Lurker > Sad_Face

Ruvan22 posted...

1) I'm not sure your broad statement is true - there are some people that have been hired due to work without formal training, but they are the exception, not the rule.

Coding bootcamps have skyrocketed over the past decade and there a lot of folks in software without CS degrees. Unless you want to label coding bootcamps as formal training.

2) Free college tuition would greatly benefit the disadvantaged who don't have the free time to learn from "the wealth of knowledge and information freely available", much less have the time to "build a portfolio".

This is why I brought up the point that many people don't use their degree. Yes, having an education is important, specifically meeting a certain threshold of literacy is important. We're in a crisis right now where most people go to college and are saddled with debt for a degree they don't use and are entering a job market that is heavily saturated with people in their position. What purpose does college serve in 2023 for most people? Is it necessary, absolutely critical for people to go to college? Is it that important that the US government should allocate budget for it? Why?

uwnim posted...

Personally, I'd prefer it doesn't. Making college free doesn't really do anything to fix the problems with it and likely would make them worse. It would hide the costs, so the ever increasing price would be hidden. It would make college feel even more like something that you are required to do even if all you end up doing is getting a degree that has no value outside of being a degree(as in, what you learned is irrelevant as is what the degree is in, the value is simply in having any degree) to meet the requirements of a signalling game imposed by employers.

I'll echo uwnim's point as one of the reasons why there's a ton of pushback especially in GOP states. In a number of GOP towns, their rates of degree holders is in single digits. They have a culture that never pushed for their kids to go to college and life went on as normal for them over the past couple decades. So they're absolutely flabbergasted over the prospect that someone goes to college, gets a degree, gets saddled in debt and even more possibly doesn't optimize or get any use out of the degree while everyone else has to foot the bill.

However, those who didn't live in a culture where everyone was pushed to go to college don't understand that the last sentence I wrote above more nuanced than that. In the culture for a lot coastal states, all kids hear is "college, college, college" where it's the next step in their adult life and if they don't go, they're not living life right everyone is going to look at them like "What the heck are you doing?". These kids are being taken advantage of to sign loans they're not going to pay off as colleges keep increasing tuition with no impunity. Heck, the government also added fuel to the fire by banning declaring bankruptcy over school loans from back in the 00's.

The whole college system is broken. I think the first things to assess is what purpose does college serve nowadays (versus what it idealistically serves) and if it's an absolute necessity as we move to an educational revolution in the near future.

AirJordan2345 posted...

ye, i agree with you on that. You really don't even use the stuff that you studied in college. Another thing, you really think that computers and a.i. will be able to do most jobs? So when is a machine gonna be able to make a burger and a pizza or cut someone's hair, without any human help?

There's going to be a lot of jobs rendered redundant by AI; white collar jobs in particular are most susceptible. The software development positions, a number of them are going to be cut at lower levels but otherwise it's an incredible tool to augment one's abilities and increase one's productivity. The way I see it is that with AI, one person could do the work of 5 guys. A company could cut corners and reduce staff, but what about a company who decides to keep their personnel and have them maximize AI tools? They're going to build things far bigger and greater due to the collaboration of their staff members in conjunction with these new tools.

The name of the game previously was learn something valuable so you can charge people a premium for your efforts. With AI, what is considered valuable to learn is going to be drastically different. Of course, what you learn using your hands isn't going to be touched by AI anytime soon, or until robots can mimic the dexterity at an affordable price. But getting started in a field to get a job to leverage into a career is going to be a helluva a lot harder I'll admit.

Ruvan22 posted...

Eh... I'm not sure disregarding the societal benefits of higher education is the best answer to a specific problem with higher education. Also while AI definitely has the potential to do all that, I would think lots of other things will need to happen first - high speed internet has affected schooling, entertainment, communication, health delivery, etc BUT there are SO many areas of the country still don't have high speed internet to begin with.

Not agreeing with universal free college tuition =/= disregarding societal benefits of higher education.

Don't twist my point.

We're in a country right now where the vast majority of people have degrees but are underemployed in relation to their education due to the overall saturation of degree holders in the market. Disregarding obvious fields where you need a license to operate in, we have tech companies more than willing to hire someone who built a portfolio of projects in his spare time using the wealth of knowledge and information freely available over people who studied the craft in school. So what is the argument right now for universal free college tuition?

