zlacker

[parent] [thread] 41 comments
1. orland+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-05-18 05:27:14
Awfully familiar to the other South-African emerald mine inheritor tech mogul.
replies(5): >>kmeist+o6 >>treme+O9 >>kayceb+Rg >>xaPe+au >>xyzzyz+hj1
2. kmeist+o6[view] [source] 2024-05-18 07:07:52
>>orland+(OP)
I'm starting to think the relatives of South African emerald mine owners might not be the best people to trust...
replies(2): >>fennec+Tl >>pawelm+on
3. treme+O9[view] [source] 2024-05-18 08:02:19
>>orland+(OP)
Please. Elon's track record to take tesla from concept car stage to current mass production levels and building SpaceX from scratch is hardly comparable to Altman's track record.
replies(4): >>satvik+1d >>jajko+tg >>Techni+2k >>lr1970+Rz
◧◩
4. satvik+1d[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 08:45:28
>>treme+O9
Indeed, at least Elon and his teams actually accomplished something worthwhile compared to Altman.
◧◩
5. jajko+tg[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 09:39:14
>>treme+O9
But he is a manager, not an engineer although he sells himself off as such. He keeps smart capable folks around, abuses most of them pretty horribly, and when he intervenes with products its hit and miss. For example latest Tesla Model 3 changes must have been pretty major fuckup and there is no way he didn't ack it all.

Plus all self-driving lies and more lies well within fraud territory at this point. Not even going into his sociopathic personality, massive childish ego and apparent 'daddy issues' which in men manifest exactly like him. He is not in day-to-day SpaceX control and it shows.

replies(2): >>treme+ar >>former+UE
6. kayceb+Rg[view] [source] 2024-05-18 09:48:14
>>orland+(OP)
Are you saying that Altman has family that did business in South African emerald mines? I can't find info about this
replies(2): >>krypto+Dp >>Walter+JL
◧◩
7. Techni+2k[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 10:41:48
>>treme+O9
SpaceX didn’t start from scratch. Their initial designs were based on NASA designs. Stop perpetuating the “genius engineer” myth around Elon Musk.
replies(5): >>hanspe+0m >>Sirens+1m >>colibr+6r >>KyleOn+tr >>ekianj+7w
◧◩
8. fennec+Tl[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 11:06:42
>>kmeist+o6
Lmao no point in worrying about AI spreading FUD when people do it all by themselves.

You know what AI is actually gonna be useful for? AR source attachments to everything that comes out of our monkey mouths, or a huge floating [no source] over someone's head.

Realtime factual accuracy checking pls I need it.

replies(2): >>docmar+xA >>postmo+zO
◧◩◪
9. hanspe+0m[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 11:07:44
>>Techni+2k
By that logic nothing has started from scratch.
◧◩◪
10. Sirens+1m[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 11:07:59
>>Techni+2k
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch You must first invent the universe”

…no one “started from scratch", the sum of all knowledge is built on prior foundations.

◧◩
11. pawelm+on[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 11:25:59
>>kmeist+o6
You are not responsible for the sins of your father regardless of how seriously fucked in the head he is.
replies(3): >>Loughl+Lo >>progra+O11 >>kmeist+V23
◧◩◪
12. Loughl+Lo[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 11:41:25
>>pawelm+on
No but there is the old nature versus nurture debate. If you're raised in a home with a parent who has zero qualms about exploiting human suffering for profit, that's probably going to have an impact, right?
replies(1): >>johnis+7E
◧◩
13. krypto+Dp[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 11:50:42
>>kayceb+Rg
No. Some dude that launches rockets did, though.
◧◩◪
14. colibr+6r[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:06:58
>>Techni+2k
Altman is riding a new tech wave, and his team has a couple of years' head start. Musk's reusable rockets were conceptualized a long time ago (Tintin's Destination Moon dates back to 1953) and could have become a reality several decades ago.
replies(1): >>treme+wr
◧◩◪
15. treme+ar[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:07:30
>>jajko+tg
"A cynical habit of thought and speech, a readiness to criticize work which the critic himself never tries to perform, an intellectual aloofness which will not accept contact with life's realities—all these are marks, not ... of superiority but of weakness.”
replies(1): >>Angost+ww
◧◩◪
16. KyleOn+tr[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:09:36
>>Techni+2k
I feel like Steve Jobs also fits this category if we are going to talk about people who aren't really worthy of genius title and used other people's accomplishments to reach their goals.

