No, it's saying "let's build a web service" and starting with a framework that just lets you write your endpoints. This is about something higher level than the nuts and bolts. Both are worth learning.

The fact you find this trivial is kind of the point that's being made. Some people think having an agent is some kind of voodoo, but it's really not.

Or, to put it another way

Have the grace to accept things I cannot change, the power to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

An intelligent person usually knows a lot about a lot. The more things you know about, the more chances you have to make a mistake and think changing something is in your court, when it's really not.

I agree with that.

Another type of problem with this particular person was the insight that there is no meaning to be discovered, distilled or coaxed out of analysis.

That we must create meaning is an example of something which is entirely in their court but which they somehow can’t accept and proceed with.

You can know something is not within your power to change and still find the fact of its existence deeply upsetting.

That's why the saying I quoted had "the grace to accept the things I cannot change"

It's not "accept things that are not upsetting"

It's a kind of context about the person's life, since this is a local community publication, not a news wire service. One that is palatable to a wider audience than religion or political affiliation for a feel-good story like this. Though if she had no loving family and were engaged in the church, that is what I would have next expected to hear about since she is retired. If not retired, I would have expected a blurb about her job instead.

There's also a good chance, since she was interviewed, that that's how she described herself first.

"Tell me about yourself."

"Well, I'm a grandmother..."

It is, and it's not equally intuitive for everyone.

Just a link to the app store page?

If you're going to advertise a product at least go the content marketing route to give the discussion here a bit more to chew on.

This article describes financial instruments that were niche a few years ago that now dominate. I wonder what are a few more instruments which are niche today that might have a similar trajectory.

Bartering for food

> Everybody

Not everybody everybody. Some people want to charge/pay/receive the maximum reasonable amount. Where "reasonable" is informed by social norms. The existence of so many amoral corporations, and sociopathic individuals running them, has absolutely skewed social expectations though.

Such people are certainly less common, but they do exist (anecdata of one, me)

Homo economicus does not actually exist.

My experience is that kids have to be taught “‘fair’ is what the market will bear” because they start out feeling quite strongly that it’s not true.

Tons of kids aren’t taught that, some of them start businesses, and they may struggle to make ends meet (or at least to thrive like they could be) because raising prices to market rates feels so unfair to them that they won’t do it unless prodded to and told it’s ok by someone else (and they still might not)

I definitely am not convinced market-rate-is-ethical-and-fair is natural thinking for most people, or the kind of thing they want to do.

(I’ve been the one telling people they should raise prices and I still can’t shake the feeling that it’s kinda wrong…)

> kids have to be taught “‘fair’ is what the market will bear”

Because it seems like the normal default for humans is that "fair" means when I sell something I take the highest offer I can get, but when I buy things the seller should give me the lowest offer he can while meeting his expenses or he is being "greedy." If you don't believe me just read the HN comments on any financial topic.

Nope, it works both ways, at least for lots of folks. The other attitude often (in my experience, most of the time) has to be explicitly taught or conditioned in from getting fucked enough times and deciding you may as well be fucking people too.

Not liking the price but paying it anyway isn't "getting fucked" like you and so many other people seem to believe.

K. But from what I’ve seen most people have to be taught your way of thinking.

Their very long HN bio ends with

"PS: definitely not ElReg's aMfM"

Isn't that a breach of HN's rules? My understanding is HN cracks down on bots and bot-like behavior.

I've always read the phrase "within a generation" to mean "within a generational lifespan", not "the time between groups we distinguish as distinct generations". Which is to say that under that interpretation it wouldn't be inconsistent to have believed it in both 2000 and 2025

I agree. I'm pretty sure both photosynthesis (superposition) and our sense of smell (quantum tunneling) involve quantum effects, so it's not that wild to think that quantum effects are at play in the mechanistic operation of the brain and therefore contribute to the phenomenon of consciousness.

everything is quantum. it's just convenient to deal with the emergent behavior instead (like "chemistry").

yes, photosynthesis is quantum. so is vision, smell, etc. heck, metabolism is quantum!

but these are fast and local, because most of the world is decoherence-friendly. the quantum effects of a photon in your rod cell is not going to cause any quantum weirdness in a smell receptor in your nose.

Well yes, what I meant was that there are phenomena within these procesess that work because they leverage quantum effects that are not available in the newtonian regime of physics.