Corvos
3hr ago
I was writing some code to optimise within constraints - basically just a massive pile of nested loops and if statements. It did well so we ported it to production, rewriting everything in C++.
The result was literally hundreds, maybe thousands of times faster. It went from being something that ran with a visible delay to something I could run in real-time.
Corvos
9hr ago
I cheated by reading your comment first, but it seemed this way to me as well.
But it's not all levels. I don't think that for the vast majority of people these troubles do exist.
I don't get how you can think that unless you ignore every single official pronouncement about how hard they're working to employ 'diverse' candidates, the massively changing demographics of your society as foreigners are bussed in to drive down wages, being told by practically every single person here that they've seen this stuff...
Some blackpills are very definitely up for interpretation: for example the people worried about the covid vaccine have to interpret certain things about the evidence, how pharma works, how vaccines work, etc. to come to the conclusions they have. Anti-white discrimination is different. They boast about it on every channel possible! People can't wait to tell you how hard they're discriminating against white men! I can't help thinking you are so keen not to be blackpilled that you're putting your fingers in your ears.
Beyond that, let's say you're right. Maybe the pizza dudes are fine. (I doubt it, I've seen the demographics.) It still means that white people are being given an incredibly hard time in better paying areas. Personally, I worked very hard to get into a good school, and then very hard to get into a good university, and then very hard to get into a good PhD and then very hard to get a good job. And at every stage, they clearly and loudly said that it was a shame they had so many white men, and they discussed what could be done to make sure that people like me weren't doing the kind of stuff I'm doing. You couldn’t see the noticeboards under signs about women’s mentorship groups and women’s leadership groups and female-only funding opportunities.
All indications are that it’s starting to work. My friends and colleagues are really struggling to get new jobs. The cohort under me, including my own relations, are having huge trouble and some of them are failing to launch completely. Good for you if you’ve found another way to live your life, but ‘just deliver pizza, bro, it’s not hard,’ frankly isn’t good enough.
These are fully generalisable arguments against ever caring about anything ever, though.
Holocaust? Well, the Jews in Israel are fine.
Rwanda? Some of them make it, no Tutsi can be all Tutsis.
Fired without cause? Well, my brother still has a job.
The whole point of the article is that actually a lot of people are having serious difficulties. You can decide how much you personally care, and to be glad for your own good fortune, but you are not rescuing people by persuading them that their troubles don't exist. There is a spectrum between 'full blackpill' and 'this is fine', and the clear proof for massive discrimination at all levels really ought to be nudging you a bit further along IMO. I have personally seen people I care about fail to launch because of exactly this kind of stuff.
Corvos
1d ago
Noted, and I'm not sure if I agree or not. Please see my reply to @Gillitrut.
I have had some respect for my managers too, don't get me wrong. It's just that I also note that management has massively increased and I wonder how much of
prioritizing the work for me and other team members. Coordinating work across teams. Translating high level strategy shifts from higher level executives into concrete terms for people like me
really, really actually is valuable compared to the 1930s where this work was not done to the same degree. It feels valuable, but is it? Are those strategy shifts really necessary? Are lower-level workers essentially allowing their own abilities to plan and coordinate to be taken over by their manager? Is this all optimisation that gets 99% of the juice out of the orange instead of 95% at the expense of vast amounts of extra work? Is this all a Red Queen problem?
Those aren't rhetorical questions, they're questions I really don't have the answer to. Modern society has broadly done away with the originals (which one could take as evidence of efficacy, or of public goods issues) and for caste reasons I don't really trust the institutes like Harvard Business Review whose job is theoretically to answer these questions.
It is often argued that management is, by and large, a bullshit job because it has expanded so hugely and yet the same organisations (eg universities and hospitals) used to run perfectly well with smaller numbers.
Management seems to have grown with the ability of people to generate, communicate and store paperwork. If Person A is spending all of their time sending emails to other departments and then Person B is filtering a department’s incoming mail to sort out the dross, we can be back at digging a hole territory.
