sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
Suddenly I cannot remember the color of your eyes
Or the things we said as we stood together for the last time
User ID: 636
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
17hr ago
I don't think SFH neighborhoods are his primary focus.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
17hr ago
The serious eats bean routine worked pretty well for me. If I'm feeling lazy I just put a few bay leaves in as aromatics.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
17hr ago
What leads you to believe that Anthropic's stated principles are compatible with speeding up Chinese progress to AGI?
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
18hr ago
Drip irrigation is extremely convenient and low maintenance. There is a startup cost, of course, but it's great to have it. It's also like building a hydraulic lego set.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
18hr ago
This isn't reddit - if you're making a claim, it's on you to support it, rather than everyone reading it trying to Google what it is you really mean.
Let's unpack this link.
Time reported this week on how some companies are beginning to follow a predictable model when it comes to rehiring workers after laying off those same employees due to their jobs being taken over by artificial intelligence (AI). The company first announces it is going to use an AI to do a job. The staff is downsized. Then six to twelve months pass and the AI has successfully managed 60% of the job duties, while unable to complete the remaining 40%, so the company hires the original staff members back. This gap in performance is real.
Link is broken, so I can't say anything about this.
Robert Half reported that a total of 29% of those organizations which cut employees due to an AI related reduction had already rehired into the positions they cut.
Again, link is broken.
According to Forrester, 55% of executive decision makers who replaced their employees using AI will regret the decision within 18 months. We currently are inside this 18 month window
I don't think I need to explain why this is an unimpressive claim.
Bottom line is I don't see anything here to support your claim. We also need to distinguish between hiring after layoffs vs asking employees to come back, as you claimed. If Meta lays off thousands of SWEs and hires more after, that's not "begging laid off employees to come back" and it's probably not even rehiring into the same positions.
But without actual evidence I'm just trying to read the tea leaves of what you might be trying to claim.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Sorry, but the funniest American writer is either Philip Roth (Portnoy's Complaint, though perhaps you need to be Jewish to see the humor) or John Toole.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
The only person I ever heard mention that band IRL was an old boomer lady teacher I had in high school.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
residents of that neighborhood who already rely on street parking
Well, I have a solution for that, but you (along with the rest of this forum) aren't going to like it.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
I don't understand why you think this addresses my objection. Most pregnancies are not in the range of "possibly the last pregnancy you can have".
A 25 year old woman gets pregnant and finds that the baby has Down's. Her options are to have the baby with Downs or abort and have another baby without Downs. She cannot have both of these babies - she can have another baby after the Downs baby, but she could have another after the next pregnancy anyway. This logic applies until she's old enough to not be able to get pregnant again after the current pregnancy.
It's also fairly obvious that most people are not trying to maximize the number of kids and will stop at some number, meaning that the Downs baby is trading off even more obviously. Sure, they could increase the number of kids they plan to have by one, but they could do that with a neurotypical pregnancy too.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Why would humans frequently engaging in heinous evil reduce your confidence that Evil exists as a useful concept and is recognizable by humans?
People doing heinous stuff and considering it morally acceptable pretty directly implies that people have difficulty recognizing good and evil. Either that, or they are right and I'm having difficulty. Not looking good either way for this argument.
Can we confidently say that evil leads to misery, and good leads to happiness, even if this is not the case in every microscopic section of the causal chain that we can directly observe, yes?
I think doing evil to those who can retaliate or doing evil that others recognize as evil (thus leading to some kind of retaliation) can result in misery. You can do all the evil you want to everyone else with no obvious result in misery as far as I can tell, at least as long as you don't see what you do as evil yourself.
For the things you recognize as evil, what makes them evil? What does it mean for a thing to be evil?
I don't have a totally complete moral framework, but I sort of operate off a mishmash of utilitarianism and virtue ethics. So an evil act is one that is not virtuous or leads to an overall decrease in welfare.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
I don't see how we've addressed this. The number of children you can have is finite. In most cases, aborting a down syndrome pregnancy means you can use that time to have a neurotypical child while not changing the total number of kids you have. It's a direct tradeoff and I'm confused why you are arguing with what's basically a mathematical fact in my view.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
There's nothing stopping parents from just having another child
Nothing outside of the finite human fertility window, of course.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Okay. So you do concede that in most cases we're talking about trading off down syndrome children for neurotypical children. Let's return to my original question to you.
