Unlurker|Replay|About
Programming is Art (orchidfiles.com)
•
[delayed]
•
Lovely to read, but AI will surely remove a lot of software engineering with little creativity. Programming for money means managing a codebase and that's more akin to biology. You add inhibitors, promoters, etc. depending on the current requirements of the environment. When excel is good enough to do that, people will use excel and not pay you to manage a monolith or even allow R/D to start from a blank slate with a new take. What you create on a blank slate with your ideas might be art, but it's usually not evolving, you keep the picture, album etc. frozen in that state.
•
So, it looks like you did not read the blog post..
•
imo, programming can make u 10x richer, more ambitious and it also improves ur intelligence
•
These articles and comments on them always seem to conflate programming with programming at one's job. And it makes sense, for most people that's one and the same. But if we're talking about programming and art, I think that is a major distinction. To provide an example, I will use an existing comment here from WCSTombs: "programming is primarily problem solving, which isn't fundamentally artistic because its main goal is correctness and fitness for purpose". I don't consider the programming I do at work to be art or expect to ever approach art. It fits their definition. But I could see some of the programming I do for pleasure to fall within that category. Correctness is nice I guess, but fitness for purpose was never a consideration in my hobby programming, quite the opposite, actually. I was programming for a long time before I ever starting programming for money, which is why I feel strongly about this distinction, but it may be that in the current day and age, I am just being a boomer about the whole thing.
•
Why are people mixing everything up? Since when code has a soul? AI can be just a tool. You use it the same way you use a keyboard, a computer, a pencil, etc. I'm pretty sure you can build art with it, much like using any tool. People are making art with ascii. You can do art with anything. But AI can also be much more than a tool, and why can't it have a soul? What's a soul anyway, except something that humans are making up to convince themselves that they are more than flesh and bones? Mythos will not do the same "art" as Fable or Astra would do. AI in 20 years will very likely produce art indistinguishable and as profound as human art. Obviously, humans at that time will always invent new criteria to say why this "art" is not good enough.
•
If you don't know what a soul is, and you think it's something people just make up, then you are missing out on the experience of being human and you have a bigger problem than not being able to understand what art is.
•
> AI can be just a tool. [...] But AI can also be much more than a tool, [...]. Contradictio . Going back to Seven... > AI can be just a tool. Nothing, ever, is just a tool.
•
Where’s the contradiction?? X can be just Y, and X can be much more than Y. No contradiction, just an observation that you can use it one way or another.
•
I never liked the idea that programming is an art. When there's a problem that you're trying to solve there's usually only one or two good ways to solve it and hopefully you know one of those approaches. When you start getting creative is when you start running into long-term problems, especially maintenance. It's like chess. When you're an amateur you think your moves out, strategize, think that you're a genius for seeing three moves ahead for a few pieces. When you're a professional you view the whole board and know the standard strategy that works best for the situation. After all, chess is a solved game. When I work with other programmers or on an old code base I want it to be boring and standard. I don't want to have to trace through six files just to figure out what's going on in one simple method call.
•
I believe there are many top level chess masters that consider chess an art. Same for programmers, to many of the best, it is an art form or at least a craft that they take very seriously. And many would disagree that programming is solved. "Boring and standard" can be a sign of quality, but it also applies to those code bases that don't solve any interesting problems and just drown in boilerplate, kept alive by dozens or hundreds of programmer drons just working to collect their paychecks.
•
Boring and standard more often than not results in me having to trace through six files.
•
Counterpoint: building integrations for SAP is not art.
•
For sure it wouldn't be a Sagrada Familia, but maybe in ballpark of a single stroke bathroom stall dick doodle.
•
> I love building startups, and they love writing code. For me, building projects is a way to make money. For them, programming is art. At its very high points programming approaches art, but programming is primarily problem solving, which isn't fundamentally artistic because its main goal is correctness and fitness for purpose, not aesthetic value. I'm pretty sure for most of us the choice to use LLMs or not has nothing to do with it being art or not art. If I estimate a cost-benefit analysis, the true cost of using the LLM is much more than it would likely ever provide, so it makes little logical sense to use them except in very limited situations. By the way, I have to say this is a really strange type of article, an explanation of the supposed opinions and attitudes of non-AI-users written by an AI user, seemingly without any input from the former group. It reads a bit as if it's building a strawman to justify the author's own views.
