Your comment is ironic to me, because I often feel the need to suppress my urge to call out people who seem obsessed with Elon Musk, but your comment is proving that my instinct is right.
Really feel like alot of answers to this question are more influenced by the commenter's own partisan affiliation within their own country. India's BJP seems to be used as a proxy for conservatism in Western liberal publications, and so their critiques of BJP tend to act as critiques of the right-wing parties in their own countries.
Hmm, and wouldn't that work both ways? What's stopping this from being an impetus for China to stop being dependent on US-allied countries for semiconductor fabrication?
I think the tools and techniques for developing AI-assisted art are gonna explode, and we will see things like "Photoshop for AI-Generated art" or "Blender for AI generated models", where there are mixed tools that allow touching-up AI-generated art with more AI-based tools.
I think this will absolutely change the content space. We will see smaller groups of individuals able to make animated-films, add-special effects to their video-projects, etc. Get ready ready to see more content geared for the fringes of society, and thus amplification of their preferences in media, politics, etc.
A worse one is to me is that they aren't allowed to say "Quantum Supremacy", because it reminds some people of "White Supremacy"? Nevermind that you actually give that concept more power when you make it so that even discussing it or inadvertently bring it up is stigmatized. Things are starting to get kind of Orwellian.
I mean, the boy's father also says that there will always be "horse and buggy" Amish. We are forgetting that there are different Amish orders that lie on a spectrum of conservatism within the Amish community. Even if there are some groups that end up looking more like us there will always be the Amish who don't use the internet, electricity, and probably even diesel power.
If your passion is painting, and its something you would do for free, then fulfilling your artistic potential is still work. It still requires hours upon hours of deliberate practice. The great masters would spend years working on a single painting. You don't think there would be times when they just didn't feel like making progress? Where they wanted to just take the day off and hang out at a bar with their friends?
Part of the human condition is struggle, imo. That's what I think the OP is getting at when he says that human beings need work. Maybe not a 9-5, but we all need something worth staving off instant gratification for.
I think his point (and the broader point being assumed by the author) was that "spending your time in activities that realize your self" does, in fact, feel a lot like work.
Sure, but didn't pretty much every English person those days?
I feel the real interesting point is that he was interested in the unknown, and back in those days they didn't have the modern distinctions between what we now consider as natural and supernatural.
Seems that if you want to make progress in human knowledge, you assume the risk of doing things that appear frivolous or just stupid in hindsight.
There is one reason Twitter is not doing this, and one reason the governments can do this in the first place, and that is money. Twitter makes money off of users in other countries (its stock performance is tied to % increase of DAU). Twitter knows its service is pretty easy to replicate and is thus willing to play by these government's rules. If Twitter doesn't play by the rules, there are plenty of local players who would be very happy about that.
Why would you say it's an error to use a float for currency? I would imagine it's better to use a float for calculations then round when you need to report a value rather than accumulate a bunch of rounding errors while doing computations.
I think this is Amazon's goal, where you're expending energy not to buy from them. You need a reason not to and then it only lasts for a short time period.
They're banking on being people's default retailer which lets them get away with this behavior.
No, I'm not saying we compensate people for the opportunity cost for not having kids. I'm saying we compensate them according to the value to society of them having them and spending time raising them.
I don't think the goal should be to eliminate disparities. I think it should be eliminate obstacles.
If the husband and wife agree that they want to use their combined paternity/maternity in a given way, who are you or I to tell them that they can't? The wife could just as well force the husband to take care of the child and work on her own next book. Or the pair could stagger their leaves so that they spend equal time taking care of the baby.
Unfortunately I just don't think it's a tenable position to assert that women (or men) should be able to take 2-4 years off of work and not be disadvantaged in their career for doing so.
I wholeheartedly support the idea that, as a society, we ought to value childcare/child-rearing and (perhaps monetarily) support those who perform this service. But I don't believe corporations ought to be the ones making a space for that.