Live data from Hacker News

Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

harpers.org

241–250 of 284 posts

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the most valuable and important thing you can learn will be to think critically and communicate well." I have heard some form this advice for over 30 years. Not one single penny I have earned in my career came from my critical thinking. It came from someone taking a big financial risk with the hope that they will come out ahead. In fact, I've had jobs that actively discouraged critical thinking. I have also been tol…

Critical, individualistic thinking is what the west does best. The east seems to be better at implementation and improvement once provided with a new idea. That’s where we currently stand atleast, who knows how China will do in the future. Maybe they’re the total package but that remains to be seen.

>Critical, individualistic thinking is what the west does best

Is this parody? The west currently is a huge valley of brain rot, stupid conformity, and financial gambling.

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#242

The author managed to find the strangest people & phenomena in San Francisco and make it sound like they’re a complete picture of life there. But there are packed brunch spots and parks on sunny weekends that would disagree very strongly. San Francisco is a tolerant place. Tolerance is how you get Juicero or Theranos and whatever Cluely seems to have pivoted to, but it’s also how you get Twitter, Uber, Dropbox.. and…

Yeah that was pretty much my thought throughout the piece.

It felt like the author was punching down, too. This Cluely founder seems largely unsuccessful and, as the boat guy says at the end, just a kid. A chud of a kid, but a kid nonetheless.

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's using common language to say common things on common subjects, but he does it well, and in a way I can't quite put my finger on.

More than the prose itself, I think it's that what he's writing about isn't exactly "common knowledge" but rather shrewd, piercing observation. The way he understands and captures the dynamics makes you think he's a native to the "bay area" tech scene or immersed in TPOT. Yet here's a complete outsider, pinpointing the unstated core premises and paradoxes of these communities.

TPOT has a lot of spillover into the rest of twitter at this point; I assure you people in his twitter circles see their stuff all the time.

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#244
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's charitable to frame this as resentment towards capital who gets the "credit". I'm sure people would grumble about this regardless, but the real resentment stems from them systematically eroding our ability to afford housing, healthcare, and retirement.

Their unaffordability is only the last straw that will hopefully break the camel's back and create a counter-force. Normal people generally don't dream to be ultra rich, they just want to enjoy life (and have enough money to do so). But a small percentage is obsessed with money and they obviously invest much more energy into gaining it. This dynamic means that people don't get paid according to how much value they pr…

I like that idea, and I agree. a 10x spread of $ between skill levels, and otherwise by hours of effort and years of tenure. Yes the flight attendant who's worked there for 30 years should have more ownership (and more influence) than an executive who started last month.

I have an idea I've been batting around: mandatory 1% annual tax on public corporations that is expected to be paid in their own stock, and either held in a sovereign wealth fund, or distributed equally to all citizens. This simultaneously dilutes the wealth of the majority owners hold, boosts public savings (tax advantage to holding rather than selling), and makes ordinary people automatically invested in their nation's economy.

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean... no? I've worked on chips for basically my entire career, and I get paid a more than when I briefly worked in web stuff. Not sure where this idea has come from. My previous startup I worked for just got acquired for 10s of billions of dollars, which is a higher valuation than my friends who have gone through acquisitions in the web-dev / SaaS space I know this forum is highly skewed towards Saas/JS/web stuff…

When I lived in the northeast, every time I saw an opportunity for embedded work, or traditional UI work (Qt, etc., almost invariably for things like screens on medical or scientific equipment and almost never for desktop applications) it paid 1/2 to 2/3 the going rate for a midlevel webshit engineer. Maybe I just wasn't looking in the right places.

Go to Silicon Valley VC backed firms. That's my general advice for any sort of tech work that you want to be paid well. Tech is -- overall -- not paid well. In general, most work is not. VCs are rich and the trickle down effect is large in those places where they operate. Many people are resistant to moving to California because 'cost of living' or some stupid explanation like that. This is genuinely retarded. There is no better place in the world to start a tech career (or really any corporate career), just due to how much money there is.

People confuse the 'webshit' engineers (your words, not mine) with being interested in technology. They're not. They're interested in money. I am too. I just happen to be interested in deep tech stuff as well. A lot of people in tech don't seek compensation and then complain about it. Always go for compensation, startups, and high risk ventures (i.e., go into a good business). That's my advice.

> Maybe I just wasn't looking in the right places.

Did those places have the potential to IPO / exit for multi-billions of dollars? If not, yes, you were looking in the wrong place.

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You clearly don't know what the term upward mobility means. It doesn't necessarily mean moving from one class to another - though that WOULD be included within its scope, however extraordinary an example it may be. It can mean moving within a class. Surely most people want to better their station. To argue against that is insane and counter to every observable fact about human nature.

> It can mean moving within a class. It can, but it's not how it's used most of the time, so kind of a pedantic distinction. And many do not even want to "move within a class" that much. They'd be satisfied to keep their job and retain the same constant purchasing power and ability to buy food, feed family, pay rent/morgage, year after year.

[dead]

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#248
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the idea of "downward mobility". In particular over the past 30 years we've created a new class of ultra-ultra-rich with even more wealth than the robber barons of the gilded age had, and we need to figure out how to dismantle that entire class. A puny 3% wealth tax would take over 100 years to knock them down, and that's presuming that their wealth is static and not growing at a rate much greater than 3%.

I see an easy way, let's just take it from them. Not nationalization, that never works. Distribute each company among the workers. Turn them all into co-ops. (I've been thinking this a lot but have never seen it expressed so succinctly. Thanks for the new term.)

[deleted]

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and broadly speaking those concrete concerns can be considered in aggregate as "upward mobility."

Not necessarily. Workers don't want to move into the overclass, they just want to live with dignity. One major theme is that things that seemed very ordinary and attainable a generation ago for ordinary people, like owning a house, now seem out of reach. Circa 1970 Issac Asimov wrote an essay that started with a personal anecdote about how amazed he was that he could get a thyroidectomy for his Graves Disease for abo…

[dead]

Re: Child's Play: Tech's new generation and the end of thinking

#250
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's charitable to frame this as resentment towards capital who gets the "credit". I'm sure people would grumble about this regardless, but the real resentment stems from them systematically eroding our ability to afford housing, healthcare, and retirement.

Their unaffordability is only the last straw that will hopefully break the camel's back and create a counter-force. Normal people generally don't dream to be ultra rich, they just want to enjoy life (and have enough money to do so). But a small percentage is obsessed with money and they obviously invest much more energy into gaining it. This dynamic means that people don't get paid according to how much value they pr…

> if ownership of a company was by law distributed among employees according to the amount of time and skill level they worked there.

Those are so hard to quantify that I think you'd really have better luck instituting UBI. Both in terms of encoding it into law and getting voter support.

I also want to say, as a market socialist who owns stock, owning stock in your own company is the least diverse investment you can make, except maybe buying a house and then living in it.

And if it's based on time at the company, do I keep the stock when I leave? Am I punished by losing stock if I'm fired? How much of the company is owned by former employees? A lot? None?

If I only own stock while I work there, and I can't sell it, then it's not worth much. It's just a profit-sharing bonus with extra steps.

Post reply on HN