From what I have heard, the standard rebuttal to NASA expense is that they are ploughing money into the ground to grow new things the hard way.
The goal isn’t to do things we can already do the way we know how to do them, it’s to do things we can’t do in ways we don’t yet have by training new people who don’t yet know how to do it. The opportunity being seized is that the investment will pay off with a leap forward to bigger and better things.
NASA is the Idris to SpaceX’s Python, the free jazz to their K-pop, the Cyberdeck to their MacBook, or — to go back to my original analogy — the locust-based flour to their 1000 hectares of wheat. This isn’t a value judgment. Pushing boundaries and knuckling down on commercial success are both worthy endeavors.
It reminds me of a comment I once read about how alien visitors, upon arriving on Earth, would be appalled to see how we live our lives at the bottom of a giant gaseous ocean of 20% oxygen.
Almost everyone and everything around us of any importance is one mishap away from going disappearing in a hot, sooty flame.
Worse, I am repeatedly being accused nowadays of being an LLM. It probably doesn’t help that I riff-write with only a rough outline of what I want to say, not how to say it.
If the accusation is that I am an inference engine pumping out words based on a trailing context window then I am guilty as charged. It’s just that I run on Fe + C6H12O6 + O2 (a bloodstream charged with lunch and air) instead of y/C/N2 -> Si+e- (sunlight, coal, and wind turned into silicon electrons.)
> If the accusation is that I am an inference engine pumping out words based on a trailing context window then I am guilty as charged. It’s just that I run on Fe + C6H12O6 + O2 (a bloodstream charged with lunch and air) instead of y/C/N2 -> Si+e- (sunlight, coal, and wind turned into silicon electrons.)
This sort of tells me that you are pro-LLM, and most pro-LLM people mostly paste the contents of their ChatGPT output and try to pass it off as their own.
Given that you say you aren't, the most likely explanation might be that you are spending a lot of time reading LLM prose, and are starting to write like it now too.
I don’t think the quote is particularly fair. You could just as easily see it as the best minds are building huge amounts of amazing, free technology and need a way to pay for it.
For every microsecond level ad auction broker there’s a free Android update, cat video platform enhancement, calendar app feature, or type checked scripting language release.
HFT on the other hand — now there’s a tech black hole!
[edited to add What have the Romans ever done for us?, below]
It brought panhandling to where generosity once prevailed.
It brought us social media engagement metrics and 140-character-limited 'interaction' and cluttered, flashing, distracting, human-psyche hacking interfaces.
It brought all the c*nts who only saw dollar signs.
Agree on HFT.
(Disclaimer: I'm focusing on the negatives to make a point, there probably are some wild benefits, but I'm on the side of preferring to have taken longer to get there without all the examples I've listed - yes, I'm wishing for utopia, it's my comment I can say what I want).
Edited to add: People would share their cats whether or not internet advertising existed. The cats would demand it.
> You could just as easily see it as the best minds are building huge amounts of amazing, free technology and need a way to pay for it.
That's a false dichotomy.
First of all, the technology is far from "free". It's easily accessible, perhaps, but users pay handsomely to use it, even if they're unaware of it, which most adtech companies go out of their way to ensure.
Secondly, advertising isn't the only business model companies can choose. Far from it. It may be the most profitable, and the easiest to deploy, simply because adtech companies have made it so. Companies can just as well choose to prioritize user experience, user privacy, and all the things they claim to care deeply about, over their revenues, which is what they actually care about.
Oh, and lastly, I would strongly argue that social media, web search, office suites, etc., are hardly "amazing" technology. There are very good alternatives to all of these that don't come with the drawbacks of ad-supported software. It's just that adtech companies are also unsurprisingly quite good at advertising themselves, and using their position and vast resources to dominate the market.
It's hardly a black and white area, and there's more to this question than just GOOG, but there's a joke here that has some relevance:
Those bastards have bled us dry with their algorithms, taken all the data we had, and not just from us, but from our children, our children's children, our children's children's children, our children's children's children's children... and what have they ever given us in return?
The search engine
...and a free phone OS
Oh yeah, the phone OS! Remember what the flip phones used to be like?
OK, but apart from the search engine and the phone OS...
Global Street View coverage!
Oh yes yes, oh that's a good one! So useful!
Chrome and Chromium
Well obviously that goes without saying: the browsers are very good
Docs and Sheets. I can't do me shopping without 'em!
Oh yes yes! -all nod-
OK, but apart from the search engine, the phone OS, the street view, the browsers, all the open source work, scholar, an office suite, an open DNS resolver,
web fonts, gmail, and video calling, what has Google ever done for us?
That's amusing, but it's another logical fallacy (non sequitur). :)
Was advertising necessary to produce all of this inarguably useful technology? Is this technology somehow unique in the world?
There are alternatives to all of those products that are not monetized via advertising. You may argue that they're not good enough, and I may agree to some extent, but they certainly work well enough for many people who decide to not use Google and other ad supported products and services.
Google et al don't have a monopoly on "amazing" technology. They just dominate the market to make it seem like they do.
