quite fond of.
Regarding other comments in this thread, the moral panic over AI writing has mostly passed me by. While I certainly have a philosophical preference for things written by an actual human, I don't care to invest the bandwidth in analyzing every single thing I read for hints of llm patterns. If I like it, I'll keep reading. If not, I won't. Sometimes discontinuing a piece of writing also aligns with obvious AI use, but that is generally a secondary issue.
Do you mind me asking what type of system do you use for keeping these notes, the 30mb text corpus with conversations and journaling? Are you using txt, an app like Logseq? I flip flop between apps for this sort of thing and then annoyingly the building of a "system" sucks up my time rather than writing and logging and reflecting. It's a struggle for me any advice would be much appreciated :)
Thanks for asking! I have become an infinitely better human and friend since starting.
I used Roam, but would like to migrate to Logseq for reasons of privacy and self-sovereignty :)
My most helpful meta tags are:
[[People I Meet]] for quick descriptions of everyone I meet, even if they don't get their own page
[[versus]] for dualities I notice and want to track, like [[expansion vs collapse]] [[away vs toward]] [[linear vs cloud narrative]] etc
[["as" metaphors]] metaphors that return a lot, like [[religion as seed]] or [[god as hologram]] or [[empathy as gravity]] etc
[[reminds me of]] which I sometimes use to make connection, but often just crossed
[[self comment]] for tracking my comments around the internet
[[new tag]] for tracking when a significant new tag occurs to me for first time
[[methinks]] (for my inline thoughts on articles whose content I paste into a page, which I do for most things I read, so I can always find the content that shapes me, and my own thoughts/highlights in relation to that)
[[toread]] [[towatch]] for books and films/video
[[tears]] [[fears]] [[fave snacks]] [[star sign]] [[faves]] and a "family" bullet for things that are important in their family life.
And every day, my optional top-level bullets are: todos, finds, logs, thoughts (pretty much everything fits under these, and most under "logs", because I like to track context of where I was, who I was with)
I started just using logs every day to keep track of things I did, because during pandemic I felt like I was doing nothing at all every day except being depressed. Everything grew from that :)
The exciting and interesting to me is that we'll probably need to engage "chaos engineering" principles, and encode intentional fallibility into these agents to keep us (and them) as good collaborators, and specifically on our toes, to help all minds stay alert and plastic
If that comes to pass, we'll be rediscovering the same principles that biological evolution stumbled upon: the benefits of the imperfect "branch" or "successive limited comparison" approach of agentic behaviour, which perhaps favours heuristics (that clearly sometimes fail), interaction between imperfect collaborators with non-overlapping biases, etc etc
> Lindblom’s paper identifies two patterns of agentic behavior, “root” (or rational-comprehensive) and “branch” (or successive limited comparisons), and argues that in complicated messy circumstances requiring coordinated action at scale, the way actually effective humans operate is the branch method, which looks like “muddling through” but gradually gets there, where the root method fails entirely.
> a firefighting truck was responding to a separate incident on a flight that had aborted its takeoff and reported a strange odour on board. Air traffic control recordings suggested the odour on the plane had made some flight attendants feel ill.
Not making light of this, but I imagine there is another story of the person who had some strange scented product that led the flight attendants to play it safe and phone it in. There may very be someone whose strong cologne or forgetfulness to leave a chemical at home resulted in 2 deaths :(
It may have been a fume event which is very dangerous for everyone onboard.
> A fume event occurs when bleed air used for cabin pressurisation and air conditioning in a pressurised aircraft is contaminated by fluids such as engine oil, hydraulic fluid, anti-icing fluid, and other potentially hazardous chemicals.
Anyone else think that if you're going on an airplane, you shouldn't be wearing cologne or perfume? Antiperspirant/deodorant, absolutely. But giving yourself a strong scent when you're going to spend a few hours tightly-packed with other people feels rude.
Please consider accepting what your critics are telling you, and remove the spoiler.
reply