We have to settle for 'crumbs'?

Why would you say this like it is true?

And tallow, by itself, is not something you eat, it's just moving the point of thermal and chemical alteration and production into your home.

Finally, most of this "eat as much animal offal as possible" movement is directly funded by the producers of these products battling it out with the producers of competing products.

You should listen to your doctors over influencers that talk about chemistry in a way that makes simple things sound dangerous and evil.

First, pedantically, we did not share time with 'dinosaurs' in the sense you imply.

Secondly, pedantically, that kind of hunting was not the main source of calories for hunter-gatherers. It's more apt to imagine them as gatherers first and primarily.

Thirdly, and also pedantically, you are not describing the system of capitalism that I, and most educated people talk about when they use the word. That system has only been with us in the main for, generously, 250 years.

Critically, Thag and Grog both own the means of production for their spears and 'steaks' respectively. The necessary abstractions for capital accumulation, debt, and private ownership simply do not exist.

When did capitalism begin? How was 'stuff' created and distributed prior to that? How do other, distinct and contemporaneous modes of production create 'stuff'?

It's not just short-sighted of ; It's self-destructive!

* It's the job of the consumer to correct and edit the content they consume

* Content creators have it hard enough ——— prompt-crafting and imagining transformative and disruptive new horizons in tech

* So what if the prose is 4x longer than it should be? The time value delta between real creatives and the average HN-er can't be compared —— A complete paradigm shift

* If they were real hackers they'd have their AI summarize and distill the info —— I think we can all see who the posers are

I'm excited to read content everyday... 'slop'? That's a coward's word, I see past the prose into the core of the data space, and I'm stronger for it.

81% of women have been sexually harassed, at least 20% have been raped. Yet, weirdly, that hasn't changed the allocation of capital in the United States in their collective favor.

But let's see what kind of person you actually are. Do you have a problem with suing, post-rape? What kind of society would you consider ideal?

Keep in mind that the current criminal case closure rate of rape cases is 25% and has been dropping for the last 10 years.

Almost every women I am close to has been raped or assaulted.

What part of this do you specifically not understand?

Fromsoft is perfectly happy for you to miss all of the direct exposition. It's as they intended and most people do. The intentionality of their world still draws people in and gives the world a sense of groundedness that keeps people coming back and separates it from the pale imitations. It's more than them being good at 'Vibes'.

The environment is built on the bones of a greater ongoing narrative that is intentionally obscured, even from the player who reads everything.

Dark Souls is a world in a constant cycle of Rebirth, Decay, the struggle against Entropy. All civilizations, at the end of the series, are stacked one upon another in an endless expanse of ash and dust as you bear witness to an permanent eclipse, a fading star, as time itself dissolves and the last fire fades.

Before that heavy handed stuff though, the simple matter of the direction your character travels reinforces these motifs. Down to the deepest depths and you'll witness what remains of the first civilizations. Climb up and you see the desperate attempts by the powerful to impose a false order that they hoped could forestall the inevitable.

You can even shatter the illusion of a golden order in the first game if you find the extremely missable secret boss. It couldn't be any more clearly 'said' if you were interested in paying attention.

Adding an AI model to explain or 'improv' the story of the world would destroy the whole purpose.

You are annoyed they don't pay income taxes, but where are the accolades for their generosity?

> What social program do you think creates billionaires?

Elon Musk would not be a hundred billionaire without government contracts and vast government subsidies. Likewise for Ellison and Palantir and whoever else gets to hoover up our defense spending. So too for any entity that receives the myriad benefits of 'public private partnership' in domains that used to be exclusively government run. Deloitte makes bank on 'administering' public programs. The Multi-billion dollar retail Tax prep exists entirely because the government is bribed not to compete. Private prisons/concentration camps are 'social programs' that produces billions in private wealth. etc. etc.. etc...

> Take a single parent with two school-age children who earns $11,000 annually from part-time work. The government considers this household in poverty because its income is below $25,273. But this family would qualify for benefits worth $53,128.

