I think it says we need more time in the evolutionary oven. With how fast tech and education have accelerated we're running Ubuntu 24 on the Enigma machine.
Yeah, that seems to be a better conclusion - that we're not built with enough sophistication to deal with everything we're currently dealing with. But I think that's also due to the fact that the things we're dealing with are intentionally built to take advantage of our weaknesses. You can't out evolve technology.
If such being does exist, then how could it possibly not matter? If there's an architect and we are the architect's creation, then how could our belief alone be the important thing?
That's immaterial to the discussion. The comment I replied to simply stated: "Displacing God as the center of life." They aren't arguing that god matters, it's our displacement of them.
So, on the existence of god, we have two possiblities: God does exist, god doesn't exist.
1. If god doesn't exist, then we're unhappy because we're displacing a false god as the center of life.
2. If god does exist, then we're unhappy because we're displacing a real god as the center of life.
In that discussion, god's existence in fact doesn't matter, it leads to the same outcome.
If God does exist and is our creator, then we're designed to recognize him (at least to strive to, or have some innate need to); failing to do so or radically abdicating from this need would lead to disaster.
In other words, in the God-exists scenario, we are not merely observers of a phenomenon who can be detached from it.
But that framing only really works if we assume a Abrahamic world view.
Other cultures don't and didn't relate to their deities in the same way. Do we then have to assume they all suffered lower life satisfaction than a 11th century German peasant because of their detachment from a singular god the creator? Why didn't they strive for the relationship you're describing?
Trying to put God with a capital G at the center of our lives as some innate need doesn't make sense from a historical context.
I don’t know about religions in the general sense, and you’re right to point out that I very much have the “Abrahamic world view”, though my case is much much more specific than that but that’s not relevant here.
What we might more safely assume is that the Creator is revealed through history and a group to whom it he’s not revealed might pursue him more ignorantly (I appreciate the language might sound offensive or condescending but that’s not the intention) but in that pursuit they’re still better off than someone who willfully rejects him.
This I believe is relevant to the post, as these societies have not gone from one god to another, but to none.
That's a lot of assumptions, and really only make sense if you're trying to put your own beliefs as the "correct" choice. Somehow, all these other cultures got it wrong, but the ones who believe one single god, they got it right.
> This I believe is relevant to the post, as these societies have not gone from one god to another, but to none.
I don't know what you mean by this. Particular God's importance rose and fell out of fashion in ancient societies.
This is the first release of any Haskell debugger, as far as I know. It coincides with the release of v9.14 of the de-facto standard Haskell compiler, GHC
Well, there has always been some very bare-bones debugging support in ghci (you can set breakpoints, step and inspect variables), but only for interpreted code, and zero debug adapter protocol integration or such things https://downloads.haskell.org/ghc/latest/docs/users_guide/gh...
I've never managed to get any use out of it.
This new `hdb` however looks like the real thing. I like that they added a `DebugView` class for debug-specific pretty-printing. Even has a nice web page :) https://well-typed.github.io/haskell-debugger/
The semiconductor manufacturing process is so ridiculously cool that they have to make the working conditions terrible to keep the plant from being flooded with junior engineers. I worked in ion implant, which means I was responsible for honest-to-god particle accelerators working right. But you pay for the cool factor in sweat. Pager duty isn’t a thing you take turns with. It’s your duty to carry a pager, always, from the day you sign on until the day you leave. And you will get paged. A lot. At all hours. Some of those pages will require you to go in, but you work so many hours at the plant that you’re probably already there. Did you know that “exempt” means “exempt from the 40 hour work week?” You probably have to attend at least one passdown meeting a day. Those are at 6, and whether that’s a.m. or p.m., it means you’re working a long day. The fab needs weekend coverage too, so every fifth or sixth week, you go in and work straight through, 12 days.
And then there’s the software. Part of my job was entering numbers into a system that had been designed to make it hard to enter numbers in it. This was so that you wouldn’t change them too often. But we did. A big part of the job was data analysis, but instead of actual access, certain data was only available as server rendered PNGs. Small ones.
> designed to make it hard to enter numbers in it. This was so that you wouldn’t change them too often
That's some big brain management idea right there. I suppose there was probably a reason for it but it sounds like when you do make a change it would be likely to cause an error because of poor ergonomics.
I've had the same experience while building EMRs and pharmacy inventory systems. Clients actually requested for bad UX, so that the people doing the data entry will double check that they've entered the correct values because fixing them is more painful.
Reminds of me being a hospital resident, but instead of saving patients lives and increasing the profit of the hospital's shareholders, you're just increasing the profit of the fab's shareholders.
I don’t think it’s unsustainable, it’s just an unpleasant result of supply and demand in the labor market. In Taiwan, TSMC hires PhDs to do this. Maybe there’s a smarter way to run a fab, but labor costs are a tiny fraction of capital costs, and “grind through recent college grads” has worked so far, so why change?
I left the industry because it is soul crushing for anyone who wants to try new ideas.
I also had a pager strapped to me 24/7/365. Finding a US backup for a UI developed in an obscure language owned by a Japanese IT company proved to be quite challenging. I bet they're still using it to this day and just managing it from Korea now. The risk of rewriting or refactoring some of this stuff is measured in 10-11 figures.
As others have pointed out, the monthly Who Is Hiring and Who Wants to be Hired threads are a good place to start.
Since you probably don't have industry experience, I strongly suggest you build a good Github profile. Build your own software in public, contribute to projects. That's an excellent hiring signal
I'm particularly excited by the prospect of bringing together the ecosystem of data science tools, with Cloud Haskell[0]. There's no reason the Haskell community can't have something like Dask or Ray, but with Haskell's stellar type system.
reply