This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I wonder how many of the 10k/month/employee companies are all venture backed by the same firms that are backing the big frontier companies?
I wonder how many of those firms are getting $10k/month of productivity boost?
I have no difficulty believing that many jobs can do that, but as Uber shows, adding AI isn’t automatically worth the giant bill.
$10k/month is $120k/yr which is a decent entry-level or mid-level white-collar salary, depending on the specific field. So you could reframe the question as "Is heavy AI use more productive than hiring another employee"?
The answer is debatable and changes based on circumstance but -- yes. AI is not just doubling or tripling performance but for some workers makes them an order of magnitude more powerful than they were before. There are people out there doing work in days that would have taken teams months before.
The productivity gain is not observed in fake email jobs where adding AI tokens to unproductive work simply makes it more unproductive.
Don't forget overhead... although perhaps with corporate tax breaks it evens out back near 120k.
The hope I'm sure is that it's the senior folks, who are themselves worth far more than that $120k/year.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
That's the thing, when your venture board member says jump, venture firms pretty much have to say "how high?", regardless of what the return is on jumping, because they need the next round at a higher value.
I doubt those firms would all choose the same allocation if they weren't venture backed.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link