Like others have pointed out, there are other options in life than work at Meta. Would you have worked at Krupp or Mitsubishi during WW2 if they paid enough, compared to say cleaning toilets?
This is the type of hen-egg dialectic that takes me straight to evolutionary theory. My guess is that the 'standard human tribe', ~200 strong, needs some people to be up at night. But since we don't have dedicated day/night humans, we all get this shared mess of a genome 'you need to be up at night sometimes'.
Burden of proof is on the other party. In one sentence the opinion can be summarized as "if you want increased probability of child becoming a great artist you need great commitment." That's a null hypothesis.
Don't have a book but here's some quick thoughts: 1. Biographies on, e.g., Chinese pianist Lang Lang. When he was ~9 he 'retired' (it's an extreme case but telling, can recommend). 2. If you want formal/mathematical/CS perspective, study Reinforcement Learning (e.g. Rick Sutton).
I'm surprised at how few parents understand what it takes to create a great artist. You need to start when they're 5 (or preferably younger), put them in a workshop with great artists/pedagogues etc. (costly!) where they work full time (forget school), evaluate potential and there is a tiny chance they themselves will become great. Annoyed by parents talking about their 5 year olds as "too young" or when they recommend their teenager to 'pursue their dream' when they don't provide a fraction of above. It's still possible but odds go down dramatically.
Agreed it's what they're doing but this looks more like "turning everyone against you". And you want your enemies to underestimate you (like Song or Kievan Rus' underestimated the Mongols) but the world doesn't underestimate Russia. Maybe it could have but WW2 and appeasement are still too fresh in memory.
This is a core reason for my own burnout - why should I work for a culture that seemingly promotes lazy/hypocritical behavior? Reminds me of "Idiocracy" or "burn after reading" the "league of morons"
On the institutional level there's grounds to believe it unfortunately (less welfare support, more military etc) Was thinking about the term "suicidal empathy" that some politicians have been bringing up lately (wrt migration policy). It's like a new derogatory jargon.
It's more that people who historically didn't have a voice now have one. It's often stupid but sometimes also interesting and innovative. Saw a channel where a university professor "I" comes to the realization she's been left-leaning/biased for decades, that her recent male students no longer dare engage in debate because of shaming/gaslighting etc. Then I click channel description and turns out it's "100% original writing". Now if it hadn't said that it would be strawman propaganda. But now it does... Not sure how to put a finger on it, there's some nervous excitement when reading these days, not knowing who the sender is, getting these 'reveal' moments when finding out whole thing was made up by some highschool kid with AI or insane person.
"...talking 5 minutes with the average voter" and all that. Ironically, lots of these people are meanwhile fine with "AI glasses" being used everywhere. They just haven't thought it through. What if a pedophile wears them?
Yes and to be clear on what "practical" means here. If there's a mountain between origin-destination for a road trip it's relevant to highlight it. In the case of orbits the objects may be small but they're very fast and very dangerous.
This is obvious for us who believe in and spend time on writing good documentation, but there are a surprising amount of devs out there who don't. "The code speaks for itself" people. Never understood them (literally) it's like some cult from the middle ages.