Why do we assume everyone should be working? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why do we assume everyone should be working?

#121

Post by IAmBroom » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 5:58 PM UTC

hamper653 wrote: post #70

317070 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you adjust for all ways people receive minimum income benefits, not just the 'final resort' one, you get > In Belgium, roughly 4.35 million adults (aged 18 and older) are not working out of an adult population of about 9.5 million, around 45%. Of those, roughly 3.95 million or 40% receive government income above the leefloon.

Are you counting retired workers?

Why do you assume that "retired workers" are not included in the group "people"?

Re: Why do we assume everyone should be working?

#122

Post by xigoi » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 7:12 PM UTC

lucumo wrote: post #18

bradfitz wrote: post #5

> utilizing a resource to it’s fullest at all times is not a given Typos like this (it's instead of possessive its) used to be bother me but now it's a hint that it might be human-authored, which is quaint, so it's stopped bothering me as much.

That won't be a good heuristic much longer. A few weeks back I saw Gemini write "Redundant Abstraciton Overhead" (-citon instead of -ction). It was the first time I saw a model make a "typo", so I made a note of it.

In non-English languages, LLMs seem to make typos way more often than humans.

Re: Why do we assume everyone should be working?

#123

Post by hamper653 » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 10:20 PM UTC

cykros wrote: post #119

hamper653 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In socialism, you wouldn’t be paid. That’s the whole point.

Yea, we saw the bread lines.

So did we.