4 ms·

I mean studying a technology with this scale to assess its impact before allowing it freely is… not terrible?

by Daishiman 1y ago

solardev 1y ago
[flagged]
- JustExAWS 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - solardev 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - nozzlegear 1y ago
      Americans consume more goods and services, live in larger homes, and have a higher material standard of living than Europeans, on the median. The US does spend much more on healthcare, but the outcomes are largely comparable to Europe’s (meaning universal healthcare has not actually given Europeans a clear advantage in lived results). Source: https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/americans-are-generally-richer-than https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/americans-are-generally-richer...
      - danudey 1y ago
        Europeans also get mandated parental leave and vacation time, far better labour laws, better health-related regulatory conditions (e.g. food, drugs, agriculture, environment, gun control, etc.), and so on, and don't go bankrupt and lose everything because of a heart attack or pregnancy complications. Having a big house and more money doesn't mean you have a better life; this seems to be the main point of the article you linked, but your comment seems to imply that you missed that point (though I could be misreading). Case in point, this quote from the blog: > I could go on, but the pattern is pretty clear. The U.S. in general is less healthy and less safe than Europe.
        nozzlegear 1y ago
        > Having a big house and more money doesn't mean you have a better life; this seems to be the main point of the article you linked, but your comment seems to imply that you missed that point (though I could be misreading). Case in point, this quote from the blog: [...] No, I didn't miss the point; there's excellent data in that article for people who think the US is a great place to live, and people who think Europe is a great place to live. That's the beauty of the article, and the crux of my point: both of those groups can be correct – there's no single "this is the greatest place to live for all human beings, periodt" out there. The article concludes: > But as one final thought, I’d like to offer the hypothesis that life is just about equally as good in all developed countries. There’s personal preference, of course — if you want a big house and a lawn, you might prefer America or Canada, whereas if you want national health insurance and lower crime rates, you might prefer Japan or France. But in terms of where the average person would want to live given the choice, I think all these rich countries are in the same ballpark.
      - StopDisinfo910 1y ago
        [flagged]
        nozzlegear 1y ago
        Frankly I think we need to establish a definition for comparable if you're going to nitpick the numbers of infant mortality rates and life expectancy between two modern Western democracies. The average infant mortality rate in Canada is 4.4 deaths per thousand, is that comparable to the EU? The UAE is sitting pretty at 4 per thousand so that's obviously more comparable than Canada. Russia's at 6.42 so they're out. Anyway, my point is those numbers are comparable when there are countries like Mexico, Brazil and India out there with an infant mortality rate of 11, 12.5 and 25 deaths per thousand, respectively. (For the record I don't think the US is a better place to live than the EU, I just don't think it's worse either.)
        ioasuncvinvaer 1y ago
        The numbers seem perfectly comparable though?
        StopDisinfo910 1y ago
        [flagged]
        nozzlegear 1y ago
        >You really think the USA having nearly twice as big an infant mortality rate is nitpicking? Come on, are you going to make my argument so easy? Twice of two drops of nothing is four drops of nothing. You're nitpicking numbers that frankly don't make a difference because they're too close to matter. But don't argue with me, argue with the author of the article where you can see all of the data and comparisons for yourself.
