This is what I was expecting. Very much appreciated. OP’s paper is good - but I sort of feel like it’s singing to the choir. It’s a great resource if you already know the material.
I think parent was let down by the wording. The paradox is: "the people who go to the nude beach to be naked are not the people you actually want to see naked".
There's no implication that the people who go there want to be seen naked, just that they aren't easy on the eyes (of any innocent bystanders).
I will say the more recent additions to C++ at least have solved many of my long standing issues with that C-variant. Most of it was stuff that was long overdue. Like string formatting or a thread safe println. But even some of the stuff I didn’t think I would love has been amazing. Modules. Modules bro. Game changer. I’m all in. Honestly C++ is my go to for anything that isn’t just throw away again. Python will always be king of the single use scripts.
The problem is that they are _additions_, C++ has such absurd sprawl. The interactions between everything in this massive sprawl is quite difficult to grasp
I lost interest in keeping up with C++'s advances more than a decade ago.
The problem is that I want a language where things are safe by default. Many of the newer stuff added in C++ makes things safe, perhaps even to the level of Rust's guarantees -- but that's only if you use only these new things, and never -- even by accident -- use any of the older patterns.
I'd rather just learn a language without all that baggage.
Considering DOGE is ~100 people and the American labor force is 168 million, in your example, I would be willing to expend 0.000000675% of my time and energy to save 14 cents. That’s the difference between saying keep the change or putting it in my pocket.
Before anyone asks, no I don’t round up for the Boys and Girls Club at Taco Bell. I sometimes feel bad about it though.
Correct. No one is denying that Elon loves attention. Everyone knows Elon is really an acronym for 'Elon Loves Ostentatious Notice'. Its GNU'd and everything.
I think you misunderstand the metaphor. The expenditure, here, isn't the time/attention of 100 people; It's the things that have been cut/defunded and the consequences of the way those changes have been implemented.
Hold on, what savings? They said they're giving the "$10M" back to the people in the form of cheques.
So instead of them giving that money to Americans to pay for productivity (USAID buying corn from farmers, tens of thousands of employees paid to promote American standing on the global stage, paid to look after parks, paid to monitor fraud in the US financial system, paid to collect taxes, etc).. they want to send those people home and distribute their would-be salaries to every American for free.
> They said they're giving the "$10M" back to the people in the form of cheques.
They have said that 20% will be distributed directly to the population, 20% will be paid to the national debt, and the remaining 60% will simply not be spent.
1) Our debt is above GDP and interest is rising faster than GDP growth. Debt is fine when being used as leverage but we are upside down at the moment.
2) We don’t have the ability to issue more debt at the moment. The government has no money. They are using employee pension funds to meet obligations with a promissory note. We have negative cash flow and have run out of the ability to extend our line of credit until Congress raises the debt ceiling.
I read about a guy in Turkmenistan who would as a punishment be taxed 20%, and I thought, living in Western Europe or North America is kind of a financial punishment .
If you need more money, you can get another job or get a better paying job. You might even take out a loan to start a small business. Raising your income is an alternative to cutting expenses. And taking on debt is actually a useful way to get the benefits of a purchase without having to save up for it first.
>you can get another job or get a better paying job
For an increasing number of people over an increasing period of time, this isn't an option? Do you think people can snap their fingers and materialize a 6-figure tech salary? I just saw two layed off people on linkedin today, that's two more 5+ years experienced professional software devs on the market...
How much tax is enough? The government would, without playing a deduction game, would love to take 20-30% of my income, while having devalued my dollar by 50-100% in the last 5 years. My salary goes half as far.
Being honest, on what should be a great local salary, we can't even afford a starter home, or savings after our monthly grocery bill. The government caused this inflationary Era to devalue the debt, and your suggestion is to take more from families already struggling to stay ahead?
Such a communist. Take from the people at gunpoint, give it to the DC bureuacrats.
It's telling that you didn't even consider that the taxes would come from businesses. The businesses that created the majority of inflation by gouging consumers out and bleeding them dry every tiniest opportunity they legally could.