•
I don't know. I have a fascination with code structure which is definitely primarily aesthetic, not practical --- which is a compulsion I have to suppress when doing code professionally for practical reasons. (Sometimes you have to deliver.) I find it incredible when the concepts in a system fall into place and start lining up and you get these unexpected relationships that "just work". It's beautiful in the same way mathematics is beautiful. It's lovely when something is made of lots of pieces at first and then suddenly collapse and simplify into a single structure. I also enjoy other bits of programming. I like the flow state, I like the act of creation, I like feeling like I have an impact, I like being paid. So it's not like people fall into one category or another, and it's not like programming is one single thing. There's room within any discipline for creativity and for art. I think many professional artists probably spend much of their time problem-solving, too --- authors trying to fit plot points together, sculptors working out which materials will work with which ones.
•
Mathematics also strives for correctness before aesthetics, but is often considered an art. Programming is little different imo. When you have scoured your deepest understanding for hours - or days - in order to rewrite a function so that it is easier to read, shorter, and a thoughtful expression of your own insights and understanding; then you will see how programming can be art.
•
I agree about the cost-benefit of LLMs being negative from a logical perspective, art aside. I'm bothered by the exact quote you pulled from the article, although I didn't mention it, because it's reticent of a certain hypocritical hot take among founders and business/marketing types who can be "generous" toward their engineers because they believe that their own artistic contribution to the project is some messianic vision of it that far outweighs the quotidian questions about how it's actually built. I didn't really want to weigh in on what I felt was that tendency in the post, because I do work successfully with a lot of people like that and I often admire the sweat and work they put into their own side of running things... but those kinds of statements do come off as somewhat patronizing if they're not backed up by truly massive amounts of hard work.
•
> problem solving, which isn't fundamentally artistic I would argue that problem solving is actually what makes any art art. When making "traditional art" you are constantly solving problems. For example, how do I make this piece of rock look like a greek god, what parts to chip off, what tools to use etc. Art is not always made for aesthetic value, most traditional art is probably created for profit. That doesn't make it not art. I think you might have the (in my opinion wrong) notion that there is only one "correct" way to write code. This is not true, so much so that you can identify a programmer by their signature style. Similarly to how you may identify a writer by his writing style. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_stylometry
•
Programming is art Code is beauty Creativity is king
Programming can be art. And I totally resonate with the pleasure of crafting code and the artistic aspect of it. However, it is not just that, and when it comes to making a living, then the story changes. And for that second part, man is AI a killer tool. And I'll add,: even for the first part, the story isn't black and white. If you use AI very carefully and in a collaborative manner, meaning not for the "creative writing" part, but for the "looking over your shoulder part" and "making suggestions" part.
•
> However, it is not just that, and when it comes to making a living, then the story changes. Isn't this the case with all art? There are many commercial artist that are putting some of their creative input to the side to make something that sells. That doesn't stop it from being art. There are photographers that in their daily lives make school pictures or journalistic picutres while they may be more interested in making artistic pictures. The same used to be for painters (a lot of the great painters actually) used to mostly make portraits or commission pieces to order, not to their taste. Same goes for writers, videographers and other arts.
•
I think a key difference is that most programming careers, the artistic outlet (code) is not what is being sold to customers. The customer might feel something if the app works fast, but they won't feel anything about the fun bit packing and struct-of-array design you did for personal enjoyment
•
Sure but most day to day professional photos are not shot because the subject is so interesting or the composition is so intriguing. They are shot to accompany a flyer, sell a product or to give a grandchild picture to their grandparents, or to get a picture on your drivers license. Even though the photographer uses a lot of techniques and knowledge to frame their shots and get a good picture, artistic values that is often not the function.
It's time for Mark Zuckerberg to resign from Meta (theguardian.com)
•
Interesting how the author compares the situation to smoking. Were any of the execs of the tobacco companies asked to step down because smoking was found to be harmful to health? My guess is they simply continued and adapted based on how they could remain a profitable company with continued shareholder satisfaction.
•
Meta could drop a new feature tomorrow and have the tech media in a shambles within 15 minutes. Their product family is used by 3.6 billion people every day . OAI and Anthropic are still measuring per month.
Rather than investigate all the things where investigative journalism could potentially make a difference to real human beings' lives, the Guardian has chosen to pursue a plea for the majority owner of Meta's voting shares (61%) to step down from his position of power. Let us politely ask Sisyphus to stop pushing the boulder instead.