Previously, if someone took the time out of their day to physically travel to you and tell you something, you could reasonably expect it to be important.
Corvos
1d ago
That's fine, but you shouldn't expect the market to produce outcomes as if it valued something else!
I think that's the point. There is a gap between what people think is a valuable use of their time and what their boss / the market thinks is a valuable use of their time. For example, if some guy is being ordered to dig holes all over the place then being paid to fill them in is providing a marketable service to your employer, but nevertheless the overall work is going to feel stupid and pointless.
Corvos
2d ago
Certainly there have always been boys who feel like natural leaders. I remember noticing at school that certain boys just seemed to have an extra factor to them, some kind of character trait that makes them stand out that bit more. I was never able to work out what it was, though. You could say confidence but to my mind that is just pushing the problem one step back.
Corvos
2d ago
This is true, but goes too far. Watson did his actual research i.e. his succeeding in the university, because that's where the equipment, the mentorship and the funding was. You cannot strike out and make it on your own as a particle physicist.
It is the case though that pushing people out of the high-status established sinecures can lead to good results in the long term, as long as the new shoots are allowed to grow.
Of course, I also reject the OP's framing that one should consider the net worth of each minority and get rid of the ones who turn out negative. Presumably, most of the Motte would consider it deeply unfair if someone opined that it is fine to treat men as violent criminals, because the vast majority of violent criminals are men.
Your position is enlightened, self-consistent and humane. It is also turning my country into an alien hellscape.
I'm not even being sarcastic, but this isn't working. Enlightened humanism with respect to immigration has been a slow-rolling disaster for Europe, as well as for the principles that you appeal to.
These are high-paying positions in competitive fields
Yeah, why would people be upset about getting shut out of those?
Forgive my sarcasm, but really. Even putting aside the problem of 'as above, so below' and 'writer of international essays writes what he knows', would you say to a reasonably talented black man, "look, high-paying prestigious jobs are in very heavy demand and they don't like blacks, have you considered being a shoe-shiner?".
older white men pulled the ladder up behind them, either for ideological reasons or as a defense mechanism to protect their own positions
And frankly your post is the kind of thing they say. It's not that it's untrue, it's that it's only said to young white men, and it's so often said by people actively making it harder for those young men to get good jobs even as they sympathetically advise them to aim elsewhere.
We do seem to be in furious agreement, right up to the bit where your train of logic ends: 'and therefore it's annoying but basically fine'. I get that you can't make an 'ought' from an 'is' but I don't want to be ruled over and shut out of good positions by a cabal of people who don't like me much, especially when nobody else gets to play the same game.
(Yes, it happens to some degree with other groups too but a) rarely quite with such chutzpah and shamelessness, and b) if you make up a big majority of the local population then at least your news output or whatever is aligned with them and not so many people are getting shut out).
Isn't there a reasonable spectrum in between? Like, you're really not supposed to act like this, not in the West. If everyone I hired was a white English national I'd get it in the neck for God's sake, we've had decades of trying to root out any in-group preference at this point, with massive collateral damage in the process. You don't have to be a dark conspiracy theorist to object to someone buying a major news organ and stuffing it with their co-ethnics to influence public opinion towards their ethnostate, you just have to be a regular person. And if you're a would-be journalist with all the same talents or better but you're shut out purely because you don't give a shit about the Norse it's even worse!
There's also the issue that this kind of thing is literally what dark conspiracies are. "Norwegians are buying major newspapers to control the coverage of Norwegian issues" is a conspiracy theory in its own right, even if NOG never comes into the story once. Again, there are points on the spectrum in between 'this is ok' and 'Vikings have been ruling over us for a thousand years, ever since Harard secretly conquered Britain in 1065'.
Corvos
3d ago
That seems to broadly concede the point, doesn't it?
