It can be both, I think? Politicians/powerful people take advantage of divisions in society, but often those divisions do exist in a fully-fledged or nascent form for them to exploit.
I do it more or less this way - except I keep the root intact until the end. It keeps the onion structurally intact until I'm done with the dicing. At which point, the root takes a single chop to lop off, and then the whole thing scatters into tiny, mostly uniform dices. It's quite satisfying.
> not that a single user uses a lot of energy for a simple chat.
This seems like a classic tragedy of the commons, no? An individual has a minor impact, but the rationale switching to LLM tools by the collective will likely have a massive impact.
That's ok. AI will kill those off soon enough, and like all winners, rewrite history enough so that that inconvenient theft never happened anyway. It's manifest destiny, or something.
I'm a decent engineer working as a DS in a consulting firm. In my last two projects, I checked in (or corrected) so much more code than the other two junior DS's in my team, that at the end some 80%-90% of the ML-related stuff had been directly built, corrected or optimized by me. And most of the rest that wasn't, was mostly because it was boilerplate. LLMs were pivotal in this.
And I am only a moderately skilled engineer. I can easily see somebody with more experience and skills doing this to me, and making me nearly redundant.
You're making the mistake of overvaluing volume of work output. In engineering, difference of perspective is valuable. You want more skilled eyeballs on the problem. You won't be redundant just as your slower coworkers aren't now.
For most of the business, they don't really need exceptionally good solutions. Something works is fine. I'm pretty sure AI can replace at least do 50% of my coding work. It's not going to replace me right now, but it's there in the foreseeable future, especially when companies realize they can have some setup like 1 good PM + a couple of seniors + bunch of AI agents instead of 1 good PM + a few seniors + bunch of juniors.
So, tech workers paid >200k couldn't anticipate that hot places are going to get a lot hotter due to global warming and all the trends we've been observing over the last decade or so? Interesting.
Knowing something and experiencing it are two different things.
Everyone moving there knows it gets hot. But if you've never experienced 100F heat - especially not days in a row - you have little to compare it to. Theoretical knowledge compared to applied knowledge. Heck, even if you have experienced it, you probably did it in completely different conditions. For example, the Midwest gets hot sometimes, but that heat is different and lasts shorter times than it tends to in Austin. (Which is also the reason folks moving from Arizona to Indiana get shocked at the heat + humidity combination or why 80F near the arctic feels warmer than it does in some other places)
The comment hints at the fact that a group can easily loose a large number of their males, because it doesn't have to hinder procreation. Losing women is much harder to recover. Being special or interesting doesn't come into the equation.
Ah yes, nothing more beautiful than a man impregnating a woman and then divorcing her to do the same thing again with another woman and another woman...
> "...the effect decreased the higher a countries measure of gender equality. This effect seemed to be due to men being viewed less negatively the more egalitarian a country was rather than women being viewed more positively."
reply