We all know it as the engineers who made iPhone possible.

replies(2): >>KyleOn+Qs >>837204+Qz
◧◩◪◨
17. treme+wr[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:10:02
>>colibr+6r
You seriously trying to take his credit away for reusable rocket with "nu uh, it was in scifi first?" Wow.

"A cynical habit of thought and speech, a readiness to criticize work which the critic himself never tries to perform, an intellectual aloofness which will not accept contact with life's realities—all these are marks, not ... of superiority but of weakness.”

replies(2): >>colibr+Pt >>cess11+iP
◧◩◪◨
18. KyleOn+Qs[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:23:15
>>KyleOn+tr
The people downvoting have never read the Isaacson book obviously.
replies(1): >>treme+lt
◧◩◪◨⬒
19. treme+lt[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:28:23
>>KyleOn+Qs
More like ppl on this site know and respect Jobs for his talent as a revolutionary product manager-style CEO that brought us IPhone and subsequent mobile Era of computing.
replies(2): >>KyleOn+Ot >>837204+vz
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
20. KyleOn+Ot[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:32:05
>>treme+lt
Jobs was a bully through and through.
◧◩◪◨⬒
21. colibr+Pt[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:32:08
>>treme+wr
No, in fact I'm praising Musk for his project management abilities and his ability to take risks.

>"nu uh, it was in scifi first?" Wow.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X

>NASA had taken on the project grudgingly after having been "shamed" by its very public success under the direction of the SDIO.[citation needed] Its continued success was cause for considerable political in-fighting within NASA due to it competing with their "home grown" Lockheed Martin X-33/VentureStar project. Pete Conrad priced a new DC-X at $50 million, cheap by NASA standards, but NASA decided not to rebuild the craft in light of budget constraints

"Quotation is a serviceable substitute for wit." - Oscar Wilde

22. xaPe+au[view] [source] 2024-05-18 12:34:49
>>orland+(OP)
It didn't take long to drag Elon into this thread. The bitterness and cynicism is unreal.
◧◩◪
23. ekianj+7w[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:53:31
>>Techni+2k
SpaceX is still the only company with reusable rockets. NASA only dreams about it and cant even make a regular rocket launch on time
◧◩◪◨
24. Angost+ww[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 12:57:44
>>treme+ar
As is repeatedly spamming the same pasta
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
25. 837204+vz[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 13:21:40
>>treme+lt
Mobile era of computing would have happened just as much if Jobs had never lived.
replies(1): >>Camper+dM
◧◩◪◨
26. 837204+Qz[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 13:23:41
>>KyleOn+tr
Someone far more deserving of the title, Dennis Ritchie, died a week after Jobs' stupidity caught up with him. So much attention to Jobs who didn't really deserve it, and so little to Dennis Ritchie who made such a profound impact on the tech world and society in general.
replies(1): >>thefau+1d1
◧◩
27. lr1970+Rz[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 13:23:46
>>treme+O9
And don't forget StarLink that revolutionized satellite communications.
◧◩◪
28. docmar+xA[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 13:29:05
>>fennec+Tl
If it comes packaged with the constant barrage of ridicule and abuse from others for daring to be slightly wrong about something, nobody may as well talk at all.
◧◩◪◨
29. johnis+7E[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 13:55:33
>>Loughl+Lo
What are you implying here? The answer to the nature vs. nurture debate is "both", see "epigenetics" for more.

When considering the influence of a parent with morally reprehensible behavior, it's important to recognize that the environment a child grows up in can indeed have a profound impact on their development. Children raised in households where unethical behaviors are normalized may adopt some of these behaviors themselves, either through direct imitation or as a response to the emotional and psychological environment. However, it is equally possible for individuals to reject these influences.

Furthermore, while acknowledging the potential impact of a negative upbringing, it is critical to avoid deterministic assumptions about individuals. People are not simply products of their environment; they possess agency and the capacity for change, and we need to realize that not all individuals perceive and respond to environmental stimuli in the same way. Personal experiences, cognitive processes, and emotional responses can lead to different interpretations and reactions to similar environmental conditions. Therefore, while the influence of a parent's actions cannot be dismissed, it is neither fair nor accurate to presume that an individual will inevitably follow in their footsteps.

As for epigenetics: it highlights how environmental factors can influence gene expression, adding a layer of complexity to how we understand the interaction between genes and environment. While the environment can modify gene expression, individuals may exhibit different levels of susceptibility or resistance to these changes based on genetic variability.

replies(1): >>gopher+nY
◧◩◪
30. former+UE[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 14:01:25
>>jajko+tg
You’re confusing mommy and daddy issues. Mommy issues is what makes fash control freaks.
◧◩
31. Walter+JL[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 15:01:17
>>kayceb+Rg
They are referring to Elon Musk.
replies(1): >>pseuda+Ja1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
32. Camper+dM[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 15:05:08
>>837204+vz
To be fair, who else could have gone toe-to-toe with the telecom incumbents? Jobs almost didn't succeed at that.
◧◩◪
33. postmo+zO[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 15:23:19
>>fennec+Tl
Who designs the training set for your putative "fact checker" AI?
◧◩◪◨⬒
34. cess11+iP[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 15:28:18
>>treme+wr
What's wrong with weakness? Does it make you feel contempt?
◧◩◪◨⬒
35. gopher+nY[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 17:04:08
>>johnis+7E
> However, it is equally possible for individuals to reject these influences.

The crux of your thesis is a legal point of view, not a scientific one. It's a relic from when Natural Philosophy was new and hip, and fundamentally obviated by leaded gasoline. Discussing free will in a biological context is meaningless because the concept is defined by social coercion. It's the opposite of slavery.

◧◩◪
36. progra+O11[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 17:41:01
>>pawelm+on
From a game theory perspective, it can make sense to punish future generations to prevent someone from YOLO'ing at the end of their life. But that only works if they actually care about their children, so perhaps it should be, "you are less responsible for the sins of your father the more seriously fucked in the head he is."
◧◩◪
37. pseuda+Ja1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 18:53:18
>>Walter+JL
Saying the other suggested there were 2.
◧◩◪◨⬒
38. thefau+1d1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 19:13:46
>>837204+Qz
I think Ritchie's influence while significant is overblown and not entirely positive. I am not a fan of Steve Jobs, who had many reprehensible traits, but I find it ridiculous to dismiss his genius. Frankly, I find Jobs's ability to manipulate people more impressive than Ritchie's ability to manipulate machines.
replies(1): >>837204+zz1
39. xyzzyz+hj1[view] [source] 2024-05-18 20:08:53
>>orland+(OP)
You are literally repeating false smears about Elon Mask. No emerald mine has ever been owned by anyone in Elon's family, and Elon certainly didn't inherit any of it. I find it very ironic that you are doing this while accusing someone of being a manipulative crook.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
40. 837204+zz1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 22:35:27
>>thefau+1d1
> not entirely positive

I don't know if he was responsible, but null-terminated strings has got to be one of the worst mistakes in computer history.

That said, how is the significance of C and Unix "overblown"?

I agree Jobs was brilliant at manipulating people, I don't agree that that should be celebrated.

replies(1): >>holler+3A1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
41. holler+3A1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-18 22:44:06
>>837204+zz1
The main reason C and Unix became widespread IMHO is not because they were better than the alternatives, but rather because AT&T distributed them with source code at no cost, and their motivation for doing that was not altruistic, but rather the need to obey a judicial decree or an agreement made at the end of an anti-trust court case under which IBM and AT&T were ordered not to enter each other's markets. I.e., AT&T was prohibited from selling computer hardware and software, so when they accidentally found themselves to be owners of some software that some universities and research labs wanted to use, they gave it away.

C and Unix weren't and aren't bad, but they are overestimated in comments on this site a lot. They weren't masterpieces. The Mac was a masterpiece IMHO. Credit for the Mac goes to Xerox PARC and to Engelbart's lab at Stanford Research Institute, but also to Jobs for recognizing the value of the work and leading the first implementation of it available to a large fraction of the population.

◧◩◪
42. kmeist+V23[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-19 17:24:37
>>pawelm+on
This is a great sentiment in theory. But it assumes that the child is actually interested in rejecting those sins - and accepting the economic consequences of equality (e.g. them not being filthy stinking rich).

In practice most rich people spoil the shit out of their kids and they wind up being even more fucked in the head than their parents.

[go to top]