Really good piece. I don't have direct experience in Academia, but I can see similar incentives and outputs in everyday life.
I see it in people who will put highway traffic at risk of accidents so they don't miss the turn the GPS pointed out, having not bothered to do the work of learning fundamental navigational skills - or gladly outsourcing them to the machine and leaving them to decay.
I see it in people who giddily challenge the expertise of others because the machine gave them the support needed to reinforce pre-conceived opinions. What is now ChatGPT used to be TikTok, used to be Podcasters, used to be Instagram, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, TV talk shows, supermarket tabloids.
I see it in a cadre of leadership who blindly seize upon the latest Gartner reports to justify every single decision they "made", and feel they owe nobody an explanation because of their title or place in the hierarchy.
I see it in my own damn landlord, blindly following what a machine told them to charge for rent this year until I actually walk them through the financials involved and negotiate a more reasonable rate. How they charge for parking in a facility that's over half-empty, then wonder why residents never have visitors or why fire lanes are always blocked with parked cars overnight.
Hell, it's visible in the financialization of every fucking thing because the machines said we should charge $$$ for X and only pay our workers $ and how come people aren't buying shit anymore?
The narrative for the past hundred years has been that the machines should be trusted to do the right thing. That if you were replaced by a machine, it's because you made bad choices in life. GPS will never fail you, Google has all the answers, the "real" media is on socials, chatbots are smarter than scientists, and the stock market is the absolute best indicator of economic health.
And humans have behaved accordingly, because the incentives - or lack of disincentives - foster those outcomes. There's no need to learn basic orienteering when the GPS gets you there; there's no need to learn to search effectively when a chatbot or search engine spews out an answer 9 times out of 10; there's no need to understand your industry or organization when there's a consultant report right there, replete with recommendations for solutions to that problem you didn't know you had.
We have built an entire society that all but deters and punishes critical/Nth-order thinking. There's no incentive to learn new skills when machines dispense a "good enough" answer with a dopamine hit, and it's plainly visible in the slop of selfishness displayed by people out there. We can't very well close Pandora's Box or get rid of the machines, so we must instead figure out how to incentivize deep, critical thinking across the populace again.
I knew Microsoft was incredibly dysfunctional (you have to understand this if you're supporting their suite and want to succeed), but damn, I'm floored by the incompetence reported on from juniors to the Board and seemingly every step of leadership in between.
Yet I'm also not surprised, because I keep encountering it in non-Microsoft orgs. The current crop of leadership in general seems to be so myopically focused on GTM and share price bumps that even the mere suggestion of a problem is a career-ending move for whoever reported it (ask me how I know). Making matters worse is that Boards and shareholders have let them get away with this for so long, across every major org, that these folks believe in their heart and soul that they're absolutely, infallibly correct. The higher up someone is in an organization, the higher the likelihood they'll reject any and all feedback from "beneath" them that is contrary to their already-decided-upon agenda.
The kicker is that I'm not sure how to actually deal with this in a way that minimizes pain. In my subjective experience, these sorts of companies simply do not change until and unless there's literally no other option other than failure - and then, they're likely to choose failure for the parachute selection instead of doing the hard work of reform. Maybe what's needed is for Microsoft (or any of the legion of similarly dysfunctional enterprises out there) to genuinely fail in a non-recoverable way so as to shock the wider industry/economy into taking serious action on corporate misgovernance.
Maybe failure is the best option.
I don't know. I just know that this isn't tenable.
> Maybe what's needed is for Microsoft (or any of the legion of similarly dysfunctional enterprises out there) to genuinely fail in a non-recoverable way so as to shock the wider industry/economy into taking serious action on corporate misgovernance.
The naive model of capitalism says that the benefit of market competition is that it's possible for failing companies to get out-competed by non-failing ones. In practice, there's enough of a combination of "natural monopoly", lock-in effects, and anti-competitive practices that the software landscape is covered in companies that are too big to avoid, let alone too big to fail.
That's what I've been trying to impart on folks for a decade, now. The lack of regulations has let apex predators capture the environment, and short of an environmental collapse (as in, the sudden and permanent destruction of compute in general that makes their business unrecoverable), the only solution is hunting the hunters - i.e., government regulations, monopoly breakups, market penalties, etc.
There is no feasible way for someone to out-compete Microsoft, Apple, Google, or Oracle. None. They have to fail in some capacity to a significant, global-economy-harming degree to even provide an opening to competition in the marketplace. Even if AI turned out to be a huge nothingburger tomorrow, they'd still be unassailable.
1, Reading the Headline on HN) "Man, this is probably going to be something more practical, but I wish they were superconducting go-karts or golf-carts to get around the facility in."
2, Reading the article) "...okay, I was right? Kinda? Huh. Something feels off. Wait a-"
3, Remembering the Date) "FUCK. OK, CERN got me. Good one. Still want a superconducting kart though."
Their biggest asset is ERP. That's how they get orgs locked in, because migrating ERP systems after deployment can take decades of work and cost multitudes more than just eating Oracle's renewal increases. Could orgs jettison them into the sun? Totally. Is it fiscally sensible? Yeah, absolutely. Can you sell that to the board? Nope.
The best way to kill Oracle - because such a toxic organization absolutely deserves to fail - is to avoid building anything atop their infrastructure ever again going forward. Don't use their Java tooling, don't use their software suites, don't use their cloud services.
Just don't use Oracle for anything new, and work to get the fuck off of it for anything that remains.
The only reason Oracle survives is because rich dumb fucks keep giving them money.
A while ago we were looking at migrating ERP - netsuite was a not a good price proposition and candidly feels a bit dated - but when you mapped features it was pretty impressive and for a lot of business that have some complexity (multi-entity, multi-currency, multi site mfg or inventory), there is not a whole lot of good alternatives because you can't use quicken but you definitely don't want SAP
The irony is that the ERP space is ripe for innovation and disruption, but nobody wants to get into ERP because it's a goddamn nightmare.
Every business runs slightly differently than everyone else, and ERP tries to be this all-encompassing monolith. I wonder if the solution to ERP isn't just targeted microservices exposing data via APIs...
yeah but i think that is the problem - everyone wants to customize / thinks their business is super unique, but honestly the customization is what makes ERP so painful. industry customization is important (motels are different than a small manufacturer) but for SMEs a standard solution that fits their industry is the can be implemented in a manner that's not akin to open heart surgery would be far more valuable to these firms.
It used to be that managers would take capable workers under their mentorship and prepare them to move into their old role, as their manager was helping them do the same. Everyone extended a hand down to pull someone up, because companies promoted internally and hired from within.
That's not the case anymore. Your manager won't mentor you not because they don't want to, but because they're also struggling to find footing and progression in a corporate world where nobody gives a shit about the folks beneath them, nor do they have any vested interest in long-term organizational health. It's not personal, it's just the system our predecessors put into practice so they could have an easier time keeping money and power for themselves.
If we want to care about the careers of others again, we have to build institutions where mentorship and training happen, as well as where good ideas are recognized and rewarded. That's something even the most "meritorious" of SV companies completely lack atm, and they're viewed as the companies to emulate by the rest of the investor class and industry. Until and unless other companies reject those fads in favor of strategies that grow and improve their orgs from within again, we're all kind of on our own.
I've taken multiple Amtrak routes, all out of the Northeast Corridor but eventually crossing the country West or South.
You don't take Amtrak because you want to get there fast, and you don't really take it because it's cheaper than flying. You take it because you can, and because it's more important to you to be (comparatively) comfortable instead of rushing from A to B. You take it because of the sights, the people, the chance encounters, the proximity to city centers that airplanes can never hope to match. It's an experience in and of itself that's distinctly foreign to many Americans, and one I wholeheartedly recommend.
Sitting in a roomette, crossing from Boston to LA over a long weekend, sharing delicious meals with total strangers as the countryside whizzed by (or we sat on a siding waiting on a freight train).
