For the best experience on desktop, install the Chrome extension to track your reading on news.ycombinator.com
Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | history | callmeal's commentsregister

Yup - family dogs eat what we do. Funny story - my mom's dog will not eat rice unless there's also fish (leftover bones will do). Rice+fish - bowl is cleaned up. Rice+meat - only the meat is picked and eaten.

>rice is consumed in larger amounts by poorer people who can't afford real food

Um, rice is real food too, right?


>How does this happen?

Well, you see a black man became president. And what's worse, he was a really good one, articulate, kind, humble, and emodied all the values we cherish. And that broke people so much they would rather burn everything down than build on what he did.

Don't forgot how long Trump and other republicans went on about "birth certificates" during Obama's first term.


>No amount of beating low level employees will change whether they can accept pdf sent by email or not.

Yes, but a boss being unable to receive a fax because the machine is "otherwise occupied" may do that.


I highly doubt it. Not accepting PDF files from random email addresses that send to your very publicly listed email address is a smart policy. One angry jerk trying to DoS the fax machine is not going to change the policy. At best, it'd cause them to ditch the paper and toner and upgrade so that all incoming faxes are automatically scanned and sent to an email box.


"Government"? Let's call it what it is. ITYM "Republicans".


The shortage of ATC staff dates back to the Clinton Administration. It’s just hard to attract people into a 5+ year training program for a very stressful job where you might get bounced near the end with no payout and no transferrable job skills.


No the shortage goes back to Regan when their justified strike was busted. It ended the PATCO “union” and was a negative turning point for labour unions in general.


I think you mean Reagan. He removed the union for the ATC not Clinton.

Honestly, you can generally just blame Reagan for about anything. A presidency about weaking labor, strengthening Iran, and ballooning the deficit is uh never going to leave good traces.


Reagan did the right thing in that case. Government employees should never have collective bargaining rights. Public employee unions are contrary to the interests of taxpayers.


Over the course of the past year, I think we've seen more evidence that the federal workforce's collective bargaining rights aren't strong enough. Workers' employment contracts are being ignored, employees are being threatened, constructively terminated, all in an attempt to enact RIFs without following the law.

Things are happening to the federal workforce right now that aren't even legal in the private sector.


If contracts are violated then the impacted parties can seek redress through the courts. Government employee unions aren't needed for that.


You have to have your contract violated for a significant amount before you can notionally afford to hire a lawyer to fight it out. Below 5 figures it doesn't make much financial sense to do that for most people, so they just eat it instead. It's how a lot of "theft of wages" and other mistreatment happens so often. Lawyers don't take those cases for free, and court isn't free either. And you're not going to instantly appear at the top of the docket for something small like that especially if the government buries you in procedure. They can do that for years.

But sure, yeah you can seek redress through the courts.


The result of some of the issues at hand might not even be damages, but simply to realign policies with what the law requires.... which may no longer be relevant for someone who lost a job a year ago and has since moved on out of necessity.

And this admin doesn't simply stop an initiative when courts block them, they find a new "creative interpretation" to do the same thing, and carry on for however long it takes the next trial to happen.


Suing the federal government solo is an insurmountable task for most people -- even more so while they're being constructively terminated. Employee unions have been suing on their workers behalf over the past year, but the executive branch can drag out federal trials for a lot longer than people can stay without a job.


Centralization of all power in the government is also contrary to the interests of the taxpayers.

Every time i see an anti-union article, its usually about unions that do good union things...

But noone ever complains about the police union. It's always the public goods people like ATC or teachers.


People complain about police unions all the time, it's just their complainants don't overlap much with the people who complain about private sector unions.


This is a discussion with nearly unanimous agreement that poor ATC working conditions are causing Americans to die in preventable aviation accidents.

Maybe this is the one evidence-driven case where you can be open minded about the value of a public employee union?


Nope. Public employee unions bring zero value and this incident is not evidence to support such unions. Relying on unions to act as ersatz safety regulators would be stupid, just completely the wrong approach. Decisions about things like ATC procedures, staffing levels, and training standards should be the responsibility of apolitical career bureaucrats.