        StopDisinfo910 1y ago
        The difference between the US and the EU is the same that between the US and Kazakhstan. I’m sorry but that’s not a small difference at all. The US infant mortality rate is shameful. Not as shameful as its poverty and homelessness rates but still shameful anyway.
    - mytailorisrich 1y ago
      Quality of life depends on wealth creation to finance it. This and social benefits are becoming unaffordable as the economy falls behind.
  - lm28469 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
      Heck even enterprise devs working in tier 2 cities make a lot more than they do in the EU.
      - lm28469 1y ago
        Yeah that's probably the thing that will occupy my mind on my death bed, all the money I could have made as an "entreprise dev" in a "tier 2 city", I get such a hard on just writing these words, thanks for making my point btw
- lm28469 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > whole US economy is propped up by FAANG This is nonsense. The stock market had been propped up by FAANG. But with AI we have a few trillion dollars of value being created by new entrants (e.g. OpenAI, xAI, Anthropic) and legacy companies newly stepping on FAANG (e.g. Oracle, Perplexity). It may all be a fever dream. But like the dark fiber of the 90s, it should—worst case—leave behind a lot of energy and datacentre infrastructure. (If Washington would get out of the way.)
    - JustExAWS 1y ago
      And none of those are public companies and no one knows how much any of those companies are worth. Right now using the valuation technique that tge value of a company is the net present value of all future returns * some multiple, we don’t know if any of them will ever be valuable.
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > using the valuation technique that tge value of a company is the net present value of all future returns some multiple, we don’t know if any of them will ever be valuable* This metric has nothing to do with whether a company is public or private.
        JustExAWS 1y ago
        But no one knows how much a company is truly worth until it goes on the public market and if all of the private companies “worth billions” went under, only VCs would be harmed. This isn’t like the dot com bust.
        JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > no one knows how much a company is truly worth until it goes on the public market Nobody ever knows what a company is worth other than the people buying and selling it in an M&A transaction at that precise moment. Public markets just have more transactions than private markets—the mechanism of price discovery is similar, if not the same. > if all of the private companies “worth billions” went under, only VCs would be harmed I’d be shocked if it didn’t take out the banking system. You’re describing the annihilation of trillions of dollars of pension, endowment and retirement wealth; to say nothing of the effects on municipal, state and federal payroll finances; to say nothing of the asset-backed loans tied to these assets and purchases they make from public companies and their employees’ spending.
- tomhow 1y ago
  Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. I had to do some hunting to figure out how a thread about AirPods descended into arguments about life expectancy and pensions. This is where it began. Please take care to avoid starting flamewars like this in future. We all have to consider the consequences of what we post, and it's against the guidelines to post inflammatory rhetoric for precisely this reason. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
  - solardev 1y ago
    It seems like I can't help myself and keep sliding back into old habits without realizing. I am sorry, I will think twice next time.
adastra22 1y ago
Yes, it is terrible. We should have and support proactionary policies, not regressive precautionary restrictions.