For what it's worth, I love trains, and the romance of them, but I ALSO love taking it from Oakland or Richmond to Sacramento and sipping a beer while I look through the window at all the poor saps stuck on I-80. I've had that drive take 4+ hours before on a Friday, especially when people are headed to Tahoe.
This is not really true, at least for the northeast corridor. Amtrak is the fastest way to get from DC to NYC for example due to traffic in the city if driving or taking the bus, and the distance from the airport (LGA or JFK) to the final destination in the city if you're flying. I take Amtrak somewhat begrudgingly because it often can be way more expensive than flights which are subsidized generally speaking over passenger rail these days, because it's simply faster.
And I honestly don't know what adventures people are talking about, most people keep to themselves. I've had more stranger experiences on flights than I have on Amtrak but maybe it's different in the West Coast.
This only applies to sleeper car routes. You're on the traib for 2-3 days, mostly with no cell service. If you eat in the restaurant car, they will seat you with strangers. If you sit in the observation car, there's a bunch of other people sitting there too.
I did NY to Miami 18 months ago having spent a week in Washington/NY and was due for 3 days in Miami before flying home.
Saturday morning in NY looking at a few sights I hadn't seen (Trinity Church), then a relaxing train down to Miami. Beat flying and spending Sunday in a hotel room.
I didn't sit with anyone else in the restaurant car, but that does sound an interesting way to meet people from a whole different world. The Friday night in NY though I did sit at a bar next to other people, so I guess that was horrifying?
Had i been that against it though there was an option to eat in my room.
And creeping along for hours at 25mph because you're following a freight train is frustrating in its own way, even if you have a comfortable seat and food and drink.
I spent the entire trip on the Acela Express first class (work was paying) from NYC to Boston talking to an absolutely fascinating man headed to his 60th MIT reunion.
I spent the entire trip (including a 4 hour delay where we didn’t move) in the cheap seats from Atlanta to New Orleans smelling the farts of someone with serious GI issues while a college kid walked up and down the aisle spraying axe body spray to drown out the smell.
I usually take the Regional on my own dime though last trip I got a deal on the return leg on Acela. The downside of Amtrak for me is that the Boston south suburban station is an hour drive in basically the wrong direction. But I hate hate driving into Manhattan.
Do you ever consider driving to New Haven and taking Metro North the rest of the way? IIRC it's as fast as Amtrak if you're on the Super Express train.
I have considered it. I’ve never done it. Parking used to be an issue for some of the commuter rail stations but I understand it isn’t in New Haven at this point. Also about twice as long a drive but likely more efficient overall.
Many many years ago I took the train from San Luis Obispo to Sacramento and enjoyed a meal in the dining car, with set times and seating assignments. It was a really interesting conversation with my randomly chosen tablemates. Sadly I don't think they do that anymore.
it's very expensive though. i used to live in philly close to 30th and had a reason to go up to nyc regularly close to penn, essentially perfect for taking amtrak, but ended up taking boltbus just because the price difference was very significant and time wise it was only like 30-45min slower.
Pro tip for those who like risk and are traveling regularly for non timely purposes they have dynamic pricing that rewards literal last 5m. I do Amtrak for like $15-40 NYC-PHL. You have to be signed in to the app otherwise they won't give you the sweetheart deal. Refresh reguarly the price changes constantly in the last 3-4h though I'll typically rock up to Penn and buy one 10m before.
Toll roads are profitable. They are basically money-printers in fact. More/all of our expressways should be toll roads IMO. Then the people who use them will pay for them, and there will be money to keep them in good repair without needing appropriations from the general fund.
Small thing - I generally haven't seen tolled motorways called Freeways - but I haven't lived in the US in a long time. I'm familiar with turnpikes of course, and a tolled motorway in Orange County, CA.
> An 18 hour highspeed NYC to LA train would be amazing.
Often I think of the cut intro scene for "Escape From New York" where Snake robs some sort of bank and then escape in the inter state subway[0]. That future is grim but at least they got high speed long distance underground subways.
High speed around the world rarely gets people taking more than about a 5 hour trip. I'm sure a few would take such a train, but not near enough to make it worth the cost of building an maintaining it. In the mean time everyone talking about that distracts from building transportation that people would use.
If you want trains in the US then you need to focus on the DC-NYC-Boston route - this should be an obvious route with affordable high speed trains every 10 minutes all day. You also need to get local trains to stop bloating the costs such that nothing but the most dense areas can afford to build them. Solve those and then start focusing on areas where trains are harder.
Well, you can take it because it's cheaper than flying. Prices are comparable to the dirtiest, cheapiest dirt cheap flights with no checked baggage, carry-ons etc., but with more space, free wifi + (often) functional mobile data, better amenities, no TSA, and all the luggage you can carry. It's amazing being able to bring a whole guitar in a gig bag without having to worry about it at all.
The romance of it is wonderful too, but even from a purely practical standpoint the only real downsides are the slow speed and inconsistent arrival times.
At $5000 vs $2000 to take my family someplace over Christmas break (when the kids are off school flight costs go up because everyone else is trying to take their kids on vacation at the same time) I'll pay the time. I seriously considered driving instead (which would have been cheaper, and perhaps faster).
Agree except for the meals. They are just OK. The experience of talking to other people on the train can be nice but the food itself is not “delicious”.
If you really like to have good food when you travel, the dining car wears thin quite quickly. I lament the lack of options for better food (I would happily pay more).
I was massively impressed by the food when I took it, certainly as good as any restaurant my expenses policy even attempts to allow me to eat in, and I'd say better than most first class on BA which I've flown a few times, other than the fixed meal times (in F on BA you can eat whenever you want)
I’m still optimistic that this is cyclical in nature, and not an inevitable - or indefinite - outcome.
Humanity has endured regular cycles of shared enlightenment (usually accompanying profound technological or societal revolutions) and dark forests of protectionism, and we always find a way to the other side. Sometimes these cycles last a century; sometimes, but a few years. Still, we always make it to the other side.
In the case of LLMs, we have to make a few assumptions: that they will not lead to AGI, nor will we solve the problem of real-time learning or context windows. These are, admittedly, huge assumptions, but the current state of AI and compute suggests a nugget of truth to them for the time being. If that’s the case, then perhaps this “dark age” of the dark forest is bounded by the limitations of silicon-based computing (hence the push towards Quantum) and the human frustration with diminishing returns from technological investment. As artisans and brilliant minds withdraw, the forest risks starvation and withering from a lack of sustenance; if humans withdraw from technology because they must hand over IDs and personal data, because to engage with technology is to surrender to surveillance and persecution, then the natural trend will be to withdraw over time - and the markets will adapt accordingly, with or without external/government intervention.
That is to say that the dark forest only lasts as long as its inhabitants decide to persecute each other for daring to light a path forward. Right now, the incentives very much favor those willing to harm others for personal enrichment; that is not always the case, and humans decide when that reasoning becomes vilifiable.
I seem to get into sort of existential crisis every few moths with the progress that llm-s are doing. I probably fool myself for a while that "it's not real", then at some point I can't fool myself any more - then I accept it somewhat ... then the new progress happens and it cycles again.
But as it's written at the top, this was a thought experiment, not a prediction. And while I tried to put all the bad scenarios on the table (with the theme of the dark forest that is), I think I again found a sense of optimism, because I also think this thought experiment has flaws.
So I hope, that after a while I will be able to write the contrary, I've already written down some points about it - I already have a title. But we will see. I am more optimistic after I wrote this than before. :P
No. It's not really a predator-prey relationship, because the predators aren't consuming the prey for sustenance. They are killing out of self-defence only.
Not surprising, as the market has broadly moved on from add-in cards in favor of smaller form factors and external devices, absent some notable holdouts in specific verticals.