I mean practically this take is so wrong. If the (US) government is just so hell bent on taxation how the heck did we get to the point where taxes on income went from 90% (~1950) on top bracket to less than 35%? Business tax was (35% 2008) -> 20% (2020).
Empirically in the US in the last 70 years this just never has played out this why. The government did not cause and rarely causes major inflation either at least in this time period. Usually its the economy explodes due to a private industry bubble exploding or natural resources crunch due to foreign governments reducing oil production or pandemics.
Its pretty childish to use communist as a tag line when I qualified the claim you can believe that benefits should not exist but if you do you have to own saying you want to cut benefits for poor people and give a tax break to rich people (at least that is what happens when you cut taxes in a progressive system)
> We don’t have the ability to issue more debt at the moment. The government has no money.
All spending is authorised by Congress, isn't it? So how is the debt ceiling any different? No federal programs "have money" short of Congress deciding it.
Right but until Congress raises the debt ceiling, the Executive Branch has an empty wallet and maxed out credit card. Funding doesn’t go out all at once either. Some programs don’t start until later in the year for example. They typically aim to distribute 1/12th of the yearly allowance per month. Sometimes agencies will over spend early and have to be austere later (like FEMA last year).
Appropriations is Congressional and specifics how much an agency will get over the fiscal year.
Apportionment is under the Executive and addresses when and how those funds are made available.
The debt ceiling is entirely artificial, and ought to be unconstitutional. Congress decides how much to spend. Issuing debt when necessary to pay for those allocations is implied.
Everyone is missing the most obvious way to raise revenue: raise taxes.
The military is over half of all Fed discretionary spending.
Another huge expense is servicing our debt.
Those are what we should be addressing, not cutting NIH research.
By the way, we do have the ability to issue more debt -- because thankfully our debt is USD denominated and we can simply print more dollars. It's the only way we've survived this long as the world's largest debtor nation.
> We don’t have the ability to issue more debt at the moment
One, DOGE isn't doing anything to cut spending. Every dollar Musk "cuts" that doesn't get Congressional authorisation is just being borrowed from future litigation plus all the time and expense that will eat up.
Two, if DOGE can supercede the Congress than so can the Treasury in issuing new debt. Trump has said he wants to kill the debt limit. He could just try that with an executive order. DOGE is already shredding contracts and blocking lawful payments--we're already jeopardising the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. (Ironically, in a manner similar to how South Africa trashed itself in modern history.)
Musk is stealing data to use for his own gain, and installing back doors so he permanently has control over government. It will take decades to undo the spyware he's installing.
These are the biggest contributors to undoing Clinton's balanced budget in the 90's:
* Bush Jr Tax Cuts
* Useless Iraq war
* Too Big to Fail Bailouts of Banks
* Trumps tax cuts
* COVID spending
When billionaires and trillion-dollar corporations pay episilon to zero in taxes, maybe they should pay their share. Taxing the rich would solve the problem overnight.
A lot of people are talking about tool use and writing internal scripts, and yeah, that’s kind of an answer. Really though I think the author is highlighting that LLMs are not being used efficiently at the present moment.
LLMs are great at certain tasks. Databases are better at certain tasks. Calculators too. While we could continually throw more and more compute at the problem, growing layers and injecting more data, wouldn’t it make more sense to just have an LLM call its own back-end calculator agent? When I ask it for obscure information maybe it should just pull from it’s own internal encyclopedia database.
Let LLMs do what they do well, but let’s not forget the decades that brought us here. Even the smartest human still uses a calculator, so why doesn’t an AI? The fact that it writes its own JavaScript is flashy as hell but also completely unnecessary and error prone.
> Really though I think the author is highlighting that LLMs are not being used efficiently at the present moment.
Yes, that is a key point. It isn't to say they are useless tools, but that they aren't intelligent tools and that has significant meaning for what tasks we think they are appropriate for.
Unfortunately, nearly everyone has misinterpreted the intent as showing LLMs can't use tools. The point is about how LLMs work differently than most think that they do.
