You can extrapolate this on to anyones life, not just someone with such a huge and dramatic secret they were hiding for the stability of their family life.
If your parents get old/sick or you have kids or a bad relationship or you get stuck in a job or any other myriad life events occur, the weight of your own days can suddenly drain so much time and energy that years fly by. Suddenly you wake up in an aging body and your ideal life seems far away. As I get older I kind of understand the people who just flee their lives. Being saddled with responsibilities you never wanted you are forced into choosing to either strangle your own desires or be perceived as a terrible person for not fulfilling your societal obligations.
And this is why society is going to shit. “Live free, no regrets” has to be one of the most narcissistic memes I’ve ever heard of. If a person commits to a partner and/or a family, they shouldn’t just hit the reset button because they’re bored or upset with how life turned out. Talk to your partner. Tell them the truth. It’s wild that this has to even be said. Obvious caveats for abuse or depression, but come on. Have some grit.
> Suddenly you wake up in an aging body and your ideal life seems far away. As I get older I kind of understand the people who just flee their lives. Being saddled with responsibilities you never wanted you are forced into choosing to either strangle your own desires or be perceived as a terrible person for not fulfilling your societal obligations.
I am not sure if they still plant fish at Crater lake. If you have spent much time fishing you will pretty quickly learn that almost every accessible lake in the US is regularly stocked with fish.
I would say the "native" freshwater fish population is so decimated at this point that if you want to catch something you either seek out inaccessible places that have seen little human contact, or you follow the fish plantings and catch planted fish. The idea of a lake that thousands of humans regularly access having a healthy ecology seems far fetched.
They do not stock the lake anymore, no. The fish currently in it are considered invasive by the park and there are no catch limits.
It's odd the article poses this as a "problem" in an article about Crater Lake, where uniquely among lakes this "problem" is most likely to just fix the other problem.
Kill all the fish in the lake and the lake is better off.
It won't selectively kill fish, it'll kill frogs, turtles, algae, and anything else that lives in the water which isn't a bacteria or archaea capable of living in an anoxic environment. Possibly also the predators of those species which live on land.
> it'll kill frogs, turtles, algae, and anything else that lives in the water which isn't a bacteria or archaea capable of living in an anoxic environment
That's a bit dramatic. Frogs, turtles, salamanders, etc, can breathe air.
The only predators are birds, who can find food at any of the many other lakes in the area.
Crater Lake's geography is essentially unique among lakes that may be having this issue. There is a near-total lack of native fauna that would be affected by an anoxic event.
I mean it is noble to act like you are some being of infinite sympathy and forgiveness. The reality of being alive though is that many people will 100% hurt you for their personal gain.
> That's a worse crime than selling someone a drug that might kill them
I am pretty sure the 14 people who died weren't smuggling in 14 doses of fentanyl, is killing someone a worse crime than selling 100,000 people a drug that might kill them, and will guaranteed fuck up their lives, their families lives, and their community?
The USA (and many countries) decided long ago to allow the sale of alcohol, a drug that ends many lives and ruins many, many more. I hope that once these fentanyl smugglers are dealt with, we can do something about the drug sellers that are operating out in the open with impunity.
My conspiracy theory is that the administration recognizes the current media climate (a flood of frantic but ephemeral media/social media coverage of everything he does) and are leveraging it to combat things like immigration and drug-smuggling down.
The ICE deportation shit seemed nuts at first. Sure deport undocumented immigrants, but have some compassion and sympathy. Things like deporting a mom and dad at their kids birthday party seemed psychotic and bad for everyone.
Then I read that 80% of the deportations are a result immigrants turning themselves in out of fear. Whether intentional or not the most effective thing ICE did was creating a media frenzy that resulted in people turning themselves in out of fear. Ironically the people trying to "hold ICE accountable" by blowing them up on social media have caused way more deportations than ICE themselves.
Maybe this is the same thing? If all of a sudden a few smugglers getting blown up goes viral the next fisherman who wants to make some extra money might take a pass.
The alternative is Trump is just crazy and evil and power hungry (could be easily true based on his past), but I tend to get suspicious whenever we attribute a humans motivations to: "yeah they are crazy/evil/bad" because people are much more nuanced.
Also I know I am gonna get downvoted to oblivion lol
> If you are smuggling large amounts of fentanyl or weapons into another country and they shoot you that seems pretty ok.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
Also, there's great reasons to have punishments for crimes that are not just summary executions. Even if you have a warped morality where all criminals of any sort should die, there's _still_ great reasons to not allow that to be chosen by the closest person with a gun. That way lies chaos and corruption.