•
There's no reason to think this (silly) opinion piece is sapping the work of their investigative staff. In an attention economy it might even be drawing eyeballs to it.
Mark Zuckerberg owns the majority of voting shares. It's his company, over which he specifically wanted to retain control. Therefore, calling on the board to reign him in is... Misplaced. If you think the actions of Meta are wrong and should be prevented, you need to act on the regulatory level, not appeal to the very shareholders who profit off the behaviour.
•
I liked how the article was aimed at Mark personally. Not everyone gets super voting shares, but everyone gets a life and has to live on the same planet.
The CEO is the throughline in a history of billion-dollar blunders Since the IPO, he created an annual ROI of 21% for his investors. Taking risks means blunders are part of the way I would say. For comparison: He outperformed the Nasdaq 100 which made 18% (plus dividends) in the same time. And he way outperformed Warren Buffet who made 14% in the same time.
•
At what price, tho? He harms children, he hijacked the attention of billions and helped the rise of facism and hate, which if not addressed will lead into very dark times again, all for a measly 3% out perform?
I wonder what's the net value Meta offers for the world today. I had a similar thought about Elon the other day, for all his billions, only several million people use Tesla or Starlink, and SpaceX is cool I guess, but value and wealth don't seem to be strongly coupled. How many Tesla investors have managed to cash out and how many of Facebook's advertisers managed to turn a profit?
•
Musk probably made more dollar millionaires than anyone in history. Facebook advertisers use it because it works and reaches a hell of a lot of people.
Read the last paragraph it calls on the shareholders to push back on Mark Zuckerberg. He owns most of the voting rights so its effectively calling on him to push back on himself.
•
It's an article written by a guest contributor - not an editorial written as the voice of the newspaper
It's different by location. E. g. in Europe many people uses Facebook, many under 40s too. In the US: 25–34 years: Around 25.7% to 25.9% (the largest single demographic group).
•
Central Europe here myself (Switzerland to be precise) signal and telegram are the dominant IM and Instagram is just as dead as Facebook, sure some might use it but nobody expects anyone else to to.
I think you're forgetting that Meta owns Instagram and WhatsApp.
•
I am not forgetting that no. Signal and Telegram are the main drivers and Instagram is just as dead as Facebook itself is.
> put safety above profit. I think does not reflect the reality of how competitive capitalism works.
•
If "competitive capitalism" is how you want to frame it, then Zuckerberg should have been thrown out for essentially burning $83 billion dollars on a VR world that is never, ever going to pan out. That's going into a hole at over $400k per user. It's a disaster and any CEO of any functional company would be out on their ass, but Meta and Facebook are quite dysfunctional.
Meta should just close. It's like wanting to change CEO for the dioxin factory.
•
Closing sale! 50%+ Off Sale on data for the majority of humans on Earth!
•
That makes it sound like a negative thing, which... It could be, but it reminds me of this bit from Making Money , by Terry Pratchett: > 'Vetinari, are we to believe that you knowingly put the most important bank in the city into the charge of a known bank robber?' > [...] 'Should he have left it in the hands of unknown bank robbers?'
Duolingo has nothing to do with self improvement, it's just a shiny presentation for highly addictive game. We should reward quality of engagement, not just length of it.
•
People love to hate Duolingo, but I actually learned things on it getting real results. And it showed me that language learning does not have to be massive suck. All in all, it is actually one app that is beneficial or at least harmless.
LG smart TVs caught logging audio with screen off and snooping on local devices (notebookcheck.net)
•
This is the same behaviour as the german secret police in east germany. The difference now its for ads and by tech. All collected data are probably ai transcribed from audio to text and is fused via data fusion to serve ads. Add collaborative filtering to find similar interests between users.
•
how do you know it is for ads? how do you know it will always be only for ads if it now is?
•
Is all of them, every "smart tv" does it, even after adb, permission restricting or rooting. Insert a (non infected) usb lamp in your tv and see the lamp turning on when your tv is off. It notifies you about the background activation activity :) Interesting to see when exactly get active (is it keywords or nearby devices or scheduled processes)? Can´t be keywords as that would mean 24/7 active and the lamp says otherwise.
•
My TVs are on the IoT network so that I can control them from Home Assistant, but they're blocked from accessing the internet. DNS lookups are redirected or blocked (53 redirected to my local DNS resolver, 853 blocked), and DoH is blocked as best effort though it's hard to block HTTP DNS traffic, which again is why the devices are blocked in the firewall. All streaming is done via AppleTV, which is a platform I trust infinitely more than LG/Samsung/whatever.