SpaceX and by extension Starship are critical for the entire western space industry. Last year SpaceX was responsible for something like 90% of the stuff sent up. Then China and then Russia. There is simply no one else in even in the market right now. SpaceX has lowered costs by an order of magnitude already and hopes Starship will drop it by another.
If you don’t like Elon Musk that’s fine. But his companies get stuff done. Blue Origin has been around longer, has gotten more from the government (Yeah, really) and been getting a billion a year from Bezos with nothing to show for it. It’s insane how much SpaceX has done while everyone else has been doing nothing.
I agree with all of that but it’s not like BO has nothing to show for it. They are likely to reach orbit soon with a new serious rocket. And I say this as a BO hater.
> SpaceX and by extension Starship are critical for the entire western space industry.
That is both true, and monumentally depressing.
>If you don’t like Elon Musk that’s fine. But his companies get stuff done.
For extremely broad values of "stuff" <glances over it the dumpster fire Twitter has been reduced to, and the CyberTaxi launch, and and and>
Yeah, SpaceX has been mostly hitting it out of the park. Tesla kinda was for a while 5 or 10 years back, but way less so these days. I can't think of another example of an Elon company "getting stuff done" in a positive way. I'm more inclined to think SpaceX succeeds due to the huge amount of luck a billionaire benefactor can bring to a hard problem, and succeeds in spite of rather than because of any other influence from Elon.
> I'm more inclined to think SpaceX succeeds due to the huge amount of luck a billionaire benefactor can bring to a hard problem, and succeeds in spite of rather than because of any other influence from Elon.
In my view its more because Musk's approach of first principles thinking works much better (compared to alternatives) in a highly conservative industry making complex physical things.
Twitter is a large part him failing to realize it is an ad company and thus he needs to make advertisers happy to spend money there, which means very active brand management and PR. He has had probably the most negative PR in history, in terms of volume of negative articles. That is an absolutely awful position from which to try and run an ad displaying business.
I have no idea the political shenanigans to which OP refers, but a missile defense shield destabilizes MAD and even if it works - which it won't - it'll be susceptible to jamming and maybe even EMPs since the satellites fly so low. Iron Dome is only effective against a limited number of slow unguided missiles, and too expensive to maintain. And SDI was a disaster.
It seems like Israel is a test-bed for weapon systems. It would be interesting to see how Iron Beam influences second-generation systems.
Having an effective counter to large numbers of nukes is likely to seriously risk Chinese and Russian escalations. MAD only works when it’s mutually assured.
I don’t think the modern Democratic Party the same pro-worker, anti-corporate greed version a lot of us grew up with. Don’t take this as an endorsement for Trump mind you. Hardly. Democrats still have basic human rights on their side.
Corporate greed and military spending aren’t up for debate though. We can bicker about guns and immigration policy all we want but some topics aren’t even on the table for discussion.
To a degree you are right, but fully agreeing with this is ignoring reality given the thread we are commenting in. There has been more antitrust legislation under the current administration than there has been in a decade so while they aren't the Dems of old, I feel we are heading in a good direction.
There are several different caucuses within the Democratic Party. Some of them are the pro-corporate types you're referring to. But there is also a Progressive caucus that is pretty pro-worker pro-tax that I think you're missing out on.
So it’s funny you mention that. I actually think Marx made a fantastic critique of capitalism. He kind of nailed the inherent flaws within the system. I compare his solutions to someone predicting that every desk would eventually have a telegraph through. Identifying a problem doesn’t therefor imply a solution.
Regarding the modern Progressive movement though, I find them a bit too authoritarian for my tastes. There are countless examples but classic Western liberalism is at odds with their ideology. They’ve fallen into the classic revolutionary entrapment of their own power being tied with continued upheaval. If you are not with them completely then you are the enemy. From the Google Manifesto to JK Rowling’s cancelling, they remind me of the mob during the French Revolution. They just eat their own and refuse to accept any kind of meaningful critique.
