HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | yCombLinks's commentslogin

Adapt, sure, but is my life better or worse after adapting? It's a fair question and a fair worry. The goal of most AI companies seems to be to replace some amount of labor with AI. Look how that worked out for our factory workers. They adapted by getting jobs at Walmart and Dollar General, or scraping by in the gig economy.


> They adapted by getting jobs at Walmart and Dollar General, or scraping by in the gig economy.

The tech crowd used to say that only the "dumb" ones did that. They said those who were "smart like us" were much more adaptable, learning to code and whatnot to find new, often even better careers. It will be interesting to see if the emperor has clothes.


Can you not see how you're doing the same thing now? Not all people in tech so dismissed the struggles of others -- but you are.


No, and obviously neither can you, else you would have explained yourself. Best to not post while under the influence of silly emotions. That is what those tech people who called those manufacturing people "dumb" did and, like this, wasn't useful.


Silly emotions? I'm not the one gleefully celebrating the ruin of others (including families). You've chosen to 'other' a broad group of people with diverse experiences and backgrounds. "Those tech people" certainly include some people who called manufacturers 'dumb', but it also includes many (most?) who didn't, and even some who used to be "manufacturing people".

You say "who cares if they suffer? They're obviously all just bad people". The people who attacked blue collar workers said "who cares if they suffer? They're obviously all just dumb people (and thus bad)." So the bulk of people who you decry are not guilty of what you claim. But you are!


> You say "who cares if they suffer? They're obviously all just bad people".

This comment aside, I do not see that text anywhere, lest my own comments. Get back to us when you return to reality.

> The people who attacked blue collar workers said "who cares if they suffer? They're obviously all just dumb people (and thus bad)."

Whether or not calling them "dumb" was justified, there no implication of "who cares if they suffer". In fact, in the context I remember, those comments were made around trying to figure out how to help those who were deemed "dumb".


Computers are many thousands of times faster and more efficient than they were 50 years ago. Airplanes still fly at the same speeds, and with only marginal safety improvements. Fuel efficiency has doubled however. Overall significantly less changes.


Faster but for the rest basically the same. More megahertz, more megabytes, more transistors per cm2 of silicon, more processors but that's basically it. Von Neumann architecture, processing separated from memory, block/file-based storage, input and output through keyboards and displays.

Yes, this drastically understates the change in computing but the actual technology hasn't changed that much, it just got denser and faster.


Are you always an ass? He had a great comment, and you respond with this low effort hostile bullshit.


No, I see this argument repeated all the time in these threads. "It will just give true/false, while humans need intuitive explanations". Why will the AI only give true/false? Where did this assumption come from? The nested citation was about AI that can give humans an explanation. The reply was "but true/false is not enough". It is as if it was a reply to another comment. How is that a great comment?


When the layoffs happened they said tailwind usage was way up. Just the paid products weren't getting used.


Despite the article title, it's clearly about technology usage patterns roughly 25 years ago being a lot better than they are today. Its obviously from the PoV of someone in a developed western country, probably America. Every single time someone brings up positive things about the past there's always some 'Nuh uh, look at how bad this thing you weren't a part of was at that time.'. Boring, pedantic, and not even relevant to what the article is about.


Ridiculous. When Ellen Degeneres came out as gay in the 90s it was a groundshaking media event. Being gay was incredibly stigmatized, far more than today. The other groups at least have public supporters today, instead of being nearly universally rejected.


Stigma is just polarized now. Come out as trans on a platform like Facebook and you will get messages of support that would never have happened in the 90s, but also hate messages and reports to the police(that they will actually follow up on) you wouldn’t have seen back then either.


You're claiming police weren't used to harass trans people back then? Hilarious!

Just wait until you learn about a bar called Stonewall...


I don't think that's what they were saying. I think they were saying worst case you dealt with local bigots. These days the whole of America's bigots are coming for you because of the internet.


I'm 50. And agree, back in the 90s things were different. But we're sliding way way way back over the past five years.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: