Job training is a lot more than learning how to use equipment. It's about showing up on time, dealing with coworkers and being a productive member of a team. That's best learned on the job and is a big reason people don't like new grads. Its like going out on a date with someone that has never had a girlfriend. Let someone else break them in and screen them.
Higher ed unfortunately almost desocializes a lot of people. They live in a bubble and become insufferable obsessed with politics and social issues that are disruptive and inappropriate in the workplace
I don't get your comparison to VC model. Sure it's temping to sell $10 for $5 and many VCs fund this business for a while. But the difference is there isn't an infinite backstop. It's not really new or innovative to give things away from "free" and fund it through some other means. But that's the problem. There's a disconnect with the service and what it costs.
You should charge roughly what it costs to operate because that's information. People should ask why it costs so much. People should consider alternatives. Trying to remove prices is like fighting climate change by removing thermometers.
At the moment, we (in the U.S. anyway) don't charge for tht true cost of operating roads and private cars, which makes transit look bad in comparison. If we want to make transit look reasonable, we need to stop pretending cars are so cheap.
That is only true if public transport is supposed to participate in the free market economy, which it doesn't have to.
If it is decided by a city government that we want public transport as a public service, paid for by taxes and other means then removing prices is an option that could make sense in the right situations.
Then it's covered by the government and cost is more or less ignored. It still costs something but now there is no or little visibility as to how much it costs which is obviously bad for incentives and general governance
Bad for who? The incentive is for more people to use the system, since we are aiming for a Greater Good kind of outcome. Cost and efficiency becomes a government problem, which we manage through policy and voting.
The road system doesn't have a price tag per trip, yet it's costs are managed through policy and governance. No difference here in my opinion.
I don't meant to compare the VC model specifically (though I can see the givaway comparison now that you mention it), just innnovation generally.
I think your point about economic signals is very good - I wonder if any locality charges at cost; does NYC do it now? - though 'charging at cost' undermines the goals: universal mobility, reducing climate impact, reducing congestion, and (I think) increasing economic liquidity and competition (e.g., in the labor market, in retail, etc.).
We need another solution: Maybe vouchers for people based on income? That becomes much more complex.
Also, I would gues it impacts ease of use and adoption - imagine being able to just hop on any passing bus, as opposed to finding your payment, going only through the front door, paying, etc.
Maybe it's similar to the handling of home office. A person at home isn't spending 30 bucks for lunch in the city. The kids have to stop gooning and go back to lurking around in shopping malls
Well considering you can go to prison in Germany for posting a meme on social media, that ship has already sailed. This has been a thing for a while. The only difference with this is this gives some parents control over what they allow their children to see on their computers
I think they should criminialize porn instead and leave the machines alone. Since that industry (conspiracy theories aside) value money above all else, massive fine and taxes on the owners of porn production is the way to go imo.
I mean, porn completely ruined my teenage years and it took me 8 years to get rid of my addiction. It warps your expectations of real-life relationships, it ruins marriages, it ruins both women and men, it's garbage poison and should be outlawed. So I would be in favor of such laws, but then again, I also know, it's not really about porn and more about the whole "we can't let the youth become radicalized by this Internet thing" stuff and just more censorship.
I find it interesting how these kinds of measures are incredibly unpopular on HN and other online platforms. But if there was some regulation about social media algorithms, short form content, age restriction for social media and other mandated restrictions on social media companies, people are a lot more open.
Why is any restriction on adult content so fiercely defended? I can post that Mark Zuckerberg should be arrested and tried at the Hague and receive a somewhat warm reception on this platform. But there are these giant faceless corporations pushing unrestricted, often depraved content to minors and people stand up for them. And this content often includes anonymous uploaded content with underage girls. It's like the meme "leave those billionaires alone!"
I'm sure this will get downvoted, but help me understand what the visceral reaction is. I've heard people argue that this kind of adult content isn't harmful, but it seems obvious that it is, especially to children. At least more than short form content like TikTok. What would you rather your 12 year old spend hours watching? The adult industry has always been a few steps ahead of popular media in terms of virality, addiction and kitsch. They're shaping the online generation, and not in a good way.
Social media regulation isn't particularly popular here on HN, though it is certainly in other areas. You also won't find many people defending CSAM here as you imply.
You also have to assume that people are not taking the purpose of these new measures at face value, but assume that there are other underlying motives and that the measures are broader than just simple pornography. And I don't think that assumption is unjustified.
The ID-based measures like in the UK are a gigantic privacy nightmare as well.
These measures are also not specific to kids, in the end they essentially always affect the access to this kind of content by adults as well. And some people think that is none of the government's business.
An additional factor is that these measures are technically infeasibly without drastic measures. So they're either easy to circumvent, or would give the government enormous power and access over all kinds of communication.
I generally agree that social media regulation is the medium where political censorship is being pushed. I disagree that measures regulating Meta or TikTok are not popular on this platform.
This is a regulation that, at least in theory, would give parents more control over what their children consume. If you think about it on a family unit, this is pro consumer. You don't have to use it.
