Exactly. Most ads are cringy and rubbish. This concept could easily have been made with real actors and a VFX crew and been equally as shitty.
I find people complaining about bad ads odd. Do people want good ads? Do they want to be engaged as they're being sold Pepsi? I work hard to avoid ads, their quality isn't even a factor for me.
> And a farmer myself, I can tell you there is no "labor shortage".
Are you a Japanese farmer? The context of the paper was Japanese, and there is absolutely a labour shortage. Your section of the world is a timy percentage, and whilst I'm glad you don't have a shortage, your experience is not the worlds.
Maybe post renaissance many artists no longer had patrons, but nothing was stopping them from painting.
If your industry truely is going in the direction where there's no paid work for you to code (which is unlikely in my opinion), nobody is stopping you. It's easier than ever, you have decades of personal computing at your fingertips.
Most people with a thing they love do it as a hobby, not a job. Maybe you've had it good for a long time?
I read these sort of comments every so often and I do not understand them. You are in a sea of people telling you that they are developing software much quicker which ticks the required boxes. I understand that for some reason this isn't the case for your work flow, but obviously it has a lot more value for others.
If you are a chairmaker and everyone gains access to a machine that can spit out all the chair components but sometimes only spits out 3 legs or makes a mistake on the backs, you might find it pointless. Maybe it can't do all the nice artisan styles you can do. But you can be confident others will take advantage of this chair machine, work around the issues and drive the price down from $20 per chair to $2 per chair. In 24 months, you won't be able to sell enough of your chairs any more.
> Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros. Following the Separation of Discovery Global for a Total Enterprise Value of $82.7 Billion (Equity Value of $72.0 Billion)
I know this isn't the main point, but does anyone else find this sentence a nightmare to read? "Bros." makes me think we're in a new sentence; This would be fine if the next word wasn't arbitrarily capitalised. Why do people write like this? Why not just capitalise the proper nouns?
Knowledge of all available codecs is certainly not the same tier as basic computer literacy. I agree it doesn't need to be dumbed down to the general user, but we also shouldn't assume everyone here know every technical abbreviation.
The parent I was replying to stated a $70k deposit on this, meaning it would take about 25 years, so my early morning maths was a bit off. Even so, that doesn't seem unachievable?
$1700 per month pays off a $350k loan in 17 years, does it not? That's assuming that the household income stays static over that time.
That is very reasonable. In Australia, 35 year mortgages are normal, and 25-30 year mortgages were normal 20 years ago. Why would your household income need to be 1/4 of the cost of the house to make it work?
The most concerning part is people are surprised. Anti-gravity is great I've found so far, but it's absolutely running on a VM in an isolated VLAN. Why would anyone give a black box command line access on an important machine? Imagine acting irresponsibly with a circular saw and bring shocked somebody lost a finger.
I'm fairly sure all the first three points are true for each new human produced. The environmental cost vs output is probably significantly higher per human, and the population continues to grow.
My experience with large companies (especially American Tech) is that they always try and deliver the product as cheap as possible, are usually evil and never cared about social impacts. And HN has been steadily complaining about the lowering of quality of search results for at least a decade.
I think your points are probably a fair snapshot of peoples moral issue, but I think they're also fairly weak when you view them in the context of how these types of companies have operated for decades. I suspect people are worried for their jobs and cling to a reasonable sounding morality point so they don't have to admit that.
Thank you. I would imagine the entire Fortune 500 list passes the line of "evil", drawing that line at AI is weird. I assume it's a mask for fear people have of their industry becoming redundant, rather than a real morality argument.
> 20 years as a dev and tech lead and full stack, including stints as a EM and CTO
> Since then I pivoted to AI and Gen AI startups- money is tight and I dont have health insurance but at least I have a job…
I hope this doesn't come across as rude, but why? My understanding is American tech pays very well, especially on the executive level. I understand for some odd reason your country is against public healthcare, but surely a year of big tech money is enough to pay for decades of private health insurance?
I'm not sure I understand this view. Did seamstresses see sewing machines as amoral? Or carpenters with electric and air drills and saws?
AI is another set of tooling. It can be used well or not, but arguing the morality of a tooling type (e.g drills) vs maybe a specific company (e.g Ryobi) seems an odd take to me.
I find people complaining about bad ads odd. Do people want good ads? Do they want to be engaged as they're being sold Pepsi? I work hard to avoid ads, their quality isn't even a factor for me.