The "Helping You Not Become Your Parents" commercials (from some insurance company I think) make me sad.

They're basically making fun of people for trying to connect.

I'm in a spot where I don't really bump into strangers much but, as a recovering introvert I've tried to talk to people like this and it feels AMAZING.

Like... irrational levels of amazing vibes.

It's so frustrating seeing my own kids be horrified by it and be hyper-introverted and disdainful of connecting with strangers.

Lessons you learn the hard way -- then fail to pass onto the next generation -- hurt.

> They're basically making fun of people for trying to connect.

I had the same thought. The clueless people turning into their parents are charming and genuine. The life coach guy is kind of a dick.

Reminds me of Apple's "I'm a PC, And I'm a Mac" ads from Apple. I always understood the point they were trying to make, but the PC character was so much more likable than the Mac.

The Mac guy was such a try-hard. "I'm cool and kind of edgy over here and you're just a dope for being sincere."

Talking to strangers is actually kind of nice as an introvert, there is very low pressure as you have no obligation to the person and you can end the conversation at any time.

I find it much nicer than talking to friends of friends or the absolute worst for me... the boyfriends of my girlfriends friends. You are getting shoved together into a forced interaction that you know will be asked about in the near future.

This is why I love IT conferences. I can chat up random strangers about topics that we're clearly both interested in. The vendors also send the most extroverted folks who are skilled in engaging introverted nerds. It's a great way for introverts to level up their social skills.

And the best part is that I never talk to those folks again ;) I found out that I actually really like making fast friends, I just hate the obligation of long-term close-knit friendships.

I end up with a lot of business cards and LinkedIn connections that usually never go anywhere. Which is fine with me!

But I got some good consulting gigs from the ones that did go somewhere.

I'm curious too but the phrase "random is clumpy" comes to mind.

> that makes labour effectively cheaper.

But it isn't cheaper yet, right? Your current salary was defined pre-AI.

Now, though, maybe you're only worth a third of what you were but you can't live on a third, and your employer can't just start giving you less money, so... they lay you off then in a year or three when the tailspin starts to hit bottom, they hire Younger You for ~$X/3.

If AI makes people more productive then labor is cheaper than it was pre-AI, even at pre-AI salaries, because you're getting more done at the same cost.

Exactly, I find the math fairly simple:

1. Employee costs x;

2. Employee produces output worth y;

3. Your profit from this particular employee is z = y - x.

So far so good. Let's assume z > 0, though of course it's not an easy statement to make with many roles, that are more like investments. But let's assume they're good investments and you're confident z is positive.

Now, if the same employee produces 2y, but doesn't receive a raise, z just improved significantly, it more than doubled. So effectively, labour just became cheaper in relation to the value of its output.

If it was that simple, layoffs would hurt profitability significantly.

Now what if you can't translate improved productivity to additional value? Simple example would be an agency with a fixed contract volume. If increases in y can't be realised, e.g. by finding more business, then the only way for the company to realise the gains is to reduce x, i.e. layoffs. z goes up right away, no business development required.

I think it's a defensive stance companies are taking. The economy is not great, they're hitting the breaks on investments, increasing their runway, shrinking to force the organisation to become more efficient. Once they're ready to invest again, they can always hire again. But I read layoffs-because-AI as "we don't know what to invest in right now, so we'll buy some time to figure that out".

I honestly didn't feel like the article even feigned rigor.

It felt like some parent's personal blog ruminating on an idea, not an "article".

Claude followed links on a single Wikipedia article and visualized the results geographically for one image so the author could keep talking about how we (and he) know basically nothing.

Doesn't seem like it belongs on HN.

You're right, maybe I'm being a little mean to a personal blog post. It's just something I see all the time in other contexts as well. And we'll probably see it more and more with vibe coding.

I didn't think you were being mean, I thought you were giving them too much credit. Ha! =)

A few days ago there was a discussion about how Singapore forces their people to save and invest in bonds. The country makes money on the difference between the daily/compound rates and it keeps their workforce working.

In other words, I suspect it's "we started with Singapore then compared to America" not the other way around.

Arg. What's the quippy internet adage for this?

Where someone (traditionally in a FOSS project's support / bug report / feature request pages) posts some angrygram of "Fix my pet peeve OR ELSE YOUR PROJECT IS DEAD TO ME!!11!!one!11!!!"

The only thing that's coming to mind is "emotional blackmail" but that's not it...

Or the original Baldur's Gate. It had some great quotes. Jaheira's annoyed "Yeeeeesss oh omnipresent authority figure?!" when you clicked on her too often always cracked me up.

Goodbye "I've successfully completed the task."

Hello "This is a triumph!"

We avoid catastrophe by thinking about new developments and how they can go wrong (and right).

Catastrophizing can be unhealthy and unproductive, but for those among us that can affect the future of our societies (locally or higher), the results of that catastophizing helps guide legislation and "Overton window" morality.

... I'm reminded of the tales of various Sci-Fi authors that have been commissioned to write on the effects of hypothetical technologies on society and mankind (e.g. space elevators, mars exploration)...

That said, when the general public worries about hypotheticals they can do nothing about, there's nothing but downsides. So. There's a balance.

Yes, but if we don't do it 'they' will. Onwards!

Custom ("vanity") plates aren't allowed in Germany?