I'm in the same boat, weirdly I can't find colleagues or friends who share my point of view. It's always the same "I can do higher level thinking now" or "no it can't do X". You nailed it with the output having no value anymore.
I find some solace in electronics repair, sadly there isn't much money to make in that.
Part of the reason men cause so much violence is because of people like you, your exact mentality. Which says that's its expected for men to be violence, so, c'est la vie!
Men are not just like... inherently violent creatures, that's a stupid and toxic mentality. No, they're socialized to be violent by other men, who were also socialized to be violent.
Bottom line of all these comments here is "because women are too innocent / fragile / weak / ignorant". It's entirely unrelated to how men view them, of course.
We just have millenia of history, experience in every country and culture, and countless scientific papers on the matter, but please go on with your question...
While I hold the same conclusion as you, individuals chiming in to concur based on their own experience is nothing more than a way to validate what certain people of the time & place commonly believe to be true.
E.g. if people were apt to believe girls preferred green peppers more often than boys, there will always be plenty who say "Well, having both girls and boys, I can concur". It could be true, it could be false, or the cause could be something else. E.g., because people think there are certain differences it shapes differences in development which lead to some of them actually being more common for nothing more than the sum of environmental factors - even if those biases only started as misconceptions.
Whichever it actually is, there will usually be large segments of the populations who would observe it to be conflicting things from an individual at-home view and it takes a lot of work & really good data to be able to make a meaningful claim about what and why differences exist.
I'm no where near that TC and think this way too. This field of work is generally new in history. The whole woe is me what will we ever do attitude is so weak and frankly annoying.
Most of modern society is new in history; what is that supposed to say? If you are making the point that it's unproven and fragile, that would be a good point and actually one that supports "woe is me" because all of it could disappear overnight considering the fragility.
In my lifetime I have watched SPARC SUN Servers being thrown in the trash, spaghetti coded javascript and php run fortune 500s, the linux kernel adding containers, and everyone now being required to know how to code for CI so they can rerun tests, linters, and rebuild their app on every commit and publish it to an S3 bucket with specific IAM permissions tied to some SSO IAM provider.
At no point in any of that was anyone coddled or told that they will get to keep their job forever. Learn new skills. That's the game.
It's not even unique to tech. Doctors have to do this too.
There's so much work in the industry right now around LLM implementation that folks not looking into that are sleeping on good jobs.
Learning a new language or tech has always been such a minor hurdle. The whole point of the current wave of AI is that there is nowhere to retreat to if your means of income depends solely on intellectual work. Learn a trade or train to be a vet, sure, that'll last a while longer.
Doctors have to undergo minor professional development refreshers — not replace their entire education. There is a reason we educate early in life; it's hard to retrain the old (and expensive or even approaching impossible).
This comment gives me a chuckle. In my lifetime alone I've seen oncology completely transform before my eyes. New tools. New techniques. New drugs. I've also watched doctors in my family study this stuff in their off time in order to get certain positions.
"minor professional development refreshers" lol
Also known as (unpaid) hard work during the weekend.
Obviously fields like oncology and genetics are going to have major disruptions. What sort of event would trigger someone needing to redo their entire 7+ years of medical schooling?
That remains to be determined. Most of the examples you'll likely come up with are made at the expense of the environment. We've never consumed as much oil and other limited natural resources as now, in spite of massive gains in productivity.
So far it also looks like digital media is fast tracking us back into fascism, helped by the large concentration of capital that occurred during the transition.
Change and automation are not always societal progress, sadly.
> I think that’s why they haven’t jumped so far because they have hundreds of millions of users who have daily habits that they don’t want to lightly disturb.
I don't think that's part of their decision making, Liquid Glass moved most things around for seemingly not much else than novelty and that's not the first time.
They have done this before, release something large early in anticipation of a major shift and iron out issues before the shift happens. Liquid Glass started off a little janky but they appear to have been ironing out initial issues with each update.
From what I understand (which might be wrong), Liquid Glass was at least partially inspired by visionOS and "spatial computing". And I guess on that platform it might make sense for some use cases.
That doesn't change the fact that I can hardly read some of the user interface in Apple Music for example.
It's not that the idea is bad, but it's badly executed.
Toyota's philosophy is polishing mature technology and small gradual iteration that supports that goal. That is not "skating to where the puck is going to be". With that philosophy Apple would never have developed the iPhone. Instead just iterating the iPod until someone else put them out of business.
It was famously explained in the original iPhone unveiling. They talked about developing new paradigms in computing and jumping towards those new paradigms with both feet.
Also, Steve Jobs once argued with Woz early on that users don't have a say in the product. The author creates a piece of work and does not stop to ask the audience what the next paragraph should be. At the end either the audience likes it or they don't and they go somewhere else. All the "toyotas" of the tech world are competing to 0 margins and will eventually die off. When Apple tried this in the 90s they ended up nearly bankrupt.
Really? None of my issues are fixed. The settings panel still has a massive gray empty chunk hanging off the bottom which makes it look like a 13 year old coded it...
Is Liquid Glass not just a means to slowly force old phones to be obsolete? - My iPhone 11 is fairly slow now and they’ve probably bought forward my next phone purchase by a year
Agreed. I vaguely remember another HN link that said Apple tried a competing-team approach to building a better siri, but it fell apart due to internal politics reasons?
Liquid Glass was also noteworthy for being the first macOS release since 10.1 which was worse across the board in a deliberate manner. They have shipped bugs before but this time it got such poor reception because all of the regressions were intentional and there wasn’t an expectation that they’d be patched.
I don’t think that cavalier attitude is universal at Apple and I don’t think the Siri PM wanted to break with their past respect for UX.
Until we can daily drive pi + qwen/glm/kimi.
reply