Does a Down syndrome child entail a richer tapestry of experiences for the parent than a neurotypical child?
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Not only have we shifted the goal posts to what I agree is a highly non-central situation at best, but even people who happen to be in that situation can't, in practice, know whether they are.
Indeed. So let's focus on the modal case where people are overwhelmingly likely to conceive again after aborting a down syndrome baby.
Seems just as plausible to me that if they're at the end of their child-bearing years they might abort what would have been their last (and in some cases only) child and not be able to conceive again.
This is my point, that outside the cases of highly geriatric pregnancies we're talking about trading off a down syndrome child for a neurotypical child.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
I have no strong opinions on any particular policy, but I can tell you right now that no builder outside of a dense urban area is going to build an apartment complex without adequate parking, regardless of what the law says, and even in urban areas there's little demand for car-free living. While it may be true that eliminating parking would reduce the per-unit cost of an apartment, it would most likely just shift that cost from the developer/occupant onto the public at large, as the residents would park on the street.
Aren't you contradicting yourself in the space of two sentences? Developers would never build without adequate parking (then we can get rid of the minimum, right?) and also getting rid of the minimum would cause people to park on the street. Pick one?
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
If you want to argue that's it's immoral to abort a down syndrome baby, go ahead - but what you're doing is arguing that the parents are missing out, in fact impoverishing themselves, by not having a disabled child.
It obviously does, on the margin, since the options are:
- First trimester abortion, try again after
- Carry the baby to term, then recover from pregnancy and birth (and dealing with a young child with disabilities), then try again
Humans have a limited fertility window and most people are trying to hit some target number of kids. However, even if you are just trying to maximize the number of kids you have until you hit menopause, you're trading off a neurotypical kid for a down syndrome kid. Exception would be situations like "you're over 40 and you probably can't get pregnant again".
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Does a Down syndrome child entail a richer tapestry of experiences for the parent than a neurotypical child? That's the tradeoff being made here.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Sure. But you don't know you in particular are going to get cancer, or that by abstaining from smoking you won't get cancer anyway. You don't know how having cancer will feel in a subjective sense. You don't know what else might happen that might obviate all downsides of cancer; maybe you're destined to die before any negative health effects would arrive and smoking would be a pure net-positive for you. All of these can "support" the absurd claim that one's decision to smoke three packs a day was not sufficiently "informed", if one's reasoning is motivated. And as I've argued a number of times before, all reason is motivated.
Sure. But we can pretty confidently say that smoking increases your chances of getting cancer versus the counterfactual. Putting your life savings on black doesn't guarantee that you'll lose them, but I'm pretty comfortable saying that you're informed that it's a possibility. Arguing against this feels like sophistry.
Do you recognize that Good and Evil exist,
Probably.
the difference between them is comprehendible by humans
Based on the number of societies in human history doing absolutely heinous shit and considering it to be normal or even moral, I'm not sure about this. In fact I suspect there's very few societies that don't involve something I consider horrifically evil until fairly recently. And even then I'm not sure.
they have important consequences for humans engaging in them?
Unclear. I'm pretty confident that good things happen to bad people and bad things happen to good people. Perhaps there is a settling of accounts in the hereafter, but that's the whole question, isn't it?
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Or know anyone who works in a big company?
Of course I know him. He's me.
Huge amounts of layoffs have occured predicated on the expectation of efficiencies from AI.
It's a fig leaf to lay off the, frankly speaking, terrible workers who got over hired during covid exuberance in the early 2020s, or otherwise for floundering businesses to shed workers in a bid to become profitable.
Some such companies, once they discovered that AI did not improve efficiency, have been forced to rehire the people they fired,
I'm not aware of any companies begging fired employees to return a la DOGE. Examples?
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
Brazil! That will justly punish his wanton ways.
sarker
hantavirus landfill tour guide
1d ago
They are depriving themselves and their child of a rich tapestry of experience; one that is perhaps more challenging and painful, but also one that can and should be fulfilling. A life of short cuts is a life cut short; not in time but in meaning.
The implication seems to be that you should have children with as many different neurological disorders as possible rather than boring neurotypicals. Is that really your position?
In that case, I hardly see why someone should have a down syndrome child instead of a normal one.
More options
Context Copy link