Liberalism requires debate, disagreement and questioning the status quo. I don’t see that amongst the modern Progressives. They would rather burn it down than build something better.
Ironically, I fear them gaining power as much as I do the religious right. Neither contains the capacity for building the coalitions needed for stable governance. I like moderates. Stability. Peace. Compromise. Mutual Respect. Empathy. I just don’t see those values in those circles.
Now that I’ve politely disagreed, I suppose it’s just a matter of time before someone comes along to insult me and prove my point.
I disagree with you on the human rights thing, that is definitely on the table for discussion.
I connect the erosion of bodily autonomy in America to the Democratic mandates for health insurance purchase with Obamacare and then certainly the federal mandate for employees of large corporations to receive the experimental EUA Covid vaccine.
In the arena of basic human rights, any political party that demands I show my private medical information as proof of vaccination in order that I may continue to work in a 100% remote job has lost the thread and there's no way back to good graces.
The "my body my choice" and workers rights Democratic party locked me down on home detention as a non-essential worker for over a year and finally got me RIF'd from my fancy job because I refused to show my papers well after the crisis had ended. Would you call that fascism or authoritarianism?
And that erosion of bodily autonomy at the federal level led to the _easy_ overturning of Roe v Wade! At the time the federal vaccine mandates were announced, I called it that they were weakening Roe. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
The Democratic party needs to end and something new needs to grow to replace all the corruption. There's not one good policy for humanity coming from them and certainly far too much optional war and needless killing.
> In the arena of basic human rights, any political party that demands I show my private medical information as proof of vaccination in order that I may continue to work in a 100% remote job has lost the thread and there's no way back to good graces.
There is no political party that demands this. I've worked 100% since the start of the pandemic and have only been asked for proof of vaccination for a company onsite. Never once been at threat of losing my remote job because of vaccination status. Sounds like your company was just looking for an excuse to lay people off.
> And that erosion of bodily autonomy at the federal level led to the _easy_ overturning of Roe v Wade! At the time the federal vaccine mandates were announced, I called it that they were weakening Roe. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Really? You should've told the Supreme Court because they didn't mention vaccines at all in their decisions to overturn Roe v Wade.
> There's not one good policy for humanity coming from them and certainly far too much optional war and needless killing.
This is not even remotely true and is so emotionally charged that it is impossible to actually have a discussion. I much prefer their policies on public infrastructure, environment, and climate just to name a few.
> Sounds like your company was just looking for an excuse to lay people off.
Of course. I called it a RIF for a reason. At the time, I was caught unawares and was very hurt by what I saw as a betrayal. It was my sense that the RIF was a politically-driven move and it was a compliance test that I had failed. It sounds like you were fortunate to have not been so caught up in it.
In my depths-of-despair blue state, the lockdowns were brutal and the outcomes on kids here have been tragic. Adults I know are just now processing the pain, many marriages wrecked. I lay those terrible Covid politics and ruination at the Democrats' feet.
> Really? You should've told the Supreme Court because they didn't mention vaccines at all in their decisions to overturn Roe v Wade.
Yes, really, it wasn't a sacred cow. The zeitgeist was: my body, my choice, but only when the mob allows it, all courtesy of Covid. RvW is just one more easy come, easy go judicial decision.
Health science will continue to advance and the abortion racket will eventually end.
> is so emotionally charged that it is impossible to actually have a discussion.
Yeah, you're right. I was coming on too strong there. :/
> public infrastructure
Infrastructure is not a Democratic issue, but the corruption is worse under the D's. Rural broadband is the latest government spending fiasco.
> environment and climate
Democratic climate politics is a racket. It's bumpersticker politics, and junk science. What climate model ever survives, where is the science in meta-analyses? Regulations around pollution is something everyone can get behind. I remember smog in Los Angeles in the 70's and it is so much better now. But pollution isn't fear porn that brings in the big bucks, boiling seas are. The catastrophism is OLD and TIRED, and none of the fear porn hath come to pass. It's such a racket.
