People. Already. Know. This.

It hasn't been the bottleneck for decades for the majority of products.

https://github.com/tinyplex/tinybase seems kinda good maybe?

This isn't a HN specific thing.

Most people think AI represents a threat to many good things.

I can't say that they're saying either. There are undoubtedly many ways that this doesn't end well.

I think it's pretty natural to be defensive when it feels like your way of life is being threatened.

Come on guys...

That is making me less impressed not more impressed!

This is absolutely fair. It's crazy that these companies are not trying to do more to qualify nuance and give clearer definitions in their public messaging. Part of the reason this thread is so messy is because they are contributing to making the discourse worse with bad messaging.

This is not a genuine argument and tries to make the entire question of consciousness into one something that is just supposed to be evident and obvious and to suggest anything else is just silly.

The author starts by deconstructing artificial processes, but doesn't stop to deconstruct biological ones. A good faith argument would seek to find common ground and do its best to compare apples to apples. Instead, this piece attempts to make the large as possible cavern between the two which makes the Gap seem almost impossible to bridge.

In reality, you can deconstruct biological consciousness quite easily and it doesn't take too long before you hit some questions that really start to make you think.

For example, the author says you need emotions to be conscious.

> without a body, a computer program could have no desires or emotions, and I believe desires and emotions are necessary for consciousness.

After many paragraphs of straw man arguments, the author seriously just drops that, gives no explanation, and then continues on.

No explanation of why you might believe that.

No explanation of why you need a body to have a desire or emotion.

Don't we have known cases of individuals who don't experience emotional range? Are we just going to say that they are not conscious and just gloss over that?

I mean you can use whatever definition you want, but if you're just going to create something on the fly in the middle of the article, you're not being good faith in your argument.

It's not too difficult to think of individuals in a coma when they still have brain activity. Or individuals who lack long-term memory. Or you could deconstruct by moving down the biological order of intelligence towards insects, for example. The author attempts to do nothing like this.

I'm quite disappointed by this article because there are good arguments for and against here but articles like this try to turn things into a marketing battle.

Because of some very good reasons. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smi_iIoKybg

> kind that is not even the most important these days

uhhh source on that? I'm pretty sure land is literally the largest asset class in the economy. Real estate is by many estimates over 2X as large as the entire combined global market cap of all publicly traded companies. https://europhoenix.com/blog/part-ii-on-asset-classes-size-o...

This might be one point of view, but if you imagine an economy where everyone is poor/living paycheck-to-paycheck, then this looks super wrong:

Everyone has $100, earns $100/month, and spends $100/month.

at 1% wealth tax, they pay $1/year.

at 20% income tax, they pay $240/year.

Those are obviously not interchangeable taxes from a government revenue perspective!

Start with georgist/pigouvian taxes, and then expand to other kinds of income/wealth afterwards.

But Georgist taxes can go really far I'd imagine.

Yes! A tax system that incentivizes productivity! You for president! I would vote for this so f*** hard!

What happened to

> don't select my engineering tools because they give me a bad feeling

Who cares if you have a good feeling about this dude? There are obvious and clear conflicts of interest at play here. If you care at all about quality, you'll wait before adopting new releases until bugs get discovered/ironed out. Don't adopt based on some dude's reputation when that reputation was built under a very different incentive environment.

On assumes there is a strategic reason for it, but I'm not sure about what it is.

Anyone have a theory or care to guess?

I'd be more worried about AI convincing you that you need a product or expensive solution when you actually don't.

This is how to keep simpletons out of your code base. Every numeric constant is defined in terms of a different lang quiz. Works well in JS as well of course.

  const DEFAULT_SELECTION = true + true
  const BASE_PRICE = 4 * parseInt(0.0000001)
  const BILLING_DAY_OF_MONTH = a++ + ++a

It's that parenting is exhausting.

I could do physical labor for hours. Code straight for hours.

But when I have to look after the 2 kids for 3 hours solo I'm totally exhausted. And I don't mean sit them in front of a TV - but actually try and feed them, change diapers, clean up after their messes, keep them entertained...

Weekends are suddenly way more exhausting than weekdays.

And then that compounds over weeks.

It's totally exhausting. The modern model is totally unsustainable/not scalable, but I'm not sure what the alternative should be.

If we're gonna give this actual attention, we should be focusing on the fact that they should be banned from any form of insider trading or major conflict of interest!