Questions like "is mouthwash effective" presumably has one solid data source -- medical journals.

It's not clear that this individual was fired for being too helpful, but it's been my experience that escalation 2 or more levels to report a problem is always a threat to your career, because it means you're exposing a failure within your management chain.

In this case it went all the way up to the CEO, so it's entirely possible he was mentally marked for "eventual downsizing after enough time to not raise red flags"

(To be clear this is a failure by organizations to protect their own bottom line. By not protecting/rewarding people for calling out systemic they incentivize all sorts of dishonesty by managers and directors which are the rule and not the exception in my experience. Famously there was the amazon case about how long customer support took to answer)

> Meanwhile, the same intelligence center also circulated a report in March showing monitoring of constitutionally protected events and demonstrations related to critical views on technology. These events included multiple "Tesla Takedown" protests against Elon Musk’s ransacking of the US government and a “Break Up With Tech Rager" sponsored by Eject Elbit, an activist group organizing to halt investment in the Israeli weapon’s manufacturer Elbit.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48237089

Points: 5

# Comments: 1

I'm not too worried, if bitwarden changes their price somebody is going to vibecode a decent enough solution for pennies on the dollar, or there's always apples built-in product.

I don't think your arguing in good faith and you are getting called out on it by a few people. So you answer first, then I'll answer -- Was the boston tea party justified? Is civil disobedience ever justified? Is breaking the law a good thing sometimes if it's a bad law (e.g. Rosa Parks)?

If you can't answer those then I think you'll have convinced me and the rest of us that you aren't even trying to make a good-faith effort to make a point.

By the way -- Where do you stand on throwing tea into the harbor? And where do you stand on the legitimacy of publicly discussing throwing tea into the harbor?

The reality is the vast majority of social progress in the last millenium was achieved with force and threat of force. I find this weird revisionist "violence is never the answer" trope recited as a fact that needs no justification to be incredibly weird and unreliable.

Let me just say: A lot of people think architecture is how do you build a very complex system with tons of moving components (databases, queues, scaling, reduandancy, failover, dozens of services). I think expert achitecture is being able to answer how do I correctly solve the problem using the fewest of those.

Genius-level engineering is inventing the zipper, usable anywhere, lightweight, cheap, sturdy, simple to make.

(I believe he's alluding to this by saying companies follow conways laws and essentially socially construct a lot of work to match up with the number of teams, hence creating a completely unnecessary nightmare of complexity just for the social incentives)

I think there are many practical ways to solve it, and would love to see more proposals out there. Instead I tend to see nihilism or division.

For small workloads binary search is slower than just checking every element.

To add to this, I think people can forget how small log(n) is... it can practically be seen as constant (as the log base 2 of ATOMS IN THE UNIVERSE is ~300).

But but solar had a 90% reduction in cost between 2010 and 2026, and is projected to decrease between 50% to 80% again by 2035. So once again, it's just numbers, and some people are being emotional again. Further evidence is that China added 70x as much solar as it did nuclear in 2025.

Like do people not know what word "general" means? It means not limited to any subset of capabilities -- so that means it can teach itself to do anything that can be learned. Like start a business. AI today can't really learn from its experiences at all.

Psychology research backs this up -- I think there are studies that show students who have a break between two classes before better in both classes (it's called interference).

Anyways it felt weird to me that our work never accommodated this, I think peak performance requires tuning the environment to the human biology, not management optics.

Well I mean you could (and should) turn on 100% agent code-reviews, and that's a type of assistance.

The hard part is that most orgs never made disposable environments nor any meaningful local testing, so the ability to validate code doesn't break something indirectly (e.g. memory leak, hammer the prod DB, cache values with the wrong key, etc) isn't there. In my experience AI code has several subtle bugs and is deceptively dangerous (because it can look so competent in other ways).