Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ratsmack's comments login

All devices should have circuitry to limit current to an acceptable charge rate, and be fused to catch surges.


A common problem during summer months.


Common now, but not in the past:

“We saw damage to plants this summer that had never showed heat stress before”


> It’s not clear that Musk was involved in the account’s suspension, but Rocketto and Nellis aren’t all that crazy to think that the X CEO might be behind it.

Good question... what's the real story?


> ... roughly as intelligent as a 7 year old kid.

Maybe a 7 month old, but surely not a 7 year old.


nop definitely not month at most I'm oft by one or two years in my memory, cows are really intelligent they just miss stuff like hands, or a more articulated language allowing them to better utilize their brain etc.


Great article and explains very well the reason that AI should be renamed PSI... Poorly Simulated Intelligence.


There's a reason for everything.


There is a reason for all the junk in my drawer, but it is still junk.


If two executives talk across a table during lunch, is it required to record it? What if they sit across the table from each other and send text messages over Signal instead of talking... is that somehow different where it would be required to record the conversation for all to see?

Where does personal privacy start and end?


I made this same argument last time the story was posted but I don't think it's really possible to answer. Even the best lawyer could only tell you something like "it's only technically legal if a judge says it is", and even then it does not automatically apply to all future instances.

Like it or not, law is all about subjective interpretation and "well ackshually" arguments.


Greed is not a requirement of Capitalism though.


It actually is, capitalism wants infinite growth, if that's not greed then I shudder to think what is.


The problem is that complex systems have not made us more knowledgeable and capable, but instead they have become a crutch.

https://www.palladiummag.com/2023/06/01/complex-systems-wont...


>By the 1960s, the systematic selection for competence came into direct conflict with the political imperatives of the civil rights movement. During the period from 1961 to 1972, a series of Supreme Court rulings, executive orders, and laws—most critically, the Civil Rights Act of 1964—put meritocracy and the new political imperative of protected-group diversity on a collision course.

Lot of this kind of stuff. Thesis summarized is that America is going to hell in a handbasket because the Feds are demanding that black people get hired once in a blue moon, a practice which dilutes meritocracy, according to the author.

Heh.

>When this was not enough, MIT increased its gender diversity by simply offering jobs to previously rejected female candidates. While no university will admit to letting standards slip for the sake of diversity, no one has offered a serious argument why the new processes produce higher or even equivalent quality faculty as opposed to simply more diverse faculty.

Ah, MIT now pumping out dumb blondes, are they? Having encountered such people as the author of this piece several times before,I have to wonder about the "meritocracy" process in place prior. So "merit" correlates positively with sunscreen purchases, and inversely to tampon expenditure, does it?

>This effect was likely seen in a recent paper by McDonald, Keeves, and Westphal. The paper points out that white male senior leaders reduce their engagement following the appointment of a minority CEO. While it is possible that author Ijeoma Oluo is correct, and that white men have so much unconscious bias raging inside of them that the appointment of a diverse CEO sends them into a tailspin of resentment, there is another more plausible explanation. When boards choose diverse CEOs to make a political statement, high performers who see an organization shifting away from valuing honest performance respond by disengaging.

I mean... is there an actual difference here? First, I'm not convinced it's unconscious bias. Second, this "disengagement" certainly seems like the kind of "meritocracy" we have sadly grown quite familiar with.

>The problem is that complex systems have not made us more knowledgeable and capable, but instead they have become a crutch.

This article kind of sounds like some people want the old crutch back. There is a non trivial question of your fitness for this, however. In the 50's the rise of psychotherapy made it quite clear that people were cracking under the strain of delivering "merit."

I'm quite delighted that this is such a concern to you people. Excellent.


>>no one has offered a serious argument why the new processes produce higher or even equivalent quality faculty as opposed to simply more diverse faculty.

This is worth debunking more directly: hiring is not and has never been meritocratic, it's heavily affected by networking and cliques (something like 70% of job hires aren't publicly listed, they just ask around if anyone has recommendations). The entire point of diversity hiring is to hire from outside of the existing cliques.



Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: