Drawing from Debord and Heidegger, this film examines our subjective experience of time throughout history. It reveals how the relentless pursuit of productivity has shaped society and our perceptions of time, creating a perpetual present driven by an autonomous economy and accelerated by surveillance capitalism. The film explores the societal obsession with busyness and advocates for reclaiming time and leisure to foster true human flourishing.
Exactly, the takeaway here is that Meg Whitman had no business running HP. That said I admit I am biased against her because of the really really ill informed way she decided important technical issues.
Just in case people don't know how stupid Meg is, she (1) acquired Skype; (2) did not acquire Skype's p2p tech; (3) fucked the Skype founders on an earn out; (4) was apparently shocked when said founders declined to renew the licensing deal for the p2p tech.
What business ebay, an auctions company, had owning Skype was never explained.
I have a customer who refuses to migrate away from his Palm Pilot Desktop software Palm Desktop (Windows 7/8/10) last stable release was in 2008. No features have been added in 24 years. The Palm Pilot itself stopped working about 20 years ago. He runs the software in a Windows XP virtual machine.
He runs his entire business off the contact list in the software. Customer has over 50,000 contacts, which the software supports a max of 8k. I got around this limit by using the "Profiles" feature in the software, which allows you to configure multiple users-Each user allowed max of 8k contacts.
I created 10 profiles by dividing the English alphabet into 10 groups based on the frequency of last name first letter in his set of contacts:
Contact Group 1: A, K, T
Contact Group 2: B, L, U
Contact Group 3: C, M, V
Contact Group 4: D, N, W
Contact Group 5: E, O, X
Contact Group 6: F, P, Y
Contact Group 7: G, Q, Z
Contact Group 8: H, R
Contact Group 9: I, S
Contact Group 10: J
Of course, when he needs to search or get data from his contacts, he needs to constantly switch profiles. I can only imagine how mundane that must be, but whatever floats your boat.
I really wish there was an app to keep up with news that will actually have an impact on me like extreme weather, changes to the tax code, and significant changes to the economy.
Such a service could only work as advertised if it were run by a benevolent dictator with a zealous aversion towards anyone changing the product to include stories that tell you "that's a good thing" or "X group most affected" or "top 10 reasons men love hairy women" or "the science is settled". Otherwise, I can picture such a service declining rapidly.
We need self-hosted AI assistants that filter out the noise for us. Only the most impactful news stories, podcast episodes, etc. All under our full, personal control to train.
News are free. You’re not the customer. People pay journalists to make people aware of some information. Entire countries own news agencies. This is what power is.
HotTake: the result of this should be to nationalize Amazon to be the defacto national provider of AWS services, delivery, logistics, and backstopped retail services.
Might as well just shut it down in that case. Amazon would be abandoned in mass if it was government run. People groan every time they see that the USPS is handling their delivery. I can't imagine how bad it would be if that same level of government competence was applied to all of Amazon's operations.
> People groan every time they see that the USPS is handling their delivery.
They do? I am usually pleased when I see it's them. They are very consistent and rarely make mistakes, in my experience. I don't know what there is to complain about, outside of pointless hatred for anything related to the government. Meanwhile, it's a crapshoot if the FedEx or Amazon driver even gets it to the right address.
Come on. My interactions with the IRS, TSA, Social Security Office, Passport Office have all been slow and arcane. It is a total fantasy to think the Government could run Amazon well.
…In that Empire, the Art of Cartography attained such Perfection that the map of a
single Province occupied the entirety of a City, and the map of the Empire, the entirety
of a Province. In time, those Unconscionable Maps no longer satisfied, and the
Cartographers Guilds struck a Map of the Empire whose size was that of the Empire, and
which coincided point for point with it. The following Generations, who were not so
fond of the Study of Cartography as their Forebears had been, saw that that vast Map
was Useless, and not without some Pitilessness was it, that they delivered it up to the
Inclemencies of Sun and Winters. In the Deserts of the West, still today, there are
Tattered Ruins of that Map, inhabited by Animals and Beggars; in all the Land there is
no other Relic of the Disciplines of Geography.
nice, you beat me to this gem (with a side of Lewis Carroll and Baudrillard) because I was finishing work
the lesson is, never try
edit OH and the other part is that it was staged literary forgery by "Suarez Miranda, Viajes de varones prudentes, Libro IV, Cap. XLV, Lerida, 1658." Borges overclocked the meta
I was thinking about this the other day and it seems like the problem of map size is also the problem of the story of our lives. How much detail is really necessary.
It sounds like you take issue with this simulation? It applies heavily academic and simplistic rules around behavior. I like build up of it all to illustrate _simulating things_, but I think almost any traditional economics theory outside behavioral economics ought to be shelved for good.
I'd go the other way, behavioral economics ought to be shelved for good. Classic econ should come back, but with a stamp on its forehead that is is not science or a practice.
Economics sits at that intersection between the social sciences and the exact sciences: you can get some useful quantitative predictions out of it, but that is discounted by the fact that people are messy, and become even messier where money is concerned.
Economy is not that different from psychology, physics, or indeed any natural science. All try to predict how they would change depending on various factors and invent explanatory models that are never perfectly correct.
It’s just that some have had more apparent prediction success than others (non-coincidentally, it’s those that don’t directly involve humans as subjects), while some are liable to affect people’s lives in more direct and drastic ways (non-coincidentally, it’s those that do directly involve humans as subjects).
I would agree up until recently. I am starting to think, though, that behavioral is only relevant in an economy of choice. With choice I keep it simple to having the option to spend or not wealth (including consuming/selling some of your stock). The less choice in the market, the more the classical models will be reasonable and efficient approximations as they can accommodate one sided choices. Complex dynamics are not what we experience now. There is a market direction, the power to impose it and its application at clear sight.
Both have been shelved; the state of the art in economic modeling is far, far more sophisticated. It goes way beyond the limitations of economics’ loan from XIX century physics (static mechanics).
Economic modeling based on game theory with extensions (say, requiring that certain agent choices are computable and are so under a limited computational budget, or non determinism, or learning) you still get sensible results under much weaker hypothesis.
The Alzabo is a monster from Gene Wolfes 'Book of the New Sun' series where it eats its victims and absorbs their thoughts and memories. It then speaks in the voice of its victims to lure the kinfolk of those hes eaten.
