6 ms·

He really put in to words what I’ve been feeling lately. I love programming and I’m quite good at it, but this industry is a cesspit. I’ve already decided to go

He really put in to words what I’ve been feeling lately. I love programming and I’m quite good at it, but this industry is a cesspit. I’ve already decided to go back to school to get one of those ‘real’ jobs. I’m tired of working in an industry hell bent on the destruction of society.

bluegatty 6mo ago
'The industry' is not hellbent on destroying society - this is just so unhinged it's hard to know how to make of it.
- yoyohello13 6mo ago
  True, I should have said an industry that will trample on anything that stands in the way of its pursuit of money.
  - bluegatty 6mo ago
    It's not doing those things.
  - kiba 6mo ago
    The industry optimize toward whatever metric is legible. A company that optimize toward an illegible metric will endure.
    - jordwest 6mo ago
      Unfortunately there are plenty of highly legible metrics that make the world a worse place ("engagement" might be among the worst)
  - sfn42 6mo ago
    Welcome to literally all industry.
  - devonkim 6mo ago
    This is what amorality means to me in the context of socioeconomics. It operates in an area of reduced dimensionality to economic value because no other value can be agreed upon in trade between cultures. It doesn’t care if a piece of art, nature or human invention is genuinely novel, rare, irreplaceable, invaluable, etc. unless it can be converted into materializable economic value that is itself subjective and present oriented so that we can plan for our future selves about resources as a proxy.
- nullsanity 6mo ago
  We need to bring back consumer first design and destroy the incentives to prioritize shareholders over the much larger cohort of ordinary consumers whose lives were affecting.
- Brian_K_White 6mo ago
  There is a quote that goes something like "The purpose of any system is whatever it does." Whatever any system does, it's someone's intention that it does so. It's like an unavoidable truism. You can't say anything that gets around it.
  - bluegatty 6mo ago
    Great. The system does what it does. It's not 'destroying society'. Not remotely in, any sense. Many people seem to like Facebook. It's not really not causing harm, they are a minor nuisance at worst ... that you can avoid by ... not using it. Open AI makes AI that you can use to do whatever. That's mostly it.
    - propstober 6mo ago
      yes and yes. a system can fulfill it’s function while simultaneously having massive impacts on society. we are only now experiencing the consequences of social media running rampant.
      - Jensson 6mo ago
        Progress have massive impacts on society, printing press was running rampant and caused massive issues, protests, civil wars and in the end democracy. Historically giving people more access to information and communication has always been a good thing even if it caused problems short term.
        propstober 6mo ago
        equating social media and the printing press is tempting but reductive. esp with massive profit incentives, social media is often built for retention and conversion rather than for informative purposes. esp within the modern context. it is not a black and white picture. social media can exist responsibly. just because a technology represents "progress" there is much we can and should pay attention to. just blanket dismissing regulation and criticism for the sake of progress is lazy. I highly encourage you to read: https://jonathanhaidt.com/social-media/ https://jonathanhaidt.com/social-media/
- munksbeer 6mo ago
  You're getting really downvoted, which just proves people don't like hearing views that challenge their narrative. I agree with you. Human greed has always been a thing, will always be a thing. But most people now would never choose to go back and be born 100 years ago if given the option. They ignore everything positive that technology has done, and massively ramp the negatives.
- FrustratedMonky 6mo ago
  "industry' is not hellbent on destroying society" Think you are missing the point. It is not an actual back room with dudes twirling their mustaches with concrete plans to destroy the world. It is the 'profit motive' that forces a thousand small decisions, that you go along with because you have a mortgage to pay. And all added up they destroy the world.
  - bluegatty 6mo ago