Why bother? Most people aren't even using their degrees as they can't find a job for what they studied for. And now we're heading to a technical revolution thanks to AI's disruption. AI is going to completely revamp what and how we learn.

Bad_Mojo posted...

Well, Japan is having a child crisis right now, right? I think China had a huge issue with too many males and not enough females

They've been vocally concerned about it for well over a decade. Now we're seeing the effects with schools closing and even certain industries starting to collapse due to lack of children being born at a consistent rate.

https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2023/4/2/last-students-graduate-school-closures-spread-in-ageing-japan

The hubris in some of these posts drive me nuts. We have thousands of years of civilizations and societies to draw from (i.e. anthropology) to understand how to create, maintain, and destroy a civilization. Within the context of this topic, to maintain a society, one of the required factors is that you have to meet a certain birth rate threshold. Failure to do so and you'll can look forward to your society and your culture having no future.

Conflict posted...

Social media can be harmful but not in ways that justify banning them entirely. The tough part that people don't want to hear is that if social media is causing you problems, the onus is on you to do something about how you use it or interpret things on it. Like if you feel bad about your friends achieving things you're not, you need to learn how to not compare yourself to them or other people in general

I agree that individuals should always take responsibility for what goes on in their lives, but at what point do we acknowledge how powerful outside forces are and that some people are not equipped to handle defending themselves? I just finished watching this before I saw your post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdbra4EdWt8

How the US as a whole has been rapidly increasing in size over the decades. Is personal responsibility really the answer to this problem that is created, perpetuated, and exacerbated by companies lobbying the government to rewrite health codes in their favor and spending almost $5 Billion in advertising?

Kids are growing up to have a warped version of what reality is thanks to social media.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsXU3uayBAM

s0nicfan posted...

Deafening silence on the 51% attack vulnurability. I can only assume most people either aren't aware or are but pretending not to notice because it's a fundamental flaw in the underlying technology that nobody wants to talk about.

It is a flaw, but what does it take to execute a 51% attack? How likely is it to execute a 51% attack? For the BTC network, it requires some extreme resources or extreme collaboration between miners to execute.

What some protocols do to prevent this is to flat out centralize their protocol (for example by whitelisting node participants) until their network gets large enough where it would be too expensive to make attacking the network worthwhile. Of course this introduces the new concern of centralization. But it does generate the discussion and understanding that centralization-decentralization is a spectrum with the vast majority of projects having some levels of centralization. So what level of decentralization and centralization is good enough?

Bullet_Wing posted...

I'm pretty heavy on the development side, not just the basic copy/paste crank out a token s*** either. Full stack solidity/web3 dev who has made countless smart contracts and dapps. I see the potential of the technology, but beyond that, I see the inevitability of it to be abused, which will undermine that potential.

Good good good, I'm working on breaking into the industry full time as a Web3 developer (can't say fullstack since my front end experience isn't strong but ChatGPT exists....). I won't deny we have these issues where developers will walk back on their promises and the community as whole doesn't do their due diligence on a project. I take it you've heard of Bancor? The project was fundamentally flawed in its protocol where it facilitated yield farming and had a strategy to prevent impermanent loss; printing out tokens to sell to cover the loss. But what kept giving it attention and customers were its connections to Chainlink and being the only major protocol you could stake Link tokens. People operated on trust and affiliations and got burned for it.

The industry needs to be more vigilant to gatekeep and socially scorn projects like this or the more obviously broken projects like the Terra Luna blockchain.

Bullet_Wing posted...

L2 chains that have low gas also have much lower volume than eth. I'm skeptical of their ability to scale.

Shameless plug but a lot of eyes are on Chainlink's Cross Chain Interoperability protocol to connect all blockchains together, whenever it releases (hopefully after I get a job). At the end of the day, no one (in the costumer base) gives a shit about where or how their transaction was verified, as long as it's publicly verifiable and their transaction goes through with no hassle. Just like how no one cares about what cloud provider Netflix uses; they just want their show streaming with no lag. With a seamless bridging protocol, volume on a specific blockchain isn't a problem because the dapp will seamlessly allow communication and transferring on different blockchains. Granted, this is an ideal scenario. I've looked into a few different bridging protocols, even used one for a hackathon, but they haven't proven their worth on the security side which makes it quite difficult to convince big name protocols like Aave or Uniswap to consider them over waiting for Chainlink's solution.

