Anyone with even a passing familiarity with EHR systems will know that nobody wants to build their own. I once worked for a large hospital system that abandoned a decades old institutionally built and maintained system for Epic. The choice was celebrated by almost everyone who worked there.
The value is in the “system” itself. The tooling, plugins, knowledge that your staff has the familiarity and skills so as to not require retraining, the interoperability of data with other systems and vendors.
The idea that AI is going to enable a variety of bespoke competitors is truly laughable!
The message overall doesn’t seem especially controversial. I am personally disappointed on what seems to be a de-emphasizing of healthful plant based sources of protein such as beans and legumes, although nuts do seem to be noted more prominently.
If the message is “eat plenty of protein and fiber” beans and legumes are a great food that has both.
This is fun to read, but from my personal perspective it all seems quite depressing. About half way through this list of stuff I start to think existentially: would I be happy if my life was constructed like the author’s? I like much of the same sort of stuff after all. But at some point I got bored with reading yet another cool random book or fiddling with an interpreter for a little toy language.
I wonder, does the author really find deep life satisfaction in all this? Presumably the answer is yes, but that doesn’t match my intuition which intrigues me somewhat. Is the satisfaction gained, at least in part, from the performance of making this sort of list and getting external approval from HN, conference audiences, etc? Is the production of this list and the stated desire to speak at conferences a statement that all the journaled activity is not enough, that it cannot be done privately? That if done privately, anonymously, it really is just not that great a way to live your life?
I am happy that I don’t live alone diving so deep into various hobbies that I ultimately start hitting the firmament underneath. What my life would look like had I not gotten married and had children is not so hard to imagine when I read these sorts of blogs, and I smugly think I am better off.
> AI on the other hand has the potential to put literally millions of individuals out of work. At a minimum, it is already augmenting the value of highly-skilled intellectual
This has been true since, say, 1955.
> This is the final capitalism cheat code. A worker who does not sleep or take time off.
That’s the hope that is driving the current AI Bubble. It has neither ever been true nor will be true with the current state of the art in AI. This realization is what is deflating the bubble.
The answer seems to be given indirectly: they offered him interview prep, fast tracked his early career stages, and paid him a ton of money. No deep philosophical torment, they offered the kid a really good job.
Living in a permanent structure where you can afford isn't as good as living in a gross RV on a street someplace and fruitlessly demanding the government build you a house?
apparently the other option, as seen in the comments, is that the government bulldoze the houses on that same street to build a highly dense row of flophouses
like I said elsewhere, just move where you can afford. wherever that is, it's probably a few decades away from being some future generation's dream home
I know I risk getting down voted to oblivion, but I truly do not understand this sentiment. There are plenty of places I cannot afford to live, so I live somewhere I can afford. Every time I hear about a "housing crisis" all I see are people demanding government mandated development in some fancy place (Manhattan! San Francisco!) that is out of touch price wise for almost every human being on Earth.
This idea that people are demanding Palo Alto or some other high end desirable community to build them a place to live makes no sense. I understand some community they can afford like Fresno or somewhere may be less desirable, i.e. fewer millionaires as your neighbors, but if that's what you can afford then that's where you go, right?
If someone wants to explain why a high end and highly sought after community needs to use the power of the government to force development for anybody at all please do let me know. Explain it like I am five. Also include in your answer why just living somewhere affordable is no longer an option, seeing as that is what seemingly everyone else so far in human history has done. In fact, it wasn't all that long ago that Palo Alto itself was just some undesirable hayfields. Every place you don't want to live is just a few decades away from being someone else's coveted dream home.
At one point it made sense for everyone to learn Perl because it was the de facto scripting language for server side components of the, then brand new, World Wide Web. Nowadays backend software development and other Perl niches like shell scripting are crowded with competitors. But that does not invalidate Perl in the least! Indeed, Perl is still the best "power tool" available to a systems programmer, system administrator, or anyone working in the realm of "shell scripts".
Learn Perl because it is the most powerful way to write scripts on Linux (or any other Unix like operating system).
You misunderstand. The body does not naturally hallucinate. To get it to do so requires overriding (forcing) the normal functions against their usual behavior with chemicals.