We're also facing a climate and pollutant crisis as a species so we seem only capable of thinking in the short term. We're not doing that well right now after only a brief period of industrialisation.
You might want to update yourself on what's happening in the USA too - 'Zine publisher sentenced to 50 years in prison for "material support to terrorists"':
You need to start using LLMs a lot and then you will know how we know.
Edit: You know how you can recognise someone just from their gait while they walk towards you? I would struggle to describe that for an individual person but it doesn't mean I can't identify them from that alone.
Another view is that theatre is local, low-infrastructure storytelling. It's been so important to us as a species, we don't want to forget it in preference of only following storytelling distributed by corporations.
I guess I am talking about analysing the written works more than the final acted piece (e.g. a book of Sam Shepard plays vs their performance). That would be good enough, I think.
I totally get why you would want to avoid the rabbit hole but your work is super interesting and I hope that you do get the luxury of being able to dive into adjacent formats and comparing them.
This is a very interesting concept. I see in your replies to other comments that you are looking at movies from different cultures, which would be a great test of your idea. Once you have sufficiently advanced, it would be great to look at theatre too. I have a hypothesis that movie-writing began to diverge from theatre-writing in the very late 20th century in terms of structure and writing with the rise of the blockbuster and the emphasis on spectacle, and we lost something after that.
Minsky, the noted Epstein associate, accused of sex with minors according to court documents, didn’t really care for self examination? Yeah that tracks.
A large part of accounting is intellectual work that rewards diligence and intelligence, but not creativity so much. A lot of QA/certification jobs are like this too. It's important stuff that involves a lot of "checking".
There is obvious survivorship bias in the analysis throughout this article. You could reframe it as startups that succeed done have these problems - well, duh!
Edit: actually the more i go through it, it sounds like chatgpt prose, especially by the end.
I've worked a lot with Oxbridge and Ivy League folks and there is nothing particularly special about them. An Oxbridge degrees bestows an out-of-the-box premium personal brand, as you've demonstrated, as well as the social network, but not superior ability, in my experience
Has anyone made a ranked list of the most mentioned people or historical facts on HN. Hedy must be on there somewhere:
https://hn.algolia.com/?q=hedy+lamarr
I know very little about this but just an observer your reply did little to refute any of the points made. You should loosen up a bit and keep an open mind about those points raised because it feels like you’re dismissing them.