Why would a career bureaucrat be a more efficient way to figure out how to attract and retain ATC workers, ass opposed to a union representing those ATC workers?

Your proposal intentionally injects inefficiency and noise into the system because you don't like some political boogeyman.


Public employee unions are contrary to the interests of taxpayers

This is not obvious on its face, but also, paying taxes is not my only concern wrt the civil society in which I live.


The dead people on that airplane are a pretty strong contradiction too this.

I’d love to see ATC funded by usage fees (some kind of “landing toll”) instead of the government (with some kind of licensing / oversight - like how pilots and pilot licensing works). The current system clearly is not working.

The government is a great tool to regulate but not execute.

If the regulations are crazy let the people who have to implement them strike.


Does your comment also include the police union(s)?


Yes absolutely. They're a perfect example of the unique issues w/ collective bargaining for public services.


Yes, absolutely. No government employees should ever have collective bargaining rights. If they want better wages and working conditions then they can advocate for those through the political process, the same as any other citizen.


Collective bargaining rights shouldn’t even be a separate thing. They’re just a natural consequence of the fact that free speech is protected and slavery is illegal. The idea of an illegal strike is bizarre.


In your suggestion any other citizen has collective bargaining at their disposal, do they not?


This adversarial mindset isn't conducive to good governance.

Of course public employee unions have conflicting interests with taxpayers in general. But that's not a bad thing, unless you subscribe to the peabrained 'everyone is ripping us off mentality' of some professional whiners and presidents. There is this image deliberately created of federal government employees who show up for work and collect a huge check for doing nothing except resting their feet on the desk all day, but I don't see any basis for believing this.

In reality, it makes a lot of sense for government employees to communicate information upward about safety and working conditions, not least because managers (many of whom are political appointees) have their own career interests and those too are not always aligned with taxpayers. It's weird to me that people demonize the bottom tier employees while turning a blind eye to the economic incentives for the managerial and secretarial class in government. Look at the recently departed secretary of Homeland Security, who racked up hundreds of millions of questionable expenses.


Yeah the job should say have 10 year income guarantee. If there are no jobs you get paid. We must be talking peanuts. Just do one less invasion per decade. Can call ATC defense spend if you like :)

Not just attract, it also has very high standards. And many people fail out.


Somehow Europe manages to do that well enough.


ATC/GTC seems like a really strong candidate for partial automation with recent advances in AI. Obviously we'd still want some expert humans in the loop for exceptional situations, but I have to imagine there's a way to significantly reduce the cognitive burden/stress for these folks.


Recent advances in AI aren't useful for routine operations in safety critical domains such as aviation because we don't know how to verify and test them. An LLM is effectively an unpredictable black box with unknown failure modes. There is opportunity for greater automation but probably based on classical deterministic programming.


In addition to this, LLMs are also simply too slow right now to deliver the results ATC would need.

Ridiculous to see people acting like LLMs are a silver bullet for every problem without putting any thought into what that would actually look like.


This goes much deeper than just A vs B. As long as you Americans keep thinking this way, it will all remain the same sadly.


No, I mean government. This has been a problem for a long time and there hasn't been any serious effort to improve the situation by anyone.


Yup, it's been a problem ever since Regan (a Republican) fired over 11,000 ATC employees. And by "anyone" ITYM "republicans" again, because Democrats have been trying for years.

See this article from 2017: https://www.govexec.com/oversight/2017/06/house-democrats-in...


How many years since Reagan have Democrats held both chambers of Congress and the White House? It’s a few. And yet we’re still here.


That's because all the Democrats are Republicans.

"”The truth of the matter is that my policies are so mainstream that if I had set the same policies that I had back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican,” - Barack Obama [0]

[0] https://thehill.com/policy/finance/137156-obama-says-hed-be-...


This is not a statement of Republicans and Democrats being the same, but a statement of Republicans going off the deep end in during and after Reagan.

Obama was a very moderate Democrat for his time. If you go back in time a moderate Democrat and Republican were similar because the "center" was more reasonable. Now the "center" is just people that are ashamed that they vote Republican.