So if China CLAIMS without evidence that Americans smuggle large amounts of fentanyl or weapons on international water then you are OK with them killing Americans? Would it include your family if it was claimed they are smugglers?
If other countries were bombing US boats in the Gulf of Mexico, closer to the US and hundreds or thousands of miles away from the country doing the bombing, would you be okay with that?
Why limit it to boats? Maybe he would support shooting down American civilian planes if claimed they had drugs on board. I’m sure he would support that.
We are just in a weird transitory period right now so it is all shitty implementations replacing what we are used to.
I am semi-confident that LLM backed interfaces will be the future of many UIs though. When it works it just is a way better UX. A smart chat instead of a <form> or crawling through pages of search results is just nicer.
It is bridging the gap between the hard data computers use and the generalized way humans communicate.
How could it even achieve that? GCP and AWS don’t follow some higher standardized setup. If you use GCP app engine nothing exactly like it exists in AWS, not to mention even similar services like s3 have totally different configs and behaviors.
If I really cared about that I would just use k8s instead of hoping an infra as code tool mapped all these services somehow.
We provide client abstractions for infrastructure primitives (databases, pub/sub, object storage, etc.). Your application code uses these abstractions, and the actual infrastructure configuration is injected at runtime based on the environment.
For example, your code references "a Postgres database" and Encore provisions Cloud SQL on GCP or RDS on AWS, handling the provider-specific config automatically. The cloud-specific details stay out of your application code.
And if you prefer Kubernetes, we can provision and configure GKE or EKS instead of serverless compute. The point is your application code stays the same regardless.
I imagine most traditional taxi drivers converted into Uber and Lyft drivers. Unique regulatory circumstances in places like NYC might have delayed that process some of course (eg trying to pay off a medallion).
What a stupid process. It bothers me that farmers rarely own the land too. We can't shake our tendency to let wealth turn us into tiny little kings that live off the rent. (not so tiny in the case of farms, but you get it).
If you raise crops or farm animals, you are a farmer.
The USDA is not trying to pull a fast one with the definition of a farmer.
We could have a discussion about farmers that have other jobs and so are part time farming and part time something else. That tends to correlate with less intensive farming like corn and soybeans.
Is a massive agribusiness conglomerate a farmer? Most farmland in the US is "owner operated". But really, that just means it's not rented out by a non-operator landlord, which is the distinction that USDA article makes.
It's funny how "exploit workers worse (medallions) and worse (rideshares) until we can fully cut them out" has played out in such a perfect microcosm, and yet somehow people here don't seem to register that it was never the workers' own fault.
Taxis didn't lose because rideshares played the game better, they lost because rideshare companies used investor money to leapfrog their apps, ignored actual commercial transport regulations that would have made them DOA, and then exploited workers by claiming they weren't even employees, all so they could artificially undercut taxis to kill them off and capture the market before enshittifying.
Taxi drivers were already not employees, they were exploited contractors for the taxi companies.
And do you not remember what using Yellow Cab was like in the Bay? It was like being kidnapped. They'd pretend their credit card reader was broken and forcibly drive you to an ATM to pay them.
When I first moved here I went to EPA Ikea, afterwards tried to get home via taxi, and literally couldn't because there was a game at Stanford that was more profitable so they just refused to pick me up for hours. I had to call my manager and ask him to get me. (…Which he couldn't because he was drinking, so I had to walk to the Four Seasons and use the car service.)
Taxis lost at least partly because the workers were assholes. Refusing to take credit card payments (the card reader is "broken") or not picking up members of certain ethnic groups or not driving to certain areas. Sure some cabbies were nice, honest people with good customer service skills but those were the exception in many cities.
There was nothing stopping taxi companies from raising investor capital to build better apps and back end technology infrastructure. They were just lazy and incompetent.
Taxi companies didn't have any apps to leapfrog in the first place. Uber and Lyft created a superior product that people wanted. Doesn't matter whose fault it is, the buyers preferred something that was more convenient.
There was never a situation where uneducated cabbies on shoestring budgets were going to be able to develop an Uber/Lyft alternative.
> uneducated cabbies on shoestring budgets were going to be able to develop an Uber/Lyft alternative.
Are you under the impression that most cabs are/ were independent? That wasn't the case since at latest the 1980s. Having a radio dispatcher is a huge necessity as a cab driver.