But in general I just don't think we need freedom max absolutely everything. I think its destructive to society (as is social media but this is much worse). Naive purely economic measures like GDP and consumption miss out on the things that actually matter, like kids being the first generation in history to have unlimited unrestricted access to extreme content in their pocket.
Social media algorithm are being used to push agenda from other countries, see the Cambridge analytica case, or push extremist content to youngsters since it generates much more engagement.
Porn doesn't do this. It may have other issues, but it doesn't aim at maximing engagement with infinite scrolls and similar tactics. Let alone the content, who would watch porn for 12hrs/day? We already have the possibility to do that, and if somebody doesn't have mental issues, I'm of the opinion (s)he's not going to do that
It's the classic "think about the children" argument used to push through plethora of other shit. See UK.
I have very low trust in government (mine or other). We had these restrictions before. My country has been there, done that, for 41 years, not keen on repeat.
And unlike corporations (for all their problems and there are many), you can't avoid that.
> Why is any restriction on adult content so fiercely defended?
If you mean “why do people protest age verification” then the answer is that the only effective way to do age verification is by mandating login with government verified ID, which destroys anonymity. People aren’t upset about kids not seeing pron, they’re upset about the entire rest of the internet being subject to surveillance.
> But if there was some regulation about social media algorithms, short form content, age restriction for social media and other mandated restrictions on social media companies, people are a lot more open.
FWIW I am opposed to all such restrictions, although the restrictions on media companies (versus OS restrictions, chat control, etc) are slightly less bad because they don’t broadly constrain individual freedom in the same way.
My visceral reaction is to the slippery slope, and the fact that our government is not to be trusted.
I'm honestly not against blocking social media for children. It's just sad that we got to this point. In an ideal world, parents would be the gatekeepers and the reason for not allowing their kids to use TikTok would be that it's simply not good for them. But I'm not happy with the solution, which means that you need a way to prove your age and/or identity to all these sites. Mkey. I guess. For social media that's one thing, but you already see that they're very keen on applying that same thing for porn now? Why? That gives my government highly fucking sensitive information about me. I seriously detest that thought, so I'd rather just not give any government the tools to interfere and/or closely watch what I do.
Raising your kids is your responsibility, not mine. Don't push the consequences of your decisions onto me.
> But there are these giant faceless corporations pushing unrestricted, often depraved content to minors and people stand up for them. And this content often includes anonymous uploaded content with underage girls.
...right. You got a little too into the hyperbole here. All the remotely popular websites you may think of are restricted and are compliant with the law as far as monitoring for and removing CSAM content is concerned.
And this does not really need to be said, but nobody is standing up for anything related to such content.
Also quite obviously, people who upload such content are not going to be deterred by whatever regulation you can possibly think up.
> I'm sure this will get downvoted, but help me understand what the visceral reaction is.
"Here's a dead kid, now give up your rights."
> I've heard people argue that this kind of adult content isn't harmful, but it seems obvious that it is, especially to children.
Yeah, and I'm all for parental controls. So far as they do not infringe on my rights to say, privacy.
Why exactly can't we force phone manufacturers to engineer phones with the option to turn on "child mode" that gives parents full control and insight over everything the child does? Only whitelisted apps are allowed and there's a special web browser that only allows whitelisted websites. The parent gets to see a full audit of what the child has seen, including URLs visited. Done. No need to burden every single already existing OS and internet-facing software with this nonsense.
Oh, and take some responsibility for raising your own kids. I'm tired of increasingly being forced to do it for you.
How does GIMP compare to Photopea. On occasion I open a file in GIMP by accident and end up waiting 20m for it to load and am almost always disappointed. Meanwhile Photopea always just works super fast and supports a lot more. What the hell is it doing?
The load time of GIMP is one of my biggest complaints. It's fine once it finally opens, but that start up time is punishing. The last version of photoshop I used wasn't all that much better though. photopea is a browser app so it's not really a valid comparison. I much prefer open source local applications that leave my web browser out of it.
Prob burning through 200% of revenue which I've seen elsewhere. But they also probably spend a fair amount training their own model. I don't think it's foundation model. But it's pretty fair to assume that $1bn revenue is about $2bn to Anthropic/GPT/Grok
This article claimed they had single-digit monthly cash burn in August, when they had over $500M ARR (so let's say $41M monthly) and 150 employees. If that is true, they are spending way less than 200% of revenue.
"Anysphere runs pretty lean with around 150 employees and has a single digit monthly cash burn, a source tells me."
Doubt it. Especially when you realize the cost to the company for an employee is much more than just take-home salary. Healthcare, employer payroll taxes & such all add up. You could also argue wether deferred comp like stock options & RSUs are calculated as the cost. The employee's "comp package" often comes in at 2x or more of their base salary.
Higher ed unfortunately almost desocializes a lot of people. They live in a bubble and become insufferable obsessed with politics and social issues that are disruptive and inappropriate in the workplace
reply