    "And all added up they destroy the world." That is total nonsense. You people have lost your minds, this is worse than a bad reddit thread. Neither 'industry' not 'software' is 'destroying the world'. Also ""Think you are missing the point. It is not an actual back room with dudes twirling their mustaches "" Thanks for the 'deep insight'?!? Do you think you're conversing with a 14 year old, struggling with abstractions? FYI - I've lived around the world, 'studied industry' formally, worked in a handful of them. We're more prosperous than we have ever been, by a long mile. There are some externalizations that are not healthy, but almost all of it is simply due to the large footprint we have on the earth. Thankfully the population will scale back a bit and we'll probably harmonize. But the very notion that 'the industry is destroying the world' is so juvenile and nihilist, it's just ridiculous.
    - FrustratedMonky 6mo ago
      'the industry is destroying the world' Sorry. It think there were several themes here. "Capitalism", leads to a thousand little decisions, that destroy the world. I've seen plenty of middle managers, that when they have to make their quarterly numbers, will dump toxic waste into the river upstream of a kindergarten. Then "Industry". Look up some of the philosophy around 'e/acc'. They are definitely wanting to destroy the 'humans'. So maybe not the 'world', just all the 'humans'. And since the 'e/acc' comprise a large component of AI companies, and AI is driving the industry. I think there is a fair argument that the "Industry" does want to do harm to 'humans'. But maybe humans doesn't equal the 'world'. "Do you think you're conversing with a 14 year old, struggling with abstractions?" Yes, a little bit. You posted a single sentence. How does that convey that you are some industry veteran. Though, I do see you have posted more since then. But not what I saw at that time. To some of your other posts. Yes, Today is better, and Tech is a big part of that. I don't think that should imply that it is a never ending fountain of good, just ignore any problems. It isn't like Industries can't go downhill. What? We can't talk about it. Could be we are steadily pushing up the mountain until we go over a cliff. Look up Black Swan events.
at-fates-hands 6mo ago
>> I’m tired of working in an industry hell bent on the destruction of society. People will argue this point. However, when I look at all the things that tech has done thinking it was going to improve society; when in fact, it did the exact opposite is hard to argue. AI is just another item on a very long list of dystopian markers that writers/musicians have warned us about for years. The scary part now is people denying its happening right in front of them.
- jordwest 6mo ago
  > The scary part now is people denying its happening right in front of them. I wonder if age is a factor. Those of us who have been around for a while have seen all the promises and hope and excitement about the future, that maybe 20% of that comes true and the rest ends up being the usual exploitation and greed. The younger people haven't been through that cycle of disillusionment yet so they still believe that only the positive, hopeful dreams will come true. It's natural, but naive, to believe that humans will always collectively choose the best path forward [1]. My grandma always refused to touch computers despite my excitement about them in my youth and I couldn't understand why. Now I think I get it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
  - karmakurtisaani 6mo ago
    This made me think about the difference of growing old in a static world vs a one where change is constantly accelerating. In the former, you understand it better and better as you age, but in the latter you're left with knowledge that's of no use while the next generation is ahead of you just by the privilege of being young. In the former, you are a valuable source of information. In the latter, a burden.
    - coldtea 6mo ago
      >In the former, you understand it better and better as you age, but in the latter you're left with knowledge that's of no use while the next generation is ahead of you just by the privilege of being young. I'd put it more like: you're left with knowledge that sees right through bullshit and the same-old promises and error modes, but nobody's buying. And the next generation is hired precisely because they're naive to all of that to repeat the same mistakes eagerly while sociopaths profit.