Gonna miss it, though. If they had reduced the add-in card slots to something more reasonable, lowered the entry price, and given us multi-socket options for the CPU (2x M# Ultras? 4x?), it could have been an interesting HPC or server box - though they’ve long since moved away from that in software land, so that was always but a fantasy.
At least the Mac Studio and Minis are cute little boxes.
I've found that teaching DNS is an excellent gateway to learning about how the internet itself works, especially to "green" tech folks who go blank-faced when you get into protocols, IPs, etc.
Break out a piece of mail, connect the dots, and you see their eyes light up with comprehension. "Oh, so that's how my computer gets to google.com; it's just like how my postman knows where to deliver my mail!" Then a critical component is demystified, and they want to learn more.
Running a DNS server is honestly such a good activity for folks in general.
This is honestly why I've been getting deeper into Linux and self-hosting since early COVID. As much as I've loved my M1 Pro MBP, Apple's OS decisions - and my career expectation to always be on the latest version of OSes/software to help vet organizational migrations - have basically killed my enthusiasm for their kit. The hardware is phenomenal; the software does not spark joy.
And if I'm being frank, my time with Linux (Debian 13 on an N100 NUC w/ Docker) has really opened my eyes to just how excessive modern compute is, specifically to power increasingly bogged-down operating systems and woefully inefficient software. The N100 sips energy while happily transcoding 4K video streams on Jellyfin, running my IRC server for friends to hop off Discord, reverse proxying my entire home network, letting me stream game nights via Owncast, host some image board shitposts for various friend groups, host my RSS Aggregator, and still yawns with 75% excess capacity left over.
I'll still have a Mac because that's what my family uses (if they want free tech support from me, that is), and I'll still have my Windows gaming PC, but I'm already drafting up cyberdeck plans for my first primary Linux box, with just a CLI to get me by. Realizing I don't actually need ten cores and 32GB of RAM and a hefty GPU to do daily work is pretty damn revelatory - and shows how grotesque mass-market software and OSes have become in the name of marketing cycles and advertising dollars.
I see it in people who will put highway traffic at risk of accidents so they don't miss the turn the GPS pointed out, having not bothered to do the work of learning fundamental navigational skills - or gladly outsourcing them to the machine and leaving them to decay.
I see it in people who giddily challenge the expertise of others because the machine gave them the support needed to reinforce pre-conceived opinions. What is now ChatGPT used to be TikTok, used to be Podcasters, used to be Instagram, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, TV talk shows, supermarket tabloids.
I see it in a cadre of leadership who blindly seize upon the latest Gartner reports to justify every single decision they "made", and feel they owe nobody an explanation because of their title or place in the hierarchy.
I see it in my own damn landlord, blindly following what a machine told them to charge for rent this year until I actually walk them through the financials involved and negotiate a more reasonable rate. How they charge for parking in a facility that's over half-empty, then wonder why residents never have visitors or why fire lanes are always blocked with parked cars overnight.
Hell, it's visible in the financialization of every fucking thing because the machines said we should charge $$$ for X and only pay our workers $ and how come people aren't buying shit anymore?
The narrative for the past hundred years has been that the machines should be trusted to do the right thing. That if you were replaced by a machine, it's because you made bad choices in life. GPS will never fail you, Google has all the answers, the "real" media is on socials, chatbots are smarter than scientists, and the stock market is the absolute best indicator of economic health.
And humans have behaved accordingly, because the incentives - or lack of disincentives - foster those outcomes. There's no need to learn basic orienteering when the GPS gets you there; there's no need to learn to search effectively when a chatbot or search engine spews out an answer 9 times out of 10; there's no need to understand your industry or organization when there's a consultant report right there, replete with recommendations for solutions to that problem you didn't know you had.
We have built an entire society that all but deters and punishes critical/Nth-order thinking. There's no incentive to learn new skills when machines dispense a "good enough" answer with a dopamine hit, and it's plainly visible in the slop of selfishness displayed by people out there. We can't very well close Pandora's Box or get rid of the machines, so we must instead figure out how to incentivize deep, critical thinking across the populace again.
reply