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 | pydry's commentsregister

I doubt the average person gives it much thought at all.

This certainly isn't a result of democratic overreach by a concerned group of citizens. No demographic is demanding this.

It's one of those "create the infrastructure for stasi 2.0" the epstein elite tries to periodically ram down our throats ironically using "think of the children" to manufacture consent.

The last time they did this they contracted saatchi and saatchi to run an a disturbing campaign: https://londondaily.com/revealed-uk-gov-t-plans-publicity-bl...


>see nonstop "Israel bad" "Chuck Schumer is feckless" or "jews control

9 times out of 10 somebody who perceives a huge amount of anti Semitism online wrapped up in criticism of israel will absolutely categorically refuse to condemn the genocide.

When they refuse, this is how you can tell that it is simply projection and disguised islamophobia.

Israel is also pretty open about funding bots to spread that kind of message both offline and online.


I've yet to hear an argument that argues that software engineers can be replaced by AI that doesnt boil down to slop apologism, inability to detect slop or simple gaslighting.

These are things I've come to expect from bots, clueless journalists, clueless juniors, clueless expert beginners and clueless members of the professional managerial class but almost never from experienced software engineers.

To be fair, seasoned software engineers always seem to get shouted down online by the former group which is louder and more numerous so you could argue that we "lost" the argument.

Meanwhile big tech's vibe coded monstrosities are increasingly exploding all around us in ever more humiliating ways while the humans who had this tech rammed down their throats get thrown under the bus.

This undeserved halo effect over AI is maintained in order to keep the needle from pricking the ginormous stock market bubble that hinges upon the religious belief in the lie AI Will Replace Us All Soon.


The argument is "Software Engineer" sounds like "Programmer" to me and "Programming" is just typing lines of code, AI can do all that typing quicker than a human so there we go.

Currently leading an Integration that for the most part needs no new code written and the CEO is breathing down my neck telling me to cut my 4 week estimate down to 1 because "can't i just use AI like the other firms do?".

There's a morbid part of me that wants to give him what he wants and let claude make critical process decisions on internal processes that are very domain specific and have no online documentation, but alas I would rather not have the project go down in flames so I smile and nod.


Doctor sounds like Nurse, which sounds like applying bandages and taking temperatures.

Physicist sounds like Lab Technician, which sounds like managing samples.

Electrical Engineer sounds like Electrician, which sounds like installing a bunch of wire.

Stunt Driver sounds like Uber Driver which sounds like pushing pedals and turning a wheel.

It’s fun to pretend the world is much simpler than it is.


Much less emasculating than accepting that all that weird tech mumbo jumbo that those overpaid senior engineers babble about actually has a deeper meaning and is not just there to artificially slow down the all important company growth!

Listen: nobody goes to college, gets a 4 year stem degree, and builds a career up just to not be able to slow company growth.

> I've yet to hear an argument that argues that software engineers can be replaced by AI that doesnt boil down to slop apologism, inability to detect slop or simple gaslighting.

That, or extreme extrapolation from events that form a vanishingly tiny part of the job of a software engineer. "Last week my AI solved this amazing software problem that I had struggled with" very quickly becomes "the AI is better at software than I am". Any pushback suggesting that the fact that something (or someone) did one tiny part of your job better than you one time does not mean you should be replaced, is quickly met with "yeah, but that's today, imagine how amazing the models will be in n years".

You can't win a debate with this much moving of goalposts.


You tend to see that more for the more high margin and branded supplements.

The profit margins on creatine are not high.


Do you?? Show me an HN thread where half the comments are paid for

How can you accurately detect what is and isn't a not?

You seem very confident you can tell the difference so I thought I'd ask first.


In my view, you're the one claiming to be able to tell the difference! You said, "You tend to see that more..."

...which I took to mean that there were threads where you can look at the comments and categorize them into the two categories and then assert that the size of the paid comments category was larger on posts for high margin than it is for low margin.

Like, it makes sense that the incentive is stronger in that case, but that's not what you said. You said "you tend to see that more"


If I did show you such a thread you'd likely just say "yeah I don't think any of them are paid".

So what's the point? You've just confirmed very clearly that your criteria for what constitutes a paid comment is your idiosyncratic opinion. you refused to give criteria beyond "convince me".


The bifurcation is probably mostly just along the lines of slop tolerance than whether they "like" to code or whether they're a boomer or whatever.

There are a lot of people with high slop tolerance and who are seemingly prepared to endure the side effects of that.


Most executives make commercially disadvantageous decisions in exchange for more power.

It's practically a law of business: executives prioritize their power first and their company's profit margins second. This is one reason why outsourcing coding was so popular despite not saving money and being so commercially disastrous - execs were in the driving seat with that relationship much more than they were with us.

Despite what some people will tell you about how the home assistant consumer segment "doesn't matter" (it does) it really is more about the tangibility of control over data vs the intangibility of lost consumer goodwill.

Companies are not profit maximizing at all costs. The shareholders and the executives are not a singular body they have different and sometimes wildly divergent interests.


I haven't seen anyone put this dynamic in such a clear and succinct description - the fact is that a lot of people (especially corporate managers) just hate the loss of control and will go out of their way to ban people accessing their things "wrong" - even if it's counterproductive for their larger corporation or a goal.

Yea, I don't really see the revenue potential here. They seem to be doing this purely to force developers to have a "formal relationship" with them, and to grief all other developers who don't.

Same mentality behind companies who insist users have an "account" to use their otherwise-unconnected products.


Companies that don't care about code quality always care about the side effects of poor code quality. They just can't connect the dots.

Not true at all. They do care about what's fashionable and right now what is fashionable is AI.

Just because they're in charge of multi billion dollar corporations doesn't mean that they don't get distracted by shiny baubles like a 3 year old or that they don't feel the pressure of being "cool" like a teenager. They're not LLMs.


Land value taxes don't discourage desirable behavior when raised.

Property taxes might discourage construction but if land values are high enough then property taxes approximate land value taxes.

Raising income tax on the other hand discourages working even when it is set very low. This is one which ought to be lowered if anything.

tl;dr it doesnt work the same way for every tax.


Are there good sources on income tax discouraging working? My rudimentary google searches are mixed, between it being a disincentive, and forcing people to work more for the same income.

>Land value taxes don't discourage desirable behavior

Are you serious? LVTs expressly incentivizes landlords to kick out "grandfathered in" developments and uses in favor of redevelopment and sale for that purpose.

But those grandfathered in developments and uses are exactly what made the place valuable in the first place and you need some amount of them to remain.


Redevelopment often mitigates housing scarcity in general, including for existing residents. They may have to move to a slightly smaller apartment within a generally much improved area, which usually leaves them better off. This is especially true for LVT, which amounts to a decrease in property tax for the improvements to land.

They may have to move to a slightly smaller apartment within a generally much improved area, which usually leaves them better off.

Good luck selling this to voters.


I mean, I guess if you're a NIMBY who wants to inhibit the construction of more affordable housing that's a bad thing.

Nothing inhibits construction like creating a system where all the existing land owners stand to get taxed more if they allow development.

And the land value tax does the exact opposite of that.

If you sit on an underdeveloped plot of land in a high value location your tax bill will exceed your rental income.

The land is worthless to you. So you'll sell up to somebody who will make something of it.


It's definitely a form of psychosis - contact with reality has been lost in both cases.

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

Search:

HN For You