Now that's pricey for them, but I'd bet the conversion rate there is a lot better than traditional click advertising.

You don't say?!?

Value is subjective, and anybody is entitled to prioritize the environment over any other values just as I'm free to prioritize freedom over anything else. I might just as well ask you what's the point of living in the most aesthetic prison? I don't know that there's an objectively right answer here, we're just speaking on different values.

> If climate change ruins the earth what’s the point of freedom anyway?

A lot of big science-related political disagreements in recent years stem from radically different (and in my opinion, wrong) risk-management decisions from people who (in my opinion) have almost always proven themselves to be wrong in a major way.

Based on everything I've learned in my life, I think the odds of normal human activity destroying the Earth are a very remote bet, and the odds of authoritarians who gain absolute power murdering many millions is a total guarantee.

IMO, while I don't think this would be a popular opinion on HN, I think humans face a far bigger risk from authoritarians than from climate change.

The total number of comments should rise in a few days or so after as people comment on their experiences applying to a company.

2) Keep in mind that the climate isn't the only important variable in society. If crypto is bad for the environment, but great for freedom from government tyranny, is it not still good on balance?

3) A lot of the criticism of crypto you read might not be very genuine. A lot of criticism of crypto may come from people/corporations in the media with vested interests in the primacy of the current financial order. So make up your own mind about crypto rather than being influenced by the generic media broadcasts.

IMO, monetization was never the real problem. Everybody online was interested in making money even back in the early 2000s: there were ads, spam, commerce, and get-rich-quick schemes and everything way back then too.

I think the main issue is that average IQs online have gone down dramatically.

In the late 90s and early 2000s, using a computer to participate in some online community took the slightest bit of intellect: you had to build or setup a computer and access the Internet, which was a bit harder back then. This filter ensured that a far greater percentage of everybody online was at least of average or higher intelligence. That's it. That's the simple explanation.

Today, every idiot out there has a phone in their pocket to mess up everything joyful. Everything good has to cater to this least common denominator: this is why everything sucks.

Consider the reason that HackerNews is a pleasant community to use: IMO it isn't because it lacks extreme monetization, it's because the average person here is smarter than what you'd see on other websites.

If you rank them based on # of tickets dealt with, they're just going to take the easier tasks.

If you rank them based on # of commits, they'll make a new commit for every line of code.

If you try and rank them based on lines of code, then the obvious hilarious thing happens.

Is that what Damore actually said? That's not my recollection. I think his main point was that due to differences in biology, that women had more extraversion, openness, and neuroticism (big 5 traits) and that women were less likely to want to get into computer stuff. That's a very far cry from him saying something like "women suck at computers" and seems very dishonest to suggest.

Investors in Google (of which I am NOT one) should consider if this is the mark of a company on the upswing or downslide. If the focus of Google's technology is identity rather than reality, it is inevitable that they will be surpassed.

https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-world/chatgpt-goes-viral-fo...

2) Organize your life accordingly knowing that you can be let go anytime. Save your cash to have a very solid emergency fund. Always keep your resume up to date. Always keep your eye open for different jobs. Have multiple income streams so you can survive losing your main job. Don't try and live above your means.

A lot of companies use recent employment as a filtering mechanism: if you have a big gap in technology employment, you might have trouble getting interviews.

I'd say to create an LLC on your own that serves as a consultancy and to put that on your resume that you're working with them to plug this gap. Register on freelance sites and take any jobs you can: even shit underpaid jobs. Make some money and get your skills a little current and use that to bypass the hiring filters.

Whenever some tech becomes trendy and people think they can make money off of it, it becomes a stupid buzzword that gets used just about everywhere unnecessarily.

Think back to the "cloud". When "cloud" became a reality, every single dopey company was using it as a buzzword term everywhere and it started feeling cringe.

Crypto hasn't yet quite reached those absolute heights, but think back a couple years ago where you started seeing "blockchain" in many dumb startups' marketing just because.

We're at the stage with AI right now where idiots are trying to shoehorn it everywhere in dopey ways just because, and it feels annoying.

I bet in a few years, after a lot of the bad companies who use AI in dumb ways die off and some new technology is the trendy new thing, I bet AI is going to start to feel a lot more technical than a stupid trend.