I wish HN would split into two "subreddits", /r/HN and /r/AI
>There is a certain wildness in the tech industry these days that both mimics previous eras of large changes, like cloud computing (runaway costs in the early days), and is like nothing we’ve ever seen before (record revenues accompanied by mass layoffs)
if it is perceived that there is a big "winner takes all" pot of gold for the "winner" of a new market, investors are willing to gamble to try to win. If they fail, it is rich people losing money by giving jobs to many people along the way, so the population here who wants nothing more than taxing the rich, why they should embrace that.
When agriculture was invented, there were mass layoffs of hunters and gatherers. and the same with buggy whips when cars were invented. Yes, life has some bumps but it's unavoidable and adapting to it is for the long term good. Structure your life around family and friends and don't overextend yourself (too much house, too much car) and you will be fine.
Three... bring back the original HN ("/r/startup") of hackers doing actual innovation and entrepreneurial stuff. It's the one that existed well before all the musings about painting by people who have never picked up a brush.
>before all the musings about painting by people who have never picked up a brush
I can't tell if this is a clever dig that comically undercuts the premise of the previous line, or it's an unaware unironic attempt to separate off a perceived un-serious type of poster.
First things first - have you ever considered making a tech/art blog focused on early company dynamics where you can pontificate and share these kinds of insightful musings?
That would be sweet. Same for GitHub /trending and /trending-ai.
Someone at my company said, the great thing about wanting to learn about AI is that every podcast now-a-days is about AI. I do not think that is a good thing. I want to learn things of substance, and of varying topics. I don't want every thing I read and/or listen to online to be about AI.
for what it's worth, I too would like to learn about AI, and I find very few people's opinions are worth listening to, despite a deafening cacophany of people who think they belong to that rarefied club. Turns out, the basic issues most people who work with the stuff everyday grapple with is not, in fact, a useful topic for your piece. Unless you have actual relevant data (hint: you might think you do but you don't) it's not going to be worth listening too; at best, neutral, and at worse actively harmful.
> I wish HN would split into two "subreddits", /r/HN and /r/AI
This is what everyone wants when some new thing that's ridiculously over-hyped comes along. The bubble will burst and it'll calm down. It seems like only yesterday that front page was filled with crypto/blockchain/web3 bullshit.
That's the truth. It'll be everywhere. I guess moderation and voting will have to keep quality content surfaced, but at the rate AI slop can be generated that might get very difficult.
Not to be too pedantic, but my understanding is that the transition to agriculture was not a singular event like this. Afaik this process of forced technological displacement is a relatively recent development connected to the rise of capitalism.
Plenty of losers. See native americans. Sorry about your generational hunting ground, white man would like to ranch cattle and therefore you should leave or eat lead.
It's a typical colonial take on agriculture. People flourished without it but we seem to be stuck with revisionist history around the topic.
People also seem to think hunter-gatherers were always struggling, and while it did happen, they seem to miss that there are still billions of people lacking food security because agriculture isn't as easy or prolific as we tend to believe. It's really hard, especially in certain parts of the world.
Oh well, these biases permeate everything. I have plenty of them too.
>There is a certain wildness in the tech industry these days that both mimics previous eras of large changes, like cloud computing (runaway costs in the early days), and is like nothing we’ve ever seen before (record revenues accompanied by mass layoffs)
if it is perceived that there is a big "winner takes all" pot of gold for the "winner" of a new market, investors are willing to gamble to try to win. If they fail, it is rich people losing money by giving jobs to many people along the way, so the population here who wants nothing more than taxing the rich, why they should embrace that.
When agriculture was invented, there were mass layoffs of hunters and gatherers. and the same with buggy whips when cars were invented. Yes, life has some bumps but it's unavoidable and adapting to it is for the long term good. Structure your life around family and friends and don't overextend yourself (too much house, too much car) and you will be fine.