If we accept that, then "government" and "Republicans" would be pretty much synonymous, so my original point stands. (Not that I accept it, but even if I did.)


I think your original point stands; I was not intending to contradict it, only to offer a possible explanation. The Overton window of what is seen as possible and necessary in US policy has shifted from, say, Social Security and Medicare, to tax cuts. IMO, party labels do more to obscure than reveal in these days, whatever the awfulnesses and benefits of either party may be.


Yes. Reagan was a Republican.


>Somewhat creepy, but if you're imagining that this thing is conscious and knows that it's in doom... yeah definitely not.

I don't know if it knows it's in doom - looks like all it knows is to shoot when startled. More than creepy imo.


Yes. It's like exercise. Or eating healthy. I don't enjoy working out but I should really be doing it. I really enjoy eating sweets, but I should not be doing that all the time.


An analogy isn't an answer to "why", it's a literary device to make it easier to understand a concept.

Even if talking to people is beneficial (I can accept that), you're also shaming people for being introverts. Nobody should be faulted for enjoying me-time. It isn't even harmful. No, it's not like eating too many sweets.


The "predict the next word" to a current llm is at the same level as a "transistor" (or gate) is to a modern cpu. I don't understand llms enough to expand on that comparison, but I can see how having layers above that feed the layers below to "predict the next word" and use the output to modify the input leading to what we see today. It is turtles all the way down.


It’s a good comparison. It’s about abstraction and layers. Modern LLMs aren’t just models, they’re all the infrastructure around promoting and context management and mixtures of experts.

The next-word bit may be slightly higher than an individual transistor, possibly functional units.


There is a big difference, because I understand how those transistors produce a picture on a screen, I don’t understand how LLMs do what they do. The difference is so big that the comparison is useless.


I understand how transistors work too, and how they can result in a picture on a screen. But I think most people outside the software / electronics areas don't and to them it's just magic.


Humans are future predictors. Our vision systems, our mental models of our careers. People that predict the future tend to do well financially.

Now the machines are getting better than we are. It's exciting and a little bit terrifying.

We were polymers that evolved intelligence. Now the sand is becoming smart.


>Now the machines are getting better than we are

Then AI companies should stop looking for investors and instead play stock markets with all that predictive powers!


The real money is in using the models to build utility and money-making companies. You're removed from orders of magnitude in upside potential if you have to wait for the public markets.


> money-making companies

You mean, money sucking companies, right?

>You're removed from orders of magnitude in upside potential if you have to wait for the public markets.

because that won't work. That is why!


> You mean, money sucking companies, right?

Is that what you (and all people) are in your job function? A money suck?

Do you ever buy anything for food, shelter, and clothing? Do you have hobbies?

Capitalism means we don't have to all be hunter-gatherers, and I'm pretty keen on that trade.

> because that won't work. That is why!

This is the forum for a venture capital firm. A lot of the folks here build things with the intention of creating value and getting compensated for that value creation. Other valid options are sitting at home and playing video games, reading a book, or posting on HN.

I like working on problems where I'm the customer and where I would buy the product if it existed. Turns out, there tend to be other people who would buy my software too.


I get paid for what I do. Not for what I promise to do.


>Authoritarian central planning isn't an inherent trait of engineers and nor should we aspire for it to be.

I would say that for long-term engineering projects (building bridges etc) authoritarian central planning is a required trait.


> Trying to reduce China v America to engineers vs lawyers is so reductive it's just mind blowing this keeps getting repeated.

Think of it as engineers vs non-engineers (lawyers/mba types/etc). We complain about that on here all the time (ex. boeing). It's where the priorities are: is it on making things better or making more money? In an ideal world, it would be both. Unfortunately here, it is not otherwise enshittification would not be a thing.


It feels like people accept this criticism when it props up their position - for an American (software) engineer, companies run by _American engineers_ vs companies run by American non-engineers is an obvious case of engineering is better (see criticism of Boeing); but when it's Chinese engineer vs American non-engineer, the "American" bit is more important.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search:

HN For You