bluegatty 6mo ago

'The industry' is not hellbent on destroying society - this is just so unhinged it's hard to know how to make of it.

yoyohello13 6mo ago
True, I should have said an industry that will trample on anything that stands in the way of its pursuit of money.
- bluegatty 6mo ago
  It's not doing those things.
- kiba 6mo ago
  The industry optimize toward whatever metric is legible. A company that optimize toward an illegible metric will endure.
  - jordwest 6mo ago
    Unfortunately there are plenty of highly legible metrics that make the world a worse place ("engagement" might be among the worst)
- sfn42 6mo ago
  Welcome to literally all industry.
- devonkim 6mo ago
  This is what amorality means to me in the context of socioeconomics. It operates in an area of reduced dimensionality to economic value because no other value can be agreed upon in trade between cultures. It doesn’t care if a piece of art, nature or human invention is genuinely novel, rare, irreplaceable, invaluable, etc. unless it can be converted into materializable economic value that is itself subjective and present oriented so that we can plan for our future selves about resources as a proxy.
nullsanity 6mo ago
We need to bring back consumer first design and destroy the incentives to prioritize shareholders over the much larger cohort of ordinary consumers whose lives were affecting.
Brian_K_White 6mo ago
There is a quote that goes something like "The purpose of any system is whatever it does." Whatever any system does, it's someone's intention that it does so. It's like an unavoidable truism. You can't say anything that gets around it.
- bluegatty 6mo ago
  Great. The system does what it does. It's not 'destroying society'. Not remotely in, any sense. Many people seem to like Facebook. It's not really not causing harm, they are a minor nuisance at worst ... that you can avoid by ... not using it. Open AI makes AI that you can use to do whatever. That's mostly it.
  - propstober 6mo ago
    yes and yes. a system can fulfill it’s function while simultaneously having massive impacts on society. we are only now experiencing the consequences of social media running rampant.
    - Jensson 6mo ago
      Progress have massive impacts on society, printing press was running rampant and caused massive issues, protests, civil wars and in the end democracy. Historically giving people more access to information and communication has always been a good thing even if it caused problems short term.
      - propstober 6mo ago
        equating social media and the printing press is tempting but reductive. esp with massive profit incentives, social media is often built for retention and conversion rather than for informative purposes. esp within the modern context. it is not a black and white picture. social media can exist responsibly. just because a technology represents "progress" there is much we can and should pay attention to. just blanket dismissing regulation and criticism for the sake of progress is lazy. I highly encourage you to read: https://jonathanhaidt.com/social-media/ https://jonathanhaidt.com/social-media/
munksbeer 6mo ago
You're getting really downvoted, which just proves people don't like hearing views that challenge their narrative. I agree with you. Human greed has always been a thing, will always be a thing. But most people now would never choose to go back and be born 100 years ago if given the option. They ignore everything positive that technology has done, and massively ramp the negatives.
FrustratedMonky 6mo ago
"industry' is not hellbent on destroying society" Think you are missing the point. It is not an actual back room with dudes twirling their mustaches with concrete plans to destroy the world. It is the 'profit motive' that forces a thousand small decisions, that you go along with because you have a mortgage to pay. And all added up they destroy the world.
- bluegatty 6mo ago
  "And all added up they destroy the world." That is total nonsense. You people have lost your minds, this is worse than a bad reddit thread. Neither 'industry' not 'software' is 'destroying the world'. Also ""Think you are missing the point. It is not an actual back room with dudes twirling their mustaches "" Thanks for the 'deep insight'?!? Do you think you're conversing with a 14 year old, struggling with abstractions? FYI - I've lived around the world, 'studied industry' formally, worked in a handful of them. We're more prosperous than we have ever been, by a long mile. There are some externalizations that are not healthy, but almost all of it is simply due to the large footprint we have on the earth. Thankfully the population will scale back a bit and we'll probably harmonize. But the very notion that 'the industry is destroying the world' is so juvenile and nihilist, it's just ridiculous.
  - FrustratedMonky 6mo ago
    'the industry is destroying the world' Sorry. It think there were several themes here. "Capitalism", leads to a thousand little decisions, that destroy the world. I've seen plenty of middle managers, that when they have to make their quarterly numbers, will dump toxic waste into the river upstream of a kindergarten. Then "Industry". Look up some of the philosophy around 'e/acc'. They are definitely wanting to destroy the 'humans'. So maybe not the 'world', just all the 'humans'. And since the 'e/acc' comprise a large component of AI companies, and AI is driving the industry. I think there is a fair argument that the "Industry" does want to do harm to 'humans'. But maybe humans doesn't equal the 'world'. "Do you think you're conversing with a 14 year old, struggling with abstractions?" Yes, a little bit. You posted a single sentence. How does that convey that you are some industry veteran. Though, I do see you have posted more since then. But not what I saw at that time. To some of your other posts. Yes, Today is better, and Tech is a big part of that. I don't think that should imply that it is a never ending fountain of good, just ignore any problems. It isn't like Industries can't go downhill. What? We can't talk about it. Could be we are steadily pushing up the mountain until we go over a cliff. Look up Black Swan events.

at-fates-hands 6mo ago

>> I’m tired of working in an industry hell bent on the destruction of society. People will argue this point. However, when I look at all the things that tech has done thinking it was going to improve society; when in fact, it did the exact opposite is hard to argue. AI is just another item on a very long list of dystopian markers that writers/musicians have warned us about for years. The scary part now is people denying its happening right in front of them.

jordwest 6mo ago
> The scary part now is people denying its happening right in front of them. I wonder if age is a factor. Those of us who have been around for a while have seen all the promises and hope and excitement about the future, that maybe 20% of that comes true and the rest ends up being the usual exploitation and greed. The younger people haven't been through that cycle of disillusionment yet so they still believe that only the positive, hopeful dreams will come true. It's natural, but naive, to believe that humans will always collectively choose the best path forward [1]. My grandma always refused to touch computers despite my excitement about them in my youth and I couldn't understand why. Now I think I get it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
- karmakurtisaani 6mo ago
  This made me think about the difference of growing old in a static world vs a one where change is constantly accelerating. In the former, you understand it better and better as you age, but in the latter you're left with knowledge that's of no use while the next generation is ahead of you just by the privilege of being young. In the former, you are a valuable source of information. In the latter, a burden.
  - coldtea 6mo ago
    >In the former, you understand it better and better as you age, but in the latter you're left with knowledge that's of no use while the next generation is ahead of you just by the privilege of being young. I'd put it more like: you're left with knowledge that sees right through bullshit and the same-old promises and error modes, but nobody's buying. And the next generation is hired precisely because they're naive to all of that to repeat the same mistakes eagerly while sociopaths profit.