So what some people are expecting is to see are more L2s pop up, specifically ones geared specifically and exclusively for each dapp that is big enough to facilitate its own chain; ex. an Aave chain or Uniswap chain.

Tyranthraxus posted...

As opposed to what? woolsey translations?

Are you insinuating Chrono Trigger's translation ISN'T ICONIC?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WojscNaYABc

"Am I butterfly dreaming I'm a man? Or a bowling ball dreaming I'm a plate of sashimi? Never assume what you see and feel is real! "

Tyranthraxus posted...

Eh.

Sometimes the bad translations are fun but I usually prefer more accurate translations.

I don't trust localizers nowadays to keep in the jokes. They'd sanitize the hell out of these games.

When Ethereum transitioned from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake, the the total reduction in carbon emission contribution across all industries went down by 0.1%. Also note that the BTC mining economy incentivizes efficiency in energy usage as that is the killer of profits. As a result, BTC miners tend to look for renewable energies like setting up shop in Nordic countries to utilizing thermal energy consumption. There are even nuclear power plants that would mine BTC because they have no way of storing their excess energy.

But no one gives a shit about BTC, the main fun in blockchain is smart contracts.

thronedfire2 posted...

so nothing new

I'm sure the people who own the blockchains being used will require a service fee just like a bank.

Yup, blockchains require a network fee for all transactions. But what's "new" about using blockchain tech is that those uses are done in a "trustless" (more accurately trust minimized) environment. What this means is that smart contracts are coded to act as intended without the creator being able to tamper the contract while being auditable by others to confirm the intentions stated by the creator are in line what the contract is coded to do. This allows creates an environment where business transactions are conducted without worrying about the counterparty betraying them.

This kind of thing, counterparty risk, isn't something most people ever pay attention to. But it's a big deal when you need to worry about it. Back when GME skyrocketed in value, Robinhood blocked all retail transactions and even sold off shares from people's accounts while letting institutional investors conduct transactions normally. These company behaviors would not be able to thrive in a blockchain dominated world as other developers would spin up the same type of services with the added bonus of "We developers cannot change our Terms of Service" and everyone would flock over to it.

Understanding the value of trust and transparency that smart contracts provide is an extremely difficult topic to convey. A number of developers don't really get it, a lot of institutional investors don't really get this, and the vast majority of retail investors absolutely don't get this. If you understand this, then you have an opportunity of a lifetime. For everyone else, you're going to have to wait till the industry finally recreates all the functionalities e-commerce needs to thrive, after that, novel use cases people never thought of will be derived.

There was a really good analysis of Prometheus and its allegory regarding Jesus Christ I read a decade ago that gave me an appreciation for the movie, not that I'd ever watch it again.

I planned on starting with BN2 and skipping out on BN1, but you made me a believer. Thank you Neon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMk7CKwJ8OM

Full video.

Punished_Blinx posted...

Mortgage - 210k
Student Loans - 335k
Car Loan - 35k
Credit Cards - 136k
Personal Loans - 44k

Combined Annual Income - 230k

I really want to understand the thought process in accruing the credit card debt. At least the saving's grace is the high household income.

powpow999 posted...

but I dont want a marriage, and she wants to be bred smh

The purpose of marriage is to encourage and pressure you to uphold your responsibilities in caring for the kid you bred with her. Unless you intend to take advantage of government programs for women raising kids in less than stellar conditions, make the commitment and do right by your potential kid.

I see the conversation has gone looooooonnnnngggg past this but I'll give my 2 cents and bounce.

Gladius_ posted...

First off those statistics are focusing on relationships. Young women are more likely to look for a relationship than a hookup. Further breaking it down lesbian and bisexual women are more likely than men/gay men to go for a comitted relationship. Even amongst straight women.

But who are those women in a relationship with? The lesbian/bisexual female population can't be driving the relationship statistics because they're a minority as then you're insinuating the vast majority of 18-30 women are lesbian/bisexual. The math doesn't check out.

