That source isn't even able to directly lay out the claim, it spends 5 paragraphs IMPLYING Krugman changed his position for hand-wavy political reasons.
But lacks any direct evidence that he actually did so. It misquotes things and really grasps at straws to make a point, holy moly.
>choose those who have graduated from tier-1 institutions. University degrees mean nothing at the end of the day.
It means everything for YC's model.
YC does not care about the software.
They care about the founders.
YC's model and ecosystem is explicitly designed to be a who's who club of interconnected founders that are very, very encouraged to """rely""" on each other when building their companies.
YC uses a lot of double speak regarding this ecosystem, but if you explained the concept to a layman on the street they'd tell you exactly what this concept is in just a very few, very blunt words.
Elite-class founders and lots of cheap, imported, or "passionate" labor.
This thread is going to use very dressed up and lofty language discussing the issue, in order for the express purpose of dancing around the fundamental issue here.
Y Combinator as a concept, and all of its "children" are rotten to the core.
Every single company is "evil" in some form, and not in the usual "private companies are big baddies" kind of way. They grossly and recklessly violate laws and ethical boundaries day in and day out.
The sooner people are even willing to entertain this, the sooner we can have actual conversation around these issues.
What is there to learn? If anything developers are still the one's training and enhancing the models by giving them more feedback cycles and what works and what doesn't.
It's not premature. Every single expert in this field has warned about these issues since even ~2012 days when these types of platforms were being publicly discussed.
This is an expected and understood result given the hardware and software involved.
You will not get past these issues without a RADICAL improvement in camera technology paired with specialized, dedicated processing hardware matched against several (and I mean several several) "common" environment profiles.
FSD is a scam. It's not safe. It is not technically sound.
The fact that there aren't many more accidents with the system is a by product of consistent and well thought out road standards, car standards, other safety systems present on cars, and driver education.
> but I think git-flow was popular largely because of the catchy name and catchy diagram.
It was because Git showed up in the era of SVN / CVS where those branching models were created because of the uh... let's just call it technical mishaps of those source control systems.
Git did not have the hang ups of SVN / CVS / etc but people stuck with what was familiar.
But lacks any direct evidence that he actually did so. It misquotes things and really grasps at straws to make a point, holy moly.
It's so disingenuous lmao.