I've heard it as:

buy cheap, buy twice

Unfortunately, it seems that now it's:

buy expensive, get some shitty cloud enabled feature, still buy twice.

While it's true that wealth is relative, this is so disingenuous that I can only presume that this comment is not made in good faith.

FWIW, I think multinational corporations that engage in all manner of legal tax avoidance are probably more of a problem than individual billionaires.

You might want to familiarize yourself with e-bikes.

I guess this is the same old ignorance of the right.

I can also throw meaningless insults, sigh...

> The young like it because they don't have much skin in the game.

This is completely backwards, they have the MOST skin in the game. They are the ones that are going not going to have things we take/took for granted like: living and working in the EU or being able to enjoy a pension.

Well if you're pro-EU, Corbyn is also a poor choice...

If the unreliability of the traditional banking system is due to sanctions, then that would suggest that what you are doing is circumventing sanctions and thus quite likely illegal.

Lots of caveats as I don't have enough information, happy to be corrected though.

Not sure whether it is illegal. I certainly don't like the imperialistic US view that their sanctions are globally binding. Citizens and businesses from other countries should not be bound by US laws while not being on US ground.

But I think that these sanctions against Russia are ethically justified. So circumventing them is unethical for me, whether illegal or not.

Edit: Saying that these sanctions are ethically justified does not imply that they would be the most efficient or effective way to stop the war.

A currency exchange recently got a substantial fine for allowing users to circumvent sanctions.

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/crypto-exchange-bit...

Unless they are dead set on specifically sending money to the 7 sanctioned institutions, there is absolutely nothing illegal or unstable about this. Source: me wiring modest amounts regularly to my own accounts there to pay local taxes and other things from my regular US bank accounts.

Funnily enough I was just asking chatGPT what it thought about it, so here it goes:

>It is unlikely that AI will completely replace programmers. While AI and machine learning technology has advanced significantly in recent years, there are still many tasks that require human creativity and intuition, such as coming up with new ideas, solving complex problems, and making decisions that involve subjective judgement. Additionally, as AI and machine learning technology continues to advance, it is likely that new job opportunities will be created in fields related to these technologies, such as developing and managing AI systems.

Altering the prompt a bit (how will AI put programmers out of work?)

>It is unlikely that AI will completely put programmers out of work. However, it is possible that certain tasks currently performed by programmers, such as routine and repetitive tasks, could be automated by AI in the future. This could potentially lead to job displacement for some programmers. It is also possible that the increasing use of AI could lead to a shift in the types of skills and expertise that are in demand in the job market, potentially making some programming skills and knowledge less valuable. However, as AI and machine learning technology continue to evolve, it is likely that new job opportunities will be created in fields related to these technologies, such as developing and managing AI systems.

Which is about the same what would Skynet say :)

I’ve downvoted this because the question is what the community thinks of the question. This is creating plausible spam.

I just thought it was interesting to post because:

chatGTP has been featuring quite a lot on HN

I had literally just asked the same question to chatGTP

and it's asking an interesting/relevant question to chatGTP

I do get your point about spam though

The inference is that they use insider information

I guess for me the takeaway is:

Buy fewer electronics

That's is extremely unpopular with the general public, much less here on HN.

Ask people to reduce their consumption and they have a tendency to lash out.

Why is that? I've noticed that nearly all of these new toys don't improve my quality of life. Do people buy things as a dopamine hit and form of escapism? It certainly seems that way.

Yes, that's exactly what it is. We live in a society where happiness is just an amazon box away. It doesn't last long, but with overnight shipping people don't need it to.

Almost every ad you see is trying to tell people how much better their life will be with a product and how much happier they'll be.

Especially if it concerns meat!

Buy less, period.

I got tired of being asked to sign in for services so I created a google account, reallydontaskmetosignin and I think when I tried to create that username it wouldn't let me, so I shorten it to reallydontask

> Books as a medium actively encourage unnecessary verbosity.

From memory that is the main thesis of this article by Sam Harris (from the article):

>If your book is 600 pages long, you are demanding more of my time than I feel free to give. And if I could accomplish the same change in my view of the world by reading a 60-page version of your argument, why didn’t you just publish a book this length instead?

https://www.samharris.org/blog/the-future-of-the-book

I feel this is a consequence of how cheap books have gotten to produce.

Older books, the sort that were copied by hand onto calf skin, tend to have a lot less meandering filler than contemporary literature.

And the "web-first long form" medium positively drips with filler. Half the time it doesn't even mention the subject at hand for 500 words until a tortured anecdote or analogy has run out of steam, leaving you guessing what the article is even about in the first place. Then it carries on for another few thousand words, at least 70% of which are useless flourishes or word count padding.

There's so much scope for improvement in pedagogy with better mediums. It'd be so good if college courses were presented in the format of an OurWorldInData page, perhaps with pop-out embedded video segments, instead of obscure disjointed lecture slides or a 2 hour long meandering video.

Yes, SEO advise for the past 7+ years is that 'Google likes those who are experts, so you have to have long essays to look like an expert & have longer time-on-page.'.

It’s also a consequence of programs like “Kindle Unlimited” where your pay as an author is directly tied to how many pages are read.

Yeah, there are several factors in this, for example a lot of people look at page counts (or book thickness) when deciding what to buy; thinking that thicker book = more information.

It's also that Paul Graham saying ~"books should be blog posts, blog posts should be tweets".

One of my favourite books is Longitude by Dava Soble. It's 224 pages yet conveys an epic and detailed account of an event in history that played out over a century.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Longitude-Genius-Greatest-Scientifi...

I recently read the book Atomic Habits by James Clear and felt exactly this. The book could have easily been one quarter the length and covered all the same material.

The contents of the book is quite good albeit not revolutionary. But it should have been around 60 pages not 270.

I actually found a fantastic short form version at https://www.chrisbehan.ca/posts/atomic-habits which is just as good as the book at explaining the concepts at a fraction of the read time. I advise anyone read that over the book.