The statement that women are interested in relationships while guys don't want to settle down isn't enough of a factor for this unprecedented high.

Religion is at an all time low so it can't be due to religious beliefs. Conservatism, in the younger male crowd? Also not convincing that this is a factor, most kids are going to be liberal. What I can and do see happening is guys becoming conservatism as a result of the current state.

I'll give you that women dominating college enrollment and don't prefer to date down. But this leads to a new(ish, I've seen this play out when I was school in the early 10's) dating dynamic:

https://nypost.com/2021/11/02/men-with-golden-penis-syndrome-ruining-romance-for-women/

Times changed. Adapt. We don't want to be breeding factories. You want classical traditional values? Good for you but don't be surprised when you find that opinion unpopular among us.

I want to point out that guys are adapting; this is reflected in the extreme growth of the red pill community. From Andrew Tate, to Men Going Their Own Way, to all those other red pill personalities and movements. There's needs to be reconciliation and the first thing that needs to be done is to sit down and listen to guys' complaints in why they're gravitating to the red pill communities and address their concerns.

Every successful civilization needs to have their prime working age men invested and productive in society and yet we're seeing a lot of guys checking out of society. Not even in a relationship and we're already at 60% of single males; what happens if it gets worse? Telling them it's their problem is not a solution.

Hoodroar posted...

There's nothing to engage, stats are stats and without context we can't really speculate on the discrepancy in the numbers.

You can speculate on how it would manifest in society. For instance, Gladius' point on men and women having similar online dating app experiences make no sense when factoring in this data point. Dating apps have skyrocketed in usage over the past decade and is one of the dominant forms of dating. A conclusion to make is that either online dating apps don't help men (18-30) at best, or at worst it is a massive detriment to men.

On top of that, it begs the question of who these women are dating to leave such a massive pool of single men?

Gladius_ posted...

You were there in a thread dedicated to that in the past, got your answers, people debated me, and lost. So why go through it again?

I wasn't there for this actually. And I bring it up because you guys are making it out to be a person "Crow" problem while calling him a troll, joke account, joke, and not worthy of a response. So how many guys have to go through the same experience to recognize it's not a personal problem or there might be factors out of his control that didn't exist 30-50 years ago?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/3/7/AAWh3OAAEYuN.jpg

Reposting from my post (just the twitter link source) at #163.

Is it an anomaly that the Pew Research survey reported 63% of males 18-30 are single versus 34% of their female peers? Why is this happening? Is this something to be worried about?

And bonus question, which of the demographics is most likely to be a consistent viewer of Andrew Tate and the rest of those guys Crow listed?

Pepys_Monster posted...

I was in the United States Army. They offered me a better deal than the Marines.

I should rephrase. Did you work with other branches when you were deployed (i.e. have Marines or Navy seals working with your troops). How did you guys treat each other?

I ask because I tune into Jocko's podcast every now and then and he talks a bit of how he had his Navy Seal teams dress according to code of Army soldiers to better integrate into the platoons and foster camaraderie between the branches.

https://twitter.com/pewresearch/status/1623352132375302144?s=20

Is it an anomaly that the Pew Research survey reported 63% of males 18-30 are single versus 34% of their female peers? Why is this happening? Is this something to be worried about?

powpow999 posted...

What if I breed her before she turns 25? Is that going to far tho??

If you didn't put a ring on her finger then yes it's going too far, no matter her age. If you're going to go that far, accept the responsibility and make the commitment.

Which military branch were you enlisted in? How did you get along with the other branches?

Gimme that million. I know how to invest.

Actually scratch that, gimme a house in the Hamptons and I'll sell it under market price and still turn a massive profit.

Jennywentnorth8 posted...

He had her trapped on a boat. He knew that if he DID try something, she wouldn't be able to say no...because of the implication. You know, she looks around and what does she see? Nothin' but open ocean. "Ahh, there's nowhere for me to run. What am I gonna do, say 'no'?"

I understand Disney's sentiment perfectly now.