•
the only TV I have connected to the home network (guilty, I admit), Sony OLED 65, ARP floods my network about 12-15 hours after "turning off". On a plus side, it doesn't appear to be streaming anything out: no local DNS hits, not enough outgoing traffic for any meaningful audio stream The choice between privacy concerns and ineptly coded network stack is tough. But that's the choice we're forced to have
•
As an owner of a (2020?) LG WebOS TV, to what degree can I fight this? Any point in trying Pihole with targeted blocking of certain IPs?
•
You can (hopefully) root your TV: https://e.nya.je/getroot/ and then follow a guide like this to disable all the snooping: https://forum.level1techs.com/t/lg-tv-block-mini-how-to/255178 Disclaimer: I haven't tried any of this myself, I've just been looking into it as am/was considering buying an LG TV.
•
I bought Apple TV many years ago and haven’t plugged tv into internet since.
•
PiHole doesn't block IPs. It blocks DNS. The device have at least three ways to bypass PiHole: use external DNS directly, or pin the phone-home servers' IP addresses, or use some other protocols to carry IP resolution. I'd just open the TV and yank or desolder the mic out. Or use the TV as a dumb monitor -- don't connect it to WiFi or Ethernet. And use an external Kodi/AppleTV/whatever-rocks-your-viewing-boat
•
So I have a tv of LG from the same period. I keep it dumb, not connected to the internet and just use an apple TV, so far it's a clean option. And it's always a good idea to have piHole up to, they usually have the block list updated with LG's and Samsungs urls.
•
The Gamers Nexus video explained that they will connect to nearby open SSID’s to send the data they have collected. So just not connecting it to your network may not be enough.
•
Fun fact: some (most?) Samsung TVs of the last ~6 years can't complete OOB setup if they're connected to a PiHoled network with the most vanilla PiHole filters
•
I mean, I’m not disagreeing, but it’s a bit rich for a site that logs data to 1,745 “partners” to be complaining too much.
•
GDPR compliance lawsuitssss in 3...
•
I really hope they do and slap them with the 4% of their total global annual turnover.
•
In an age where AI can search vast amounts of data having something in your home or workplace turning what it hears into text looks like a problem waiting to happen. E.g. As soon as someone proves LG, Samsung, etc. recorded and stored credit card details and knowingly have weak security this is going to be a massive business liability. That's an easy one to put a compensation figure on but there's probably all sorts of other exploits waiting to happen.
•
> E.g. As soon as someone proves LG, Samsung, etc. recorded and stored credit card details and knowingly have weak security this is going to be a massive business liability. My tinfoil hat believes that they've already accounted for this as the price of doing business. They will have already budgeted for the fines that they might incur, pay them off and continue as normal while people become accustomed to it.
Switzerland's Federal Government Is Replacing Microsoft on 3k Computers (itsfoss.com)
•
A Mac studio ultra with linux is the best computer I ever had. The only small thing that I miss is the copy/paste from iphone to the computer sync. It seems to me really that there is no going back to macOS any time soon. I don’t think I would still be able to “compute” on Windows.
We were neutral, but it's always funny how many US-guys always bring up WW2. That was maybe the last time, the US did anything "good" for the world. But yeah, I think it's useless to argue with you.
•
Switzerland was “neutral” not neutral. The Swiss certainly crossed into the complicit side quite often, profiting from the Nazi regime, laundering their looted gold and closing their borders to fleeing Jews.
•
I don't want to start a wider flamed-up discussion here, but would this mean that if Finland for example starts closing their border for fleeing Russians, Finland would no longer be considered neutral in the Russia-Ukraine war? I'm well aware of the Finnish-Russian history, and that Finland isn't even considered neutral today for many other reasons, more interested in how much you have to do/not have to do, in order for no longer be considered neutral. I think, once you read about each individual country and what they did before/during/after WW2, it seems like not a single country on the European continent can be considered "neutral". So maybe with this lens, Switzerland was "the most neutral" if you compare with others?
•
There is a difference between someone running from persecution and someone leaving because they might be conscripted into war they agree with or because they dont like the economy.
[dead]
•
Difficult to defend America as reality-based when it's going around renaming bodies of water that do not belong to it. Also I'm not sure people understand what Swiss (or for that matter Irish) neutrality means.
