Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | youarelabor's comments login

They're lucky that a random crazy person hasn't killed them yet. This is not a suggestion that any particular individual should engage in violence, it's just an observation. (Violence is bad mmk?)

I'm staying well the fuck away from SFO right now because the Californians are so far out of touch they don't even understand that they deserve the hatred they receive.


We already have procedures for getting the 'right' people, as far as it can be determined, into positions of power/decision-making authority.

Unelected greedy fuckers like Sam Altman should be laughed at and thrown out of power immediately. I would rather have sclerotic legislators, preferably drawn from the Millennial and Zoomer generations, than the greedy fuckers like Paul Graham and Sam Altman pretending they are competent.

They're playing a dangerous game because the American People will catch on to the fact that these idiots are playing God.


Who would invest in a business where the executives were elected by non-owners and had conflicting interests?

What you’re arguing for is the dictatorship of the proletariat.


there is no such thing as intelligence in humans

creating a robot that is as intelligent as a human is straightforward but then you have a computer whose fallibility is the same as a human, plus the fallibility of those who created the computer doubles the poportunity for error

these are all people who don't understand god at all, and it shows

anyone who worships a computer because other people say it's intelligent deserves what happens to them

butlerian jihad is coming not because AI is a threat, but because those who believe in AI are a threat to everyone around them.


They think they own you. They think that you're their property.

This is slavery with a lot of complicated language to convince Jeff Bezos otherwise.


> This is slavery

Slavery in the sense that Amazon engineers are paid so much that they can't financially take a 50% pay cut to work at a small remote-first company.

I think a better characterization would be that many people are a slave to the lifestyle they've been able to obtain through very high salaries at top 20 tech firms.

That's a tough position to be in. But obviously not slavery by any stretch of the imagination (sell your $3m house, move to a cheaper neighborhood, get a cheaper car, and get a 100% remote job that pays 50% less). Or keep the lifestyle and drive to the office 3 times a week.


As I said, a lot of complicated language. Stay in denial, it's what they want.


> This is slavery

Pretty amazing definition


“Slavery is when you get paid to work at the work site”


This kind of hyperbole is silly.


Wake up: these organizations pay indentured servants from overseas less money and ruthlessly exploit the power of the fact that they can be deported if they lose their jobs.


A slave can't leave. Employees can. I'm not saying that these relationships aren't unhealthy and unbalanced, but it's not slavery.

I think that such hyperbole makes it easier for people to dismiss legitimate criticisms of employer-employee relations, so is counterproductive.


Whereas your complicated language leaves you hopelessly confused.


global warming wants people back in the office, never mind the cost to the climate


How else would these companies that are pushing boundaries in sustainability innovate? Look, there’s no charger in the phone box to save the environment! /s


> Ironically the kind of people who frequent this forum will be the ones to end labor once and for all.

you are labor.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: