You can crash into things that aren't other vehicles and don't have people with them, at which point the logic of your trolley problem flies out the window.
Planning mode actually creates whole markdown files, then wipes the context that was required to create that plan before starting work. Then it holds the plan at the system prompt level to ensure it remains top of mind (and survives unaltered during context compaction).
I think the OP was making the point that it isn't meritocratic, at least that is how it read to me: they thought people where not meaningfully different in skill level (the people at the exclusive company being comparable to everywhere else) and that where you worked was the new way to find the 'in' people, rather than what university you graduated from (saying they had job offers based purely on getting the job at the exclusive company).
You could argue that getting a job at X or Y company by itself conveys some level of skill - but if we are honest, that is just version of saying you went to Harvard.
There's lots of cliques everywhere in life, and various ways to show status, SV is definitely not immune to that.
Yes, that is what OP is saying, I'm just not very convinced. Primarily because his sample size is quite small – he says the people in his smaller, non-SV jobs were just as competent as those in the SV company, but that could mean a number of things that are not "SV isn't meritocratic". For example, it could just be that his previous colleagues were more competent than the actual national/global average, which seems probable.
meritocratic means "judgement on merit (aka skill)"
and the story told is "no judgement on skill, only on being in-group. It's just the in-group is caused by previous employment and not birth-right/nationality/etc"
Personally I don't think it is the same as employment + reference. Imo it is fairly easy to game university and get a good degree from a "top" school without actually learning that much at all. Harder to get a good work reference if you don't deliver at your job.
Is this a serious question? Then here’s a serious answer - the difference between employing a 9 year old and a 19 year old for a dangerous job is All the difference in the world.
Did you answer the question? Your answer to "how are they different?" was... "they're different".
Children have been working in dangerous environments since the dawn of humanity. Genuinely interested in why you think the industrial revolution and X years old is where we should draw the line.
Because we reach a certain point where it's possible and reasonable to do so.
The ultimate goal of humanity should be UBI and all humans living a content, peaceful life in which they can pursue the things that interest them.
But because of evolutionary behaviours that result in things like capitalism, we'll never reach that goal. I'll say it now: humans are currently biologically incapable of sustaining a true utopia.
reply