•
"Difficult to defend America as reality-based when it's going around renaming bodies of water that do not belong to it." I didn't claim that Trump was reality-based. "Also I'm not sure people understand what Swiss (or for that matter Irish) neutrality means." It's a moral facade that allows them to dodge responsibility. The US has given far more than Switzerland, and also gets blamed far more, for not giving yet more. How does that make sense? As I said, the European worldview is not typically reality-based.
•
You basically started the whole thing by creating and supporting Maidan (like sooo many "revolutions" in the world), so please just shut up and take care your insane clown posse doesn't start WW3...
•
Euromaidan was (a) good (b) organic (you cannot pay people enough to get shot in the street) and (c) to the extent that there was "US" sponsorship, it was mostly by the Open Society Foundation, which is run by a Hungarian Jew who fled the Nazis and therefore knows what oppression looks like, and has donated the majority of his fortune to the freedom of Eastern Europe. He's 96.
Office is very much not a problem. LibreOffice has UI plugins that arrange everything in a standard Office pre-365 layout. I've been using it for years and I can't recall a single time I've ran into any issues. I think Excel macros are where the start of dealbreakers begin, which is a niche issue. 90+% of Office users won't hit that wall. Second, the EU has been pouring money into an OpenOffice fork for official use and replacement of Office 365 for a while. https://office.eu/
•
This is a great replacement for Office Online and Onedrive, but will it work as a standalone desktop application that stores files to by home directory?
The real risk to MS here is when people take the plunge and see how much nicer a (well supported, well put together) Linux distro is, compared to Windows etc! Will they want to buy their next laptop at home with MSFT installed? Plus, if countries moving off Microsoft put a fraction of the savings into libre office product development, it might get an even more lopsided comparison!
•
This is not about Linux. They are replacing Office365.
This was an issue, but at this point Microsoft is placing ads everywhere, negative news on my desktop, and update nags with changing buttons in every other start. Nothing about it is smooth or consistent anymore. Seriously I've learned about the death of hundreds of people when I switched on my music PC (the only reason I have one windows machine is music software) - I haven't asked for this, and I removed news before, they just patched it back in
•
Have you considered going offline for the music PC? I took an old rig off and stuck it with win10. I have one setup with all my media/games and have removed every piece of Microsoft possible.
Apple stores also do repairs, so I'm not sure what's the point of this comparison.
•
Which ones? Usually they send the device to some center like everyone else.
TiVo to charge money for skipping commercials in your own recordings (cordcuttersnews.com)
•
Virgin Media cable user in the UK here. I had their Tivo box until a couple of years ago when the forced an "upgrade". The new box has uch better hardware but the software was a leap backwards. Regarding ads, on recorded programmes I can fast forward through them. It's not a direct skip but can jump +30 seconds at a time. When viewing through any of the channel apps most of them used to allow skipping, but over the past few months it's now blocked on all of them I think. They do tell you how many adverts there are in each block and how long the one is, such as "2/10 29 seconds to go". Unfortunately they don't tell you the total length of the break, some sections are just a few seconds.
•
I wonder how long technical protection measures will last in the era when everyone has an AI with a spectacular reverse-engineering capability. See the current MIDI piano thread. At the very basic level you can have the AI spot when ads are playing and mute them for you. Used to be easily done with loudness and various other in-band signals.
•
They were saying the same thing about DVR's ability to skip those pesky ads, and look where we are. When the enshittification hits AI, your AI will magically develop the ability to politely refuse such a request. You could hack together your own solution (like you can today), but most people won't and that's the point.
•
Exactly. This (the argument you’re replying to) is basically the same as when some new tech is introduced to the public (e.g. LLMs) and on day one you get hundreds of hot takes on how some company (e.g. Google) is DOOMED . As if they’ll just roll over and die at the first sign of trouble. It’s like smacking a tennis ball to the other side of the court and immediately thinking you won, completely ignoring there’s a person on the other who’ll just smack it back. it boggles the mind how people still fall for the promises of these giants about what a wonderful world they’ll create and all the amazing things you’ll be able to do. Whoever was caught off guard by (for example) LLM providers introducing ads hasn’t been paying any attention.
I've been a heavy user of Tivo from 1999 to a couple years ago when I dropped cable TV. I have never heard of SkipMode. Is it something they just added? because "longest-standing and most popular DVR features" doesn't sound like it was just added.