Who's gonna post the reference lol

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/0/2/AAWh3OAAEW26.jpg

Think of the good Atelier Ryza brought to this world, like this bombastic Azur Lane collaboration that turned Klaudia into a FUCKING BOMBSHELL. She was super cute before, but nowhere this curvy and busty. Bless the Azur Lane artist bringing this gift to the world.

metallica846 posted...

I have Sad_Face tagged from past experience that I would not bother watching some documentary he insists is the perfect explanation for Russian genocide tbh.

You can't draw your own conclusions?

Gladius_ posted...

Nah. The documentary literally lies. Metallica can look it up if they want but it's not hard to fact check what is being said.

I implore them to do so. This is why I keep saying to take information from different sources across the spectrum. Even you are omitting stuff that makes the story more nuanced.

metallica846 posted...

You just wrote a lot of words and somehow said nothing in the process.

My hands are tied. Gladius is omitting some critical information in the documentary. Watch it.

metallica846 posted...

You mean to tell me that Ukraine had troops in country fighting back against a guerrilla war in Donbas fully funded by Moscow since 2014? Well thats just obviously super aggressive and asking to be invadedagain.and again.

Ah, you're aware of what happened in 2014? Good good. There's more to than story. Hence I keep pointing to Oliver Stone who did a documentary on the things that went down there. That story is absolutely critical to understanding the dynamics that lead to the current war we have now. Having an opinion of "Oh, it's Russia's fault! They're evil!" overly simplifies the nuance of this incredibly indepth story. There are a lot of pieces on the board who contributed to where we are now and you'll do a disservice if you don't acknowledge them.

It also goes to show how real life can be more fantastical and outrageous than what you'd accept in fictional stories.

Gladius_ posted...

Already false. They broke the Budapest memorandum first. Why would Russia be at war with Ukraine? Because they want to claim it as their own as they don't see it as a sovereign nation.

Your logic for it being false makes no sense. It's within the NATO guidelines for the US to support and bootstrap a NATO ally. Heck, when Biden won, Ukraine started moving troops and arming themselves at the border of Russia. Before Russia officially declared war, Ukraine had 100K troops amassed in position.

Again, I implore you to look at Lex Friedman's interview with Oliver Stone. Their relationship is more complicated than you realize. You're missing a significant piece of the story as evident by you concluding Russia wants to be at war with Ukraine because they want to claim it as their own.

thronedfire2 posted...

I just want to know how, exactly, NATO expansion threatens Russia. Do they think NATO is going to launch a first strike and purposely start WW3? Because the only other threat I can see is to prevent Russia from invading neighboring countries to expand its territory

Russia was opposed to Ukraine joining NATO because then the US would be setting up military bases in Ukraine, which would be at Russia's border. My memory is a bit foggy on the stipulations regarding joining NATO, but if a country in the NATO alliance was to be in a war, all NATO allies must support the country.

So naturally you can compare this to a scenario of if Mexico had a similar partnership with China, the US would be up at arms if at the agreement that would allow China to setup military bases right at the border of the US.

A general note of when it comes to politics and negotiation, you don't want to do any action you wouldn't want your opponent to do if they were in power.

shockthemonkey posted...

So you dont think that political cartoon is bologna?

So you don't think the war is more nuanced than "Russia evil, Ukraine innocent"?

IXI_Fission_IXI posted...

2) I went to do some outside work and thye license plate was completely covered and the side windows were covered with something black.

Jeez he knew what he was up to.

s0nicfan posted...

So has anybody pointed out yet that Russia invading and annexing parts of Georgia in 2008 and stealing Crimea in 2014 is justification enough for wanting to join a defensive alliance?

Read through the topic and haven't seen anyone talk about that yet. I was going to bring up that you won't have a fully informed opinion and will think that comic is bologna unless you understand the major political events that took place in Ukraine in the 2010's. I also implore you draw sources that are lean across the political spectrum because people will leave out critical details to paint a specific narrative.

I do recommend starting with looking at Oliver Stone's interview in Lex Friedman's podcast as he got a chance to interview Putin in the 2010's over it (and of course, find some sources that speak about what information Stone could be omitting).

Stagmar posted...

I dont date Americans.

ouch

50 votes and 26 voted for breaking up with her at the time I voted.

