It’s common for someone in a flare of an IBD to be unable to eat vegetables without irritation. You should seek to understand the root cause of an individual’s experience instead of invalidating their experience due to your own.
If they become healthier then they should be able to increase vegetable intake which will further increase their health.
You can argue on the basis of principles that tourism is bad. The fact remains that tourism cannot be stopped cold-turkey without massive job loss as seen during covid. If you wish to stop tourism and preserve the well being of the people that depend on its income, then you need a plan for what replaces tourism and how to re-skill your workforce. There’s clearly no such plan in place.
The only time I go to see how ancient cultures lived without electricity and weaved their own clothes in in museums and tourist attractions. They’re also typically incredibly boring.
Many people find interest and meaning in learning about all the ways that people have lived, and the things they did and made. Great museums are a source of pride for many of the world's largest cities, and widely regarded as culturally important and valuable.
This isn't even about ancient cultures, it's about valuing the product that comes from a persons work. Valuing their time and labor, valuing the craft itself.
Compared to a "tribal wood carving designed by GPT" a real world piece of wood is, well, real. The novelty of everything wears off eventually so it won't matter if GPT could still show you nearly infinite carving designs. Without that being turned into actual physical objects by people, they are disposable bytes of data with no real meaning.
Neovim already can’t keep up by itself. The future of vim won’t be as a standalone application, but as a plugin into other IDEs. The support for Neovim and VSCodeVim within VSCode greatly reduces the utility of a standalone app for anything other than edits to very small projects.
It does appear to only support Bloom, which makes it currently useless since there are much better models with fewer parameters that you can run on a single machine.
However, the project has a lot of appeal. Not sure how different architectures will get impacted by network latency but presumably you could turn this into a HuggingFace type library where different models are plug-n-play. The wording of their webpage hints that they’re planning on adding support for other models soon.
> However, the project has a lot of appeal. Not sure how different architectures will get impacted by network latency but presumably you could turn this into a HuggingFace type library where different models are plug-n-play.
I love this "bittorent" style swarms compared to the crypto-phase where everything was pay-to-play. People just sharing resources for the community is what the Internet needs more of.
at some point if you want more resources and have them available with the least latency possible, some sort of pay-to-play market will need to appear
even if the currency is computing resources that you have put into the network before (same is true for bittorrent at scale, but most usage of bittorrent is medium/high latency - which makes the market for low-latency responses not critical in that case)
> at some point if you want more resources and have them available with the least latency possible, some sort of pay-to-play market will need to appear
This already exists, it’s corporations. BitTorrent is free, while AWS S3 - or Netflix ;) - is paid.
OpenAI has a pay to use API while this petals.ml “service” is free.
Corporate interests and capitalism fill the paid-for resource opportunities well. I want individuals on the internet to be altruistic and share things because it’s cool not because they’re getting paid.
AWS, or Google Collab etc resemble more paid on demand cloud instances of something like petals.ml than they resemble Netflix.
I don't see the Netflix model working here, unless they can't somehow own the content rights at least partially. Or, as it happens right now with the likes of OpenAI and Midjourney, they sustain a very obvious long term technical advantage. But long term, it's not clear to me it will be sustainable. Time will tell.
If an engineer with 20 years of experience is intimidated by a new grad then that’s not ageism, and not what this thread is about. If a new grad performs better then there is literally no point in hiring that engineer. They don’t bring anything to the table and there is no room for growth. If you’re in your 50’s then ideally you’d be at least a principal engineer at a big tech company by then.
So You propose that the future for every developer is either go up or go out? Am I the only one that this reeks of pyramid scheme?
In reality only one in ten can become "principal engineer". But it does not mean that the other nine does not have any skills and should not work in the field.
I have seen this sentiment many times and I'm cannot understand why so many people is blind to the fact that this attitude creates serious systematic problems and is inhuman (because some abstract efficiency takes precedence over well-being).
But there's an engineer in his 50's, who worked in his company for many years. He had intimate knowledge of its systems and domain. But his company got bought out, and the new owners decided they don't need that group anymore and lays off the entire group. Suddenly, his domain expertise is near-useless unless he can find another, similar position.
He interviews for other positions, but he is hit with questions he's not familiar with. He drones on about his old systems/architect like an old fogey who not up to date with the new, shiny stuff. He tries to study the new stuff, but he's tired, overwhelmed, burnt out, etc. His interviewers realizes he has a lot of experience and probably highly skilled, but his skills and experience aren't relevant enough to what their company is doing. They offer to hire him at a junior rate, or not hire him at all. Is this ageism, or is he not good enough?
No, that's not ageism - Also that's almost never how the story goes.
The last paragraph is more commonly:
He/she applies to a position relevant to his/her skills, and makes the mistake of listing all is previous experience in the resume - No response. After a while, he downplays his resume - gets responses. In the interview he/she answers every question with great accuracy, but something just doesn't "click" to the interviewer (the interviewer is sure he/she is filtering on skill alone, but is very wrong about that)
The fact is, recruiters and interviewers hire people they like, people that are similar to them. If you're from the same place look similar and from a similar age it generally has a lot more weight than anything skill-related.
You’re going to be bitter and resentful for a long time if you believe that the fact that you haven’t received a single consulting contract is due to big corporations working against you.
It sounds like you’ve built a useful piece of software. However, you don’t get handouts because you’ve built something. Those who are successful actively promote themselves and their products. There’s a reason companies aren’t comprised of just software engineers.
The truth is that if they are without a job, then they aren’t highly qualified. A degree does not make someone highly qualified. Tech companies have always had trouble finding enough talent. If they can’t find the talent in the US, then they will be forced to hire outside the US.
Good code quality doesn’t guarantee success. However, those two data points indicate it may be necessary if not sufficient. There are only 4-5 tech companies operating at that scale with proven business models. Google and Microsoft being the primary others.
If they become healthier then they should be able to increase vegetable intake which will further increase their health.