What's your point? That education only belongs to the "talented"? Talented in what way? What good does it do to society that the "non-talented" are not educated?
>How "ugly" a trivial "Hello, World!" does not really matter much and isn't a good indication of anything about the language's ability to handle more than "Hello, World!"
Sure, but for beginner programmers who don't have the discipline down yet, it's unnecessarily hard. I bought a Java programming book as a kid and got stuck because of a typo that produced an error message I couldn't understand. This was the time before StackOverflow and Reddit. In retrospect, this delayed my programming journey by at least a year.
Longer Hello Worlds make frustration and getting stuck like this more likely.
> Yeah, we are very close to losing video as a source of truth.
I think this way of thinking is distracted. No type of media has ever been a source of truth in itself. Videos have been edited convincingly for a long time, and people can lie about their context or cut them in a way that flips their meaning.
Text is the easiest media to lie on, you can freely just make stuff up as you go, yet we don't say "we cannot trust written text anymore".
Well yeah duh, you can trust no type of media just because it is formatted in a certain way. We arrive at the truth by using multiple sources and judging the sources' track records of the past. AI is not going to change how sourcing works. It might be easier to fool people who have no media literacy, but those people have always been a problem for society.
The point was that relying on marketing messages causes the user having to research themselves what the product is actually good at and what it isn't good at and wasting time because the company isn't upfront the products strengths and weaknesses. The product might be sufficient in the end, but marketing will very rarely tell you what the product is actually sufficient at and what it is not.
The statement wasn't about whether the product is actually good or not, though in extreme cases, yes, the product is worthless while the marketing is all rainbows and sunshine. But relying on marketing is bad for the user in nearly every case, even if the product is good.
And even if you are "one of the good guys", your users won't know that. That's why you should verify from independent sources, or do your own research.
If marketing was really a reliable source of information, reviews, samples, product trials etc. wouldn't be a thing.
I have no idea if Apple should buy Peloton or not, I was just objecting to your reasoning. It's completely normal to get acquired by another company and keep on working on the existing products as is, that's all I'm saying.
Why not? If Apple buys Peloton, they also get all their staff and offices. The existing staff can continue working on their existing products just as before, while transitioning to Apple, no?