I think you have to go market by market to make that statement. In NYC, for example, it was explicitly illegal for yellow cabs to accept radio/pickup calls, which was the domain of the livery cabs (black cars). The tradeoff was that only yellow cabs could do street hails. That worked for everybody for years - yellow cabs did a volume business, livery cabs were for outer boros or luxury/business travel and would sneakily try to pick up street hails.
In those days if you needed a car to take you someplace, aside from the outer boro examples, it was always faster to get a yellow cab. The car services could maybe get there in 45 minutes if you were lucky - big companies would often have deals with car service companies to have a few cars stationed at their buildings for peak times, so execs didn't have to wait for a car.
The yellow cab operators were essentially all independent - many rented their medallion/vehicle, either from a colleague or an agency, but they worked their own schedules and their own instincts on where to be picking up fares at given times.
No one expected something like uber - what is essentially a street hail masquerading as a livery cab. This basically destroyed yellow cabs and the traditional livery cab companies, but some of it is attributable to the VC spend, lowering prices (yellow cab fares are set by the city, livery cab fares are market-regulated) and incentivizing drivers. They made it so lucrative to drive an uber that you had thousands of new uber drivers on the road, or taxi drivers who stopped leasing their medallions and started driving uber.
At some point, though - the subsidies dried up, prices went up, and now its often faster to get a yellow cab than an uber/lyft. This is anecdata, but I take cabs a lot, and I've spoken with ~6 taxi drivers in the last year who either started with driving uber and shifted to driving a taxi, or went taxi-uber-taxi. Then I've had a lot more taxi drivers where they need passengers to put the destination into the driver's waze or google maps, even for simple things like intersections - I suspect they're uber drivers who became depedent on the in-app directions and native language interactions.
But the broader point I'm making is that in NYC, the drivers themselves were essentially unable to do anything about the changing market. The only power they had was to shift between the type of fares they were getting. And today when you order an uber, sometimes you get a yellow cab.
In a society where having a job is, for that vast majority not in the non-gilded classes, the only mechanism by which a person can secure their core needs.. losing a job is indeed a pitiable situation for most.
If we've built a society that when it "pivots" leaves swathes of people smeared out as residual waste, I'd argue we should feel bad.
We've certainly reached a point of technological advancement where many of these consequences at the individual level are avoidable. If they're still happening, it's because we've chosen this outcome - perhaps passively. But the clear implication of would be that we're collectively failing ourselves, as a species that tends to put some degree of pride in our intelligence.
And we should feel bad about that failure. It's OK to feel bad about that failure. We tend not to improve things we don't feel bad about.
It's interesting that we're on the cusp of a major change in our world and no one is really talking about it. Self driving cars will have a profound impact on society. Everything from real estate to logistics will be impacted.
Looking forward to when they get rid of traffic lights and the networked cars just whiz through and avoid hitting each other. They'll also seamlessly zip lanes together on the highway, and traffic waves will be a thing of the past. Maybe China will do it first.
You could still have pedestrian crossings with buttons etc which signal the cars to stop, just the same logic as we have now. Maybe even physical lights for redundancy. Pedestrians are pretty rare in most places though so this shouldn't slow things down too much.
Walk? Waymo already stops at crosswalks (marked or unmarked) if a pedestrian looks like they are crossing or starting to cross. That is more than I can say for human drivers. I’m confused why you don’t think this is just a win for pedestrians given how messed up things are now.
More likely that Waymo's will make it a paradise for pedestrians. It should be possible to cross any road at any point without so much as looking either way.
If a programmer is more efficient with AI then you need fewer programmers, assuming a fixed amount of work is needed. So in that sense AI would be replacing programmers.
It's also hard to trust due to alienation. Currently society has this rigid demand for conformity that is fueled by social media/internet shame culture.
We continually see people online who step outside the line and are torn down by downvotes, comments, etc. And these cultural viewpoints lack all nuance so you are forced to either shove yourself into the box wholly or be ridiculed. Even if you are 90% onboard with the popular viewpoint, you cannot let that questioning 10% show. The end result is a bunch of people wandering around with their secret "bad" thoughts being driven further against whatever populist issue they should be jumping into next.
If your parents get old/sick or you have kids or a bad relationship or you get stuck in a job or any other myriad life events occur, the weight of your own days can suddenly drain so much time and energy that years fly by. Suddenly you wake up in an aging body and your ideal life seems far away. As I get older I kind of understand the people who just flee their lives. Being saddled with responsibilities you never wanted you are forced into choosing to either strangle your own desires or be perceived as a terrible person for not fulfilling your societal obligations.
reply