Imagine, say, the NYT was taken over by a Norwegian billionaire who had really strong opinions on what should be done with Norway's national fund. It's kind of a regional issue that most non-Norwegians don't have much of a stake in and he therefore carefully vets his hires for top editorial positions to make sure they have the correct stance and strong ties to his faction. Naturally, this means that they are all Norwegian.
Probably these picks have strengths beyond being Norwegian! They write well, they're bright, they're personable. Some of them have a good reputation and industry awards. You can't get a job in the new NYT just by being Norwegian, and being Norwegian is only one of the reasons they were on the short list.
But when you get right down to it, the editorial team got hired because they were Norwegian.
It seems to me that those of us who are not Norwegian have a right to ask whether this counts as illegal discrimination, and if not why not. We also have a right to ask clearly, in public, what it means for our information ecosystem that one of the main sources of information is now being run largely by and for Norwegians, without getting fired for anti-Norwegianism. Yes, it's more complicated than that, but that doesn't mean you can't draw a pretty clear conclusion.
(Apologies if it turns out we are in heated agreement.)
Corvos
3d ago
Head of AI will mean developing lots of smaller models that are needed to accurately make the base LLMs work - smaller agents for interrogating the codebase, embedding models for condensing the code in a vector database, etc. Plus of course prompting experimentation to make the base LLM maximally correct while using minimal tokens.
Corvos
4d ago
Depends on the institution and the degree. The courses I was involved with (on both sides) were >70% finals.
Corvos
4d ago
One of the really serious structural issues with universities is that they are primarily research institutions. Academic staff didn't come to teach, hate doing it, and are actively incentivised not to do it because it takes up time you need for grinding papers and citations. Exams are a massive nuisance that come every year and all the people nominally in charge of them desperately wish someone would cancel them.
It's all perspective, right? Your right to stop sending paychecks to someone at will == their right to be thrown away like garbage by their liege whenever convenient.
Appeal to the majority is a logical fallacy but nevertheless I think it says something that in almost all societies those higher in society have obligations of loyalty to their underlings (which must be reciprocated of course).
Based on what I read in the newspapers lately:
- If that literal tweet were reported to the police, probably nothing.
- If reported to their employer, maybe they would be disciplined or fired, depending on their job.
- If the tweet were different and contained a slur or a call to action, then arrested, especially if the authorities are feeling sensitive. For example, an ex-Royal Marine was arrested and held for 20 days in jail for making a video two days after the knife murder of three little girls by Axel Rudakabana:
He told GB News that his duty solicitor informed him he “would have been fine” had he said the same thing a few months prior.
The revelation left him exasperated as he questioned “what’s the difference?” because the laws surrounding free speech had not changed.
The 46-year-old posted the 12-minute video in which he said illegal immigrants have “the numbers to take over” the country.
He also used the words “scumbags” and “psychopaths” and warned the country was “under attack”.
Michael said on GB News that words had been scrutinised in isolation and the targets for his criticism had been Rudakubana and “illegal, unchecked or radicalised immigrants”.
He was found 'not guilty' by a jury after 17 minutes but he was up on terror charges with a maximum sentence of 7 years.
A nurse who tweeted that she didn't care if people burned down the asylum hotels was advised to plead guilty and got several years in jail.
I agree with @Crowstep:
for most people, most of the time, the state is nothing to be feared. But that's also true in literal dictatorships.
Corvos
6d ago
I am very sorry to hear of your troubles. I suggest that you:
- Take things one moment at a time. Do what you can do in the moment, without considering the big picture, and do not dwell on what you can't do.
- Be there for him physically. If you get on, then the emotional side will take care of itself.
- Focus on the things that it will comfort you to have done for him when you are looking back.
My best wishes for you and your family.
Pydantic is regularly used, but what about Astra? Are you using astral yourself? Is it in any major open-source projects?
I’ve never seen anyone do package management that wasn’t pip (or conda/apt depending on environment).
Open to it, I’ve just never seen it in the wild.
More options
Context Copy link