I’ll never understand the mentality of people who confidently yap about things that they don’t even have a basic understanding of. Iran didn’t fund ISIS, they are the ones who defeated it. ISIS was trying to destroy Assads government (Iranian ally), why would Iran fund them.
Seriously impressive level of ignorance and hubris on display here.
I liked the article and think it contains some good insights, but there are a few things that left a bad taste in my mouth, and prevented me from fully connecting with the argument being made.
First, there are some platitudes or outright stereotypes that are presented as profound insights, e.g. “men do not connect emotionally as well as women”. Whether this is or is not true is up for debate in the first place, but either way, it’s hardly a novel or interesting statement. Discussing the causal relationships that yield this emergent phenomena, and using that to synthesize a solution, is far more interesting.
Second, these issues primarily affect lower or middle class men and boys. There’s just something off-putting about an Ivy League-educated lawyer and politician, who is not a man, writing op eds about men’s issues and how to address them. Like… what exactly makes her think that she would have any valuable insight that’s not inherently obvious to the median American male? Cynically, I think it may be good for us to have women spearheading this, because it’s politically incorrect for men to raise these issues. That right there illustrates one of the central cultural illnesses that is resulting in the enshittification of men.
But most of all, I find it patronizing that this piece refuses to acknowledge that men have legitimate complaints in some respects. Eg during my undergrad, there was a TA room where students could go for help on CS projects. There was almost always a line down the hall because of the popularity of the major. However, female CS students had their own special TA room, with an equal number of TAs, despite women making up like 10% of the major. For another example, look at the female-exclusive career fairs and resulting employment opportunities, like at GHC. Men and boys see this stuff in front of their face all the time. They know it’s not fair. It’s obvious that it’s not fair. But nobody wants to say it, because you’ll be labeled as all sorts of horrible things. That is emblematic of the core, central issues in our modern gender roles and expectations as they relate to men. And I hate to say it, but IME, these harmful attitudes towards men are primarily perpetuated by women (in particular, the very-online crowd)
You are correct. The fact that so many people are saying “lol just train it on text about the game bro” reveals how little people understand how these models work, how they are trained, etc.
Except that robotics technology is completely different from LLMs? Comments of this flavor are such a tell that the commenter has absolutely no idea what they’re talking about.
This was true up until pretty recently. CS has come to be seen as a “prestigious” degree, and SWE as a “prestigious” career. Lots of kids who, 10 years ago, would have studied law, medicine, finance, or hard sciences, are studying CS. At my alma mater, CS is the largest major by a huge margin.
The result of all this is there is a massive supply of smart and capable American citizens with formal training trying to break in to the job market, with limited success, due in no small part to the labor oversupply caused by immigration.
I mostly agree with you, but i think there’s something you got wrong. The democrat establishment didn’t abdicate their pro-labor position for reasons of racial equity- this was only ever a cover story.
The real reason is that they are totally beholden to powerful business interests that benefit from mass immigration, and the ensuing suppression of American labor movements. The racial equity bit is just the line that they feed to their voters.
Same as it ever was. The rich and well-connected hoard resources among members of their clique. Then they have the nerve to strut around talking about what visionary geniuses they are to achieve this level of “success”.
Surprised that I had to scroll this far down to find this comment. I didn’t know anything about the authors upbringing, but just from reading the speech, I had a strong feeling that it was something like this.
The reality is that the people who control the funding don’t want anything to do with the average slob. “Find your people” is a euphemism for “be rich and well connected, and hang out with other elites”
Clean MDMA is increasingly hard to come by. If you have a good plug, consider yourself lucky. But in the year of our lord 2025, almost all crystalline or powder recreational compounds have been stepped on to an absurd degree.
The evangelical angle certainly applies to a subset of the republicans, but not all of them.
The difficult and uncomfortable truth is that ardent supporters of Israel wield immense power and influence, and they are able to significantly damage the careers of politicians that do not align with their interests.
The fact that many repugnant racists, antisemites, and holocaust deniers make a comically exaggerated conspiracy theory out of this core truth makes it impossible to discuss it rationally.
A controversial take for sure, but I can’t say I disagree. The new batch of AI tools is awesome, but this rush of capex that we’ve seen is just insane and is going to lead to a lot of blood being spilled, metaphorically speaking.
> What am I supposed to do? Keep standards high and fail them all? That’s not an option for untenured faculty who would like to keep their jobs. I’m a tenured full professor. I could probably get away with that for a while, but sooner or later the Dean’s going to bring me in for a sit-down.
IMO, this is not the problem, but it’s definitely a problem. I think that we should, in fact, fail these kids. And if they repeatedly fail, they should be kicked out. I know that it’s politically untenable, but it also seems right.
It also seems wrong to me that these kids are accepted in to the university to begin with. It seems to me that there is a maturity gap here. Have these people never had the experience of not getting something that they want because they failed to obtain it?
I’ll never understand the mentality of people who confidently yap about things that they don’t even have a basic understanding of. Iran didn’t fund ISIS, they are the ones who defeated it. ISIS was trying to destroy Assads government (Iranian ally), why would Iran fund them.
Seriously impressive level of ignorance and hubris on display here.