If she's perfect, she'll find a way to handle grocery shopping without embarrassing herself, like using a shopping basket and bringing that back or talking someone else into bringing back the shopping cart for her. You guys are missing out on a great opportunity for something relatively insignificant.

1337toothbrush posted...

He said in a recent video on his youtube channel that when doing contract work he gets paid based on sales: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVhGCtCNGHg

I'd say I'd want other developers to take note on how he accomplished getting a cut out of sales, but most 99% of the industry are never going to have the negotiating power he has, nor the trust and respect he commands to be able to accomplish this.

CyricZ posted...

No one's suggesting that, particularly in the context of this particular grown-ass man.

Then why did Taharqa respond the way he did?

Taharqa_ posted...

So a grown ass man doesn't have any agency whatsoever? Lol

You think grown ass men can't lose agency in their lives?

JACKBUTTMOMMY posted...

lol

You laugh but we have a massive issue of unwed mothers suffering from men who knock them up and go about their business. The effects of all these guys failing to uphold their responsibility is currently snowballing and causing more and more societal problems than people realize.

It's a guarantee that the government is going to step in and start holding people accountable and it won't be pretty.

Doom_Art posted...

what would getting married solve?

Ideally it should force commitment from both ends to have your friend help his baby mama secure an optimal environment for the kid to be raised in. An absent father skyrockets the chance of a lot of behavioral problems that could make life a metric ton more difficult for the kid years down the road that could be outright avoided with the kid's father directly raising the kid.

Problem is most people don't understand what marriage is about nor value it so it doesn't impose the heavy pressure to commit with society helping to enforce this with social pressure. But opting for shared custody in different homes doesn't have the same effect as marriage because decisions can change at any time. One of them could get a new job and relocate to a new state, thus cutting the kid off from the other parent.

Fony posted...

i think they broke up and just had a business relationship for most fo the time they were rich. she had some weird harem in south america. this dude scammed the whole world and couldn't hold on to that.

She was IN SBF's harem in the Bahamas. Probably pretty low at the totem pole judging from her tumblr page people dug up.

I feel more sorry for Harry than anything. The guy got uprooted from his family, his friend circle, his home country, and his wife has him under her thumb.

UnfairRepresent posted...

it's just we're s*** scared of pissing off Russia.

This directly contradicts the US' relationship with Ukraine over the course of 10 years leading up to the war. I don't buy this.

shockthemonkey posted...

what? Normal people are able to admit theyre wrong and f***ed up and that doesnt make them psychopaths at all.

What exactly are you trying to argue here? You're not saying anything that disagrees with my post.

Hinakuluiau posted...

We're getting one persons biased view of how it went down who admitted he stalked her. Who says she wasn't wrong for feeling assaulted?

That is a possibility. But that doesn't absolve her of texting back whatever variant of "I had a great time!" and then agreeing to make plans for another date and then flaking on him. You're leading a person and giving them false expectations that things are alright and it'll hit 10x as hard when combined with "You're a psycho and made me feel like I was raped". This is the type of emotional trauma that'll lead someone to think "All ___ are evil!"

Mr_Karate_II posted...

That's kinda stalker behavior, she blocked you on one dating site and you message her on other sites, you begging for one more night is just pathetic.

No shit he feels horribly embarrassed (an understatement at the very least) by the situation. He's desperate for closure. Honestly that girl is awful in that she doesn't even consider him human with how she treated him. "I had a great time! Let's meet up again!" -> *ghosts him* -> "You're horrible and made me feel like I was raped".

It takes an incredibly strong willed guy (or perhaps indifferent to the point of sociopathy) to brush that off and go about his business. Most guys are going to panic and enter desperation mode to try and make things right.

Kakapo posted...

Stay fat and sad then, what do we care?

Less healthy and productive people contributing to society. Health problems galore that strain the healthcare system. For recreation, that's less people you're able to socialize with in an active setting. I'm planning a hike right now and I have a friend I can't invite (I did anyways but I know he won't come) because he's not fit enough to manage. Great guy otherwise.

But as a rule of thumb regarding "Why do I care that X is screwing up his own life?", imagine an extreme hyperbolic case of everyone around you doing it and imagine what life would be like then. This thought process is the reason why laws are written and enforced; to regulate social behavior to maintain a threshold of quality of life.