Besides, it's not like Google developed these products in a vacuum (except perhaps early web search). Many of them are based on the work of other companies and individuals, which they either acquired, forked, or depend on. Which is fine, but the point is that not all of it is built and maintained entirely by G.[1]
[1]: The Roman analogy actually works in this sense as well, since accomplishments of the Roman empire were also largely based on work borrowed, adapted, or simply stolen from others. So were all the atrocities they committed necessary to advance technology? Perhaps. But if alternatives existed during their time that didn't come with the same downsides, I'm sure people would choose to use those instead, which is where your analogy falls flat. :)
But does anyone else feel we might need to cross the search engine off this list soon? Since whatever happened which is reducing the usefulness of Google search (Search Engine Optimisation?), is search better now than it was in the pre-Google days?
Tangential question - would search engine optimisation have been less effective/destructive if there was more variety in the search engine people choose?
I'm torn about this because I believe there's an amount of online services that should be truly free, for all, forever
For example, email. I use free emails since the 90s, never paid for it. I went long stretches having no disposable income at all - if I had to pay for email, I would have dropped it multiple times. However email is a postal box in the Internet - people don't stop sending you emails just because you decided that this month, a bag of rice is more valuable than an email subscription
(Nowadays email is like your online identity. People don't send you emails, instead, it's all services you use that send you access codes. Losing your email is truly scary)
On the other hand, I really loved the backup service of Colin Percival, tarsnap. It's an ultracapitalist, even libertarian, and it seemed to me very fair that you would pay for exactly what you use. If you stop paying he deletes your data, on the spot, no questions asked. (actually not sure if there's a grace period for permanent removal. but even if there is, this makes no difference for people that don't have money)
I had to stop paying due to life circumstances, I lost a backup.
I still have backups from around the same time in Google Drive, even without paying anything.
So really if we live under capitalism and such essential services like email and backup MUST be provided by private entities, then we really, really need ads and ad supported business that gives users permanent free stuff.
Fortunately capitalism can't and won't last forever. (but unfortunately it will surely outlast me and you)
That is an incredibly dishonest way to look at it.
1) You're conflating the "smartest people" with tech companies. The point of the quote is that people's careers are funneled towards ads.
2) The technology is not free and amazing. It may give consumers some marginal utility, but it's making them dependent on the system and recording most interactions they have with it. It's a widespread system of surveillance and control, and the tech companies are in charge.
It was not! I don’t think it adds much to this thread to refute the accusation though, but I would add: if you’d tried to out me by asking me to write a haiku about buttons, you’d be reading a haiku about buttons right now. It’s as reliable a signal as looking to see if I use hyphens and dashes. (I love haiku!)
Is there any research on the effect of apparent gravitational field strength on sports? I’d be willing to bet that rocketry and artillery takes account of 50mm/s2 difference at the equator. While the difference is obviously tiny, the margins in modern sports are also miniscule.
Do Fijian rugby games see a 0.5% increase in longest drop goal distance?
I have no idea about the 0.5% increase in drop goal distance, but tongue-in-cheek, I would say only 0.5% as many attempted drop goals - given the Fijian team's emphasis on a ball-in-hand style of play instead of kicking the ball away.
On a slightly related note, I always found the games played in Pretoria in South Africa fascinating. It's 1350 m above sea level, so kicks all go 10% to 15% further (my estimate) which makes quite a difference when there are players kicking penalties from over halfway even at sea level.
But then why don’t the big corpos take each other down by vibe coding each others offerings until only one is left?
You build your product audience off the back of your community and sense of taste just as much as the code itself. I love what Brad does with liliputing.com. I love what dang et al do with this place. I love what Stephen Lavelle does at increpare.com. 3Blue1Brown, Steve Ramsey’s Woodworking for Mere Mortals, Don’t Hug Me I’m Scared… I guess I’m straying into content not just code but the underlying theme is good taste and good ideas and a good workflow through craftsmanship and custom tools*.
You won’t make billions but you’ll make something worth engaging with. If anything, I’m looking forward to a future of more creators not fewer.
* Oh! Vibecoding is 3D printing and AI slop is land-filament? Doesn’t mean you can’t do amazing things with an LLM / X1 Bamboo, just that if you don’t put much effort in then… it shows!
I read some of the Ubuntu thread about potential implementations and it sure made me pine for some rose tinted good old days when AccountsServices, xdg-portals, dbus, systemd-login, et al. weren’t things one had to know or care about. Everything seems so complicated these days.
The best QA isn’t just about finding bugs. It’s about bringing quality to the codebase: typing, better static analysis, linters, and useful libraries. In the other direction, it’s also about integrating into the release process by using integrating the what-goes-on / what-stays-in-beta decisions into quality’s approach to giving signal over any other part of the codebase.
Anything that involves gating bits of code, basically, and deciding whether to gate bits of code or not.
The best QA is linting, CI and language features? Sure and automated testing at different levels too but this sounds like basic things the engineering org does
https://www.tiktok.com/@veryimportantpeopleshow/video/731957...
reply