Name some more favored policies! In the seventies we had the misery index under Carter. Under Biden, we got the huge spike in deaths of despair. Democratic public health policies are schizophrenic. What a huge mess, I can't understand Democratic voters!
> In my depths-of-despair blue state, the lockdowns were brutal and the outcomes on kids here have been tragic. Adults I know are just now processing the pain, many marriages wrecked. I lay those terrible Covid politics and ruination at the Democrats' feet.
This sounds hard and I'm sorry to hear you were going through that. I don't think it is a fair assessment of the situation. The lockdowns and quarantine started under Trump for instance. To spare his side of any blame and lay everything at the feet of the Dems is having a selective memory.
> Health science will continue to advance and the abortion racket will eventually end.
You are going to have to explain this statement because I don't see how abortion is a racket. Unless you mean saber rattling over abortion.
> Regulations around pollution is something everyone can get behind. I remember smog in Los Angeles in the 70's and it is so much better now.
Smog in better now because of the EPA and restrictions around fossil fuels. The GOP explicitly states in their platform that they want more fossil fuels and to gut the EPA. As far as your comment on corruption, this is not a "Dem" issue, politics at the local level is incredibly corrupt. I live in a red state and the same thing happens here. Tons of grant money disappearing into pockets of contractors that are friends of the local republicans. There needs to be more oversight at the local level.
> none of the fear porn hath come to pass.
For you it hasn't. Parts of the country reaching wet bulb temperatures and other countries seeing record high temperatures every year. More fires in the western US that burn longer and cause more damage.
Don't take this the wrong way but you just lack empathy. A lot of what you are saying is that "Dems say it will get bad and it hasn't gotten bad FOR ME" and this isn't 100% your fault. Media works hard to "other" people so you won't feel empathic. I think Trump is a moron but I understand why people feel angry and fall for the rhetoric he pushes. However, I've read all of Agenda 47 and the GOP 2024 platform and I'll pass on it thanks.
> The lockdowns and quarantine started under Trump for instance
There were states like SD that were done with lockdowns in July of 2020, if I recall correctly. And, their outcomes were better. I never mentioned Trump, he was always a states' rights guy, but you're right he was the guy in charge, so he needs to be held to account on covid.
My state's voters are hopeless. I will never understand the shallow emotional appeals here that unfailingly win the day.
> More fires in the western US that burn longer and cause more damage.
We do have a lot of fires! You attribute that to climate? In my opinion, a lot of those fires are intentionally set and for a lot of reasons.
> You are going to have to explain this statement because I don't see how abortion is a racket. Unless you mean saber rattling over abortion.
You think there's no money in abortion? Check it out, use your imagination. I'm saying the earlier fetuses can come to term outside the womb and the better tech like ultrasound gets, the more the fetus becomes humanized and will be accorded human rights. If the population crashes, the whole life discussion will flip. The clock is ticking on this topic, and it's ultimately going to be seen as barbaric.
> However, I've read all of Agenda 47 and the GOP 2024 platform and I'll pass on it thanks.
It's reactionary. If the D's and RINO's could show a little restraint, maybe the pendulum wouldn't have to swing so hard.
How about not just giving your vote away for cheap/free purely over Blumph hatred this time and demand some actual reforms and accountability from your side? How much faff is in your platform?
Whether it is reactionary or not doesn't matter. They are still policies I don't support and even with this statement you lay the blame at other people's feet. With many other points, you are beginning to delve into conspiracy so I think this conversation has run its course. And I don't have a side, that is cult thinking. I request accountability from everyone.
Well it's good you're a free thinker, we need more of those. Sorry for assuming where you had placed yourself.
The 'conspiracy' label has no sting if you meant it to. I'm sick of clown world and voicing my opposition to it and shaking my fist at clouds. You can't blame me for not accepting predominant narratives, we are so propagandized. And when I am wrong, I own up to it.
I don't believe Trump will be allowed to be president again, so you shouldn't have to worry about Agenda 47 bugaboos.