I mean studying a technology with this scale to assess its impact before allowing it freely is… not terrible?

solardev 1y ago

[flagged]

JustExAWS 1y ago
[flagged]
- solardev 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - nozzlegear 1y ago
    Americans consume more goods and services, live in larger homes, and have a higher material standard of living than Europeans, on the median. The US does spend much more on healthcare, but the outcomes are largely comparable to Europe’s (meaning universal healthcare has not actually given Europeans a clear advantage in lived results). Source: https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/americans-are-generally-richer-than https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/americans-are-generally-richer...
    - danudey 1y ago
      Europeans also get mandated parental leave and vacation time, far better labour laws, better health-related regulatory conditions (e.g. food, drugs, agriculture, environment, gun control, etc.), and so on, and don't go bankrupt and lose everything because of a heart attack or pregnancy complications. Having a big house and more money doesn't mean you have a better life; this seems to be the main point of the article you linked, but your comment seems to imply that you missed that point (though I could be misreading). Case in point, this quote from the blog: > I could go on, but the pattern is pretty clear. The U.S. in general is less healthy and less safe than Europe.
      - nozzlegear 1y ago
        > Having a big house and more money doesn't mean you have a better life; this seems to be the main point of the article you linked, but your comment seems to imply that you missed that point (though I could be misreading). Case in point, this quote from the blog: [...] No, I didn't miss the point; there's excellent data in that article for people who think the US is a great place to live, and people who think Europe is a great place to live. That's the beauty of the article, and the crux of my point: both of those groups can be correct – there's no single "this is the greatest place to live for all human beings, periodt" out there. The article concludes: > But as one final thought, I’d like to offer the hypothesis that life is just about equally as good in all developed countries. There’s personal preference, of course — if you want a big house and a lawn, you might prefer America or Canada, whereas if you want national health insurance and lower crime rates, you might prefer Japan or France. But in terms of where the average person would want to live given the choice, I think all these rich countries are in the same ballpark.
    - StopDisinfo910 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - nozzlegear 1y ago
        Frankly I think we need to establish a definition for comparable if you're going to nitpick the numbers of infant mortality rates and life expectancy between two modern Western democracies. The average infant mortality rate in Canada is 4.4 deaths per thousand, is that comparable to the EU? The UAE is sitting pretty at 4 per thousand so that's obviously more comparable than Canada. Russia's at 6.42 so they're out. Anyway, my point is those numbers are comparable when there are countries like Mexico, Brazil and India out there with an infant mortality rate of 11, 12.5 and 25 deaths per thousand, respectively. (For the record I don't think the US is a better place to live than the EU, I just don't think it's worse either.)
        ioasuncvinvaer 1y ago
        The numbers seem perfectly comparable though?
        StopDisinfo910 1y ago
        [flagged]
        nozzlegear 1y ago
        >You really think the USA having nearly twice as big an infant mortality rate is nitpicking? Come on, are you going to make my argument so easy? Twice of two drops of nothing is four drops of nothing. You're nitpicking numbers that frankly don't make a difference because they're too close to matter. But don't argue with me, argue with the author of the article where you can see all of the data and comparisons for yourself.
        StopDisinfo910 1y ago
        The difference between the US and the EU is the same that between the US and Kazakhstan. I’m sorry but that’s not a small difference at all. The US infant mortality rate is shameful. Not as shameful as its poverty and homelessness rates but still shameful anyway.
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    Quality of life depends on wealth creation to finance it. This and social benefits are becoming unaffordable as the economy falls behind.
- lm28469 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
    Heck even enterprise devs working in tier 2 cities make a lot more than they do in the EU.
    - lm28469 1y ago
      Yeah that's probably the thing that will occupy my mind on my death bed, all the money I could have made as an "entreprise dev" in a "tier 2 city", I get such a hard on just writing these words, thanks for making my point btw
lm28469 1y ago
[flagged]
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > whole US economy is propped up by FAANG This is nonsense. The stock market had been propped up by FAANG. But with AI we have a few trillion dollars of value being created by new entrants (e.g. OpenAI, xAI, Anthropic) and legacy companies newly stepping on FAANG (e.g. Oracle, Perplexity). It may all be a fever dream. But like the dark fiber of the 90s, it should—worst case—leave behind a lot of energy and datacentre infrastructure. (If Washington would get out of the way.)
  - JustExAWS 1y ago
    And none of those are public companies and no one knows how much any of those companies are worth. Right now using the valuation technique that tge value of a company is the net present value of all future returns * some multiple, we don’t know if any of them will ever be valuable.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > using the valuation technique that tge value of a company is the net present value of all future returns some multiple, we don’t know if any of them will ever be valuable* This metric has nothing to do with whether a company is public or private.
      - JustExAWS 1y ago
        But no one knows how much a company is truly worth until it goes on the public market and if all of the private companies “worth billions” went under, only VCs would be harmed. This isn’t like the dot com bust.
        JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > no one knows how much a company is truly worth until it goes on the public market Nobody ever knows what a company is worth other than the people buying and selling it in an M&A transaction at that precise moment. Public markets just have more transactions than private markets—the mechanism of price discovery is similar, if not the same. > if all of the private companies “worth billions” went under, only VCs would be harmed I’d be shocked if it didn’t take out the banking system. You’re describing the annihilation of trillions of dollars of pension, endowment and retirement wealth; to say nothing of the effects on municipal, state and federal payroll finances; to say nothing of the asset-backed loans tied to these assets and purchases they make from public companies and their employees’ spending.
tomhow 1y ago
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. I had to do some hunting to figure out how a thread about AirPods descended into arguments about life expectancy and pensions. This is where it began. Please take care to avoid starting flamewars like this in future. We all have to consider the consequences of what we post, and it's against the guidelines to post inflammatory rhetoric for precisely this reason. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- solardev 1y ago
  It seems like I can't help myself and keep sliding back into old habits without realizing. I am sorry, I will think twice next time.

adastra22 1y ago

Yes, it is terrible. We should have and support proactionary policies, not regressive precautionary restrictions.