> It would receive Treasury checks of $3,400 in refundable child tax credits and $4,400 in refundable earned-income tax credits.

... A person who make this little would not pay income taxes, so these credits cannot be realized.

> Temporary Assistance for Needy Families TANF is temporary

All of these programs are difficult to retain access to. I've never met anybody among the working poor able to realize even half of these meagre benefits.

A random family in NYC would pay, on average, $20,439 annually, just on child care, per child, thus, this hypothetical single parent is contributing at least $40k in labor to produce future workers. It's not unreasonable to give them compensation for this thankless task.

As another point of comparison, Norway spends 18k per year for every kindergartener in their nation regardless of the parent's income. This is what is known as, under capitalism, an investment with a 50 year compounding return.

Starving, homeless children produce negative externalities if they are not cared for, so the return on the investment is even more potent in this case.

All this said, you've asserted that 53k, by itself, is 'lavish'. But you are speaking to someone who regularly makes that much money in between blinks on a half-decent day in the market, so I'm not really convinced that it is.

> Basically any average citizen is silly for thinking their vote has an impact. Per "Testing Theories of American Politics", the preferences of the average citizen have a "near-zero, statistically non-significant impact" on public policy when the preferences of economic elites and organized interest groups are taken into account.

This is why organized, sustained political action is required above and beyond elections. So that, in aggregate, these near-zeros can create change. It's not an invitation to check out and advocate for centrist reactionary nihilistic libertarianism, which is what I have to assume your true position is.

Before I left my previous company the CEO waxed philosophical about adopting the 996, even as we had above target profits for then nth quarter in a row and layoffs rolling over every department.

Why are you free from the bounds of courtesy, but fall back on them the moment someone responds in kind?

Do you really believe that women cannot arc weld? Do you really believe that women cannot scuba dive? Do you really believe that women cannot lift 25kg or take out the trash?

If you do, then it's rather unkind and incurious to cast half of the human population as so fundamentally incapable, and you should bring evidence to support your assertion.

If you don't actually believe it, then the substance of your comment is unkind snark, no?

Your original comment is just a warmed-over version of "women wouldn't last a day in a real man job"

We've been hearing that repeated ad infinitum as women have continued to prove the assertion wrong.

For the record though, I don't think anyone should do a job that has a 1/15 fatality rate. Men shouldn't be cannon fodder either.

When women put on scuba gear or touch a arc welder their ovaries explode, killing them instantly.

55lbs also is well known to instantly disable women who do, in fact, labor in physical jobs.

The moment a child turns 7 and reaches that weight, women lose the ability to move the child at all, leading to tragic outcomes.

In all seriousness, just because a certain job is socialized a certain way, doesn't imply a fundamental lack of ability.

Being the only woman on a certain kind of male team sucks so so much more than having to put on scuba gear or lifting something heavy.

You can't say this, unsupported by evidence, in Trump's America, where revanchist 'white guy DEI' is the ordering of the world.

> Women earn better salaries than ever before

... This is a clever way of avoiding saying that the gendered pay gap still exists, in favor of men, but has been narrowing.

What makes jobs that pay enough 'more attractive', generally, is rising fixed costs, like rent and energy, and stagnant wages.

My worry is that it will inspire a wave of imitators if people's clout sensors activate. Like what happened with numerous open source github projects just a few months ago, prompting many outright bans.

I am violating the general rule: 'Assume good faith.' Because Good Faith was not on offer at the outset. Relentlessly clinging to good faith in the face of contrary evidence hurts the greater principle, which is dedication to the truth. The burden of good faith rests on the shoulders who want to use public resources as a drive-by test bed for their automated tools.

He could have downloaded the full text of wikipedia and observed the output of his bot in a sandbox, after all. This is how I practised before making my first major contribution iirc, it was ages ago.

I have accumulated excess suspicion of self-proclaimed CTOs and middling academics with a bone to pick over my years contributing. I would be happy to be wrong, and would genuinely like to see Bryan convert his faux pas into something productive.

Regardless of the outcome, I do appreciate you looking into it further.