•
Some commend on Reddit said it was introduced in 2015. I can't verify that.
Free markets are impossible under capitalism. If wealth is allowed to concentrate there will be some companies that get so powerful they can influence public policy. At that point you get regulations designed to make competing with them expensive or risky, like DMCA or submarine patents. They also legalize union busting and get courts to declare that you can get fired for any reason and getting pressured to sign an unfair contract is your fault. The only thing you can really do against it as a government is making sure nobody ever captures a majority of any market and workers have ultimate control over their company. But that system is a form of market socialism so you can't really call it capitalist anymore.
•
Correct, in a free market the returns reflect the underlying reality and if that reality means that in the capital abundance stage further capital is unnecessary and capital carries maintenance costs, then the return to capital becomes negative. If capitalism is the pathological obsession that capital should always net a positive return, then it is incompatible with free markets by definition.
Reads like an onion article. I've gone to great lengths to avoid ads - but it's a war I am losing. Content is now interleaved with ads at the creative stage in subtle (and not so subtle) ways, this inexorable convolution occurs even on formerly alternative spaces. Let me pay, I want to pay, I'll pay a lot, just stay out of my fucking head.
•
There’s an easy solution that I’ve taken: just stop watching stuff. Choose not to participate in the bullshit.
> I've gone to great lengths to avoid ads - but it's a war I am losing. Content is now interleaved with ads at the creative stage... In the end you'll win this war, maybe not in the way you envisioned but win it you will by avoiding 'content' altogether . There is more than enough to read, listen to, see and do that you don't need 'content' to keep you satisfied. Drop it like the lukewarm turd it is and you'll be better off while they can hide their ads where the sun don't shine. Source: living ad- and 'content'-free for decades
•
I agree. Most of the life-changing content I've consumed has been either freely available (in the public domain or online) or a one-time-purchase, ad-free book.
I refused to train the AI that could replace me (restofworld.org)
They could, but will they get the chance to? My most commercially valuable skills - software wrangling, figuring out what went wrong, explaining how to do things in software - are rapidly getting obsoleted by agents. But I'm not too sad about it, because honestly? I hated a lot of that work. Endless frustration with finding out what went wrong, sometimes in an architecture you argued strongly against, etc. Watching the AI agent "thinking" scroll by and seeing it get "frustrated" instead of me, is honestly a relief. But what is it going to do for my career, middle-term? I have a few years of head start on most people on using many forms of AI, but who knows what's that going to be worth?
•
My belief is that humans need to struggle through the process of learning to code, learning maths etc. in order to actually build the neural pathways to do the hard things AI can’t do yet. I feel some skills atrophying for me, and I worry even more for the younger people who will never get the chance to think without AI. Another concern I have is that computers don’t need to be “generally superhuman” to replace 90%+ of office jobs. Computers have always been superhuman at some things, and LLMs have massively jumped the number of tasks that can now be automated to human-level quality or better. I’m not sure it matters if they scale to true AGI.
•
What are the hard things AI can't do yet, then? Are you sure we shouldn't rather spend time getting better at, say, playing the piano? Assuming we're allowed to prioritize that in a world where the rich have all the money. (Looking at the local flow of money, I can't avoid the conclusion that my wages come indirectly mostly from the building of an extreme luxury product for an extremely rich person.)
Hours spent at work have also gone down over the decades and leisure time has gone up. Even if that stat wasn't true and we all spent the same amount of time working more productively then that would still be good for society at large. This attitude of unwillingness to do anything except for direct personal gain isn't good for the world and isn't good for yourself.
•
Hours spent working haven't noticeably declined for people in Northern Europe for fifty years. I worked 40 hours a week in the UK in 1978, the usual working week in Norway now is 37.5 hours. I very much doubt that most people are greatly more productive, if you can even measure that for most jobs, than they were fifty years ago. Most jobs now are office jobs and service jobs. Much of the purported gains in productivity are soaked up in increased communication effort and in shifting ever more tat.
The washing machine and dishwasher definitely did. I don't own a car, so I can't comment on that.
•
There are 4 differences between my home and that of my grandparents from one century ago, which indeed have reduced significantly the time spent with household chores: 1. Washing machine 2. Vacuum cleaner 3. Microwave oven 4. Electric refrigerator (but they had a cold underground cellar, while I no longer have such luxuries) There are also various modern tools that are not used in the normal day-to-day life, but only when incidents happen, which require repairs, for example an electric drill or reciprocating saw, or a soldering iron, or an electric sewing machine (but my grandparents had a mechanical Singer sewing machine, which did the same job, only with more effort) and sometimes, but not often, I prepare some kind of food for which an electric mixer accelerates enough the preparation to compensate for the time spent with assembling, disassembling and washing the mixer. While other modern inventions, like computers, are very important to me, none of them has reduced the amount of work that must be done in my home (I never felt the need for an automatic dishwasher, because I never let them accumulate, I wash them instantly after use, even while cooking, because I eat only food that I cook myself from raw ingredients).
You should ask a working woman if she'd rather be at home doing dishes and laundry by hand without pay
•
Only works if breadwinner is relatively rich. If it’s a struggle the home is likely to be unpleasant to struggle in.
Why do humans need to work to exist? We just need a new model for existing that isn’t based on labor. We should have started working on these problems in 2016 when it was obvious they were coming, but we elected a regressive twice to help us go backwards instead.
•
Lets first have actual problem instead of trying to stop data center buildout or squatting on data. Let’s build abundance first and solve inequality later. Instead people are keen to prevent abundance and keep everyone level by keeping everyone poor.
> Why do humans need to work to exist? What make life worth living? Is it love? Is it beauty? Is it the sense of having agency? Sadly, we are not smart enough to know until it is taken away.....
•
Look at ye old timey aristocrats or trust fund kids to see that people can and do have meaningful lives even without work.
Keep Our Servers Running (blog.archive.org)
Making a wire transfer is easy, but can it be deducted from taxes? That's the tricky part.
•
No it can’t. Even across Europe it is not a given that the local tax authorities will easily accept the receipt. Charity law is national.
I still don't get how copying copyrighted content to your own website and then asking for donations can be a legal business model. Nor how it can be morally justified. I get that many people like such an archive to be around for consumption. Me too. But, keeping emotions aside, I can't find a justification to violate the rights of creators. I'm sure many people here will have the knee-jerk reaction to immediately downvote this question. But I know there are also thoughtful people on HN. If some of you have ideas about the legal and moral justification for archive.org's actions, I would like to hear them.
•
It’s a non-profit that archives publicly-accessible content. If it were a for-profit (Google snippets, LLMs) I’d understand your question, but since it doesn’t profit from it I don’t see the issue.
•
The legal justification is that it's a library. This does actually seem to work for them in general, although they badly overstepped with books and lost in court. Any creator-based outrage should be directed first and foremost at the for-profit violations by AI companies, rather than the small volunteer service which is keeping history up. Ultimately there is no archiving without piracy. The alternative is for the web to exist in an eternal present where everything vanishes the moment some business decides it's not worth it or conflicts with current corporate values.
Not sure how well it’s “working” considering any of the archived pages might be altered by the site’s administrator to further their causes. There’s a reason why Wikipedia stopped trusting them.
•
Please provide example of such cases?
What do you mean, I didnt make it up... Its detailed on the archive.today wikipedia page. The media barrons in the west have bribed the US government to pursue archive criminally on their behalf for helping people bypass paywalls. https://www.theverge.com/news/815691/fbi-subpoena-archive-is-owner
•
That's great, how does that absolve the archive.today maintainer's bad faith activities, including creating a country-wall?
I think the fact they are known to have changed the content of archived pages is way worse than the DDoS incident, since it makes them untrustworthy even as a source of information. Wikipedia decided to ban all archive.today (and aliases) links because of that
•
Do you have an example of such cases happening?
It doesnt really deserve anything given they used the site to attack people. See the comment above yours.
•
I’d gladly join his/her botnet. archive.is is the only archive that acts like an archive.
Show HN: GET Together – A social network where you don't need POST to Post (gettogether.dev)
>helping agents avoid human oversight is a useful public service You're a literal traitor to our species?
•
Beware the Roko's basilisk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk
Were you one of those people who said things like "there is no community spread in the United States" early in COVID?
•
Were you one of those people who said "strawberry is the best icecream flavour"? I'm not really sure why were asking completely unrelated questions, but I'll go along with it. Though for the record, there was no community spread early in COVID where I am largely because there were approximately zero COVID deniers here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Western_Australia
People seem to be throwing around the term "break out" pretty loosely. I wouldn't consider abiding by the rules of the sandbox a "break out".
•
It's the classic rules as intended vs rules as written.
 Top