That's the crux, isn't it? You aren't just dependent, you are dependent on a system that relentlessly stalks you with increased demands. You are tasked with keeping ahead of a pack of hunters who want to take you down -- and not only will your companions leave you for dead the moment that happens, the group will punish any suggestion that we might want to do something about this on a systemic level because they strive to join the hunters themselves.
It's grim and people are correct to behave like it's grim.
Today’s ways of living - no matter how challenging or disillusioning or alienating they may be - are largely preferable to literally being hunted and having your livelihood threatened by predators, compared to the figurative hunters and predators you’re describing.
It ain’t perfect - and we’ll work to improve it - but it’s way better than the way it used to be for so many people. Civilization aint all bad.
I do prefer modern living, but when people describe the horrors of the past, they go for movie horror version rather then anything actually resembling what historians describe as past.
The Hobbes argument can be used to justify tyranny far worse than what we see. It does not prevent me from believing that substantial improvement is possible.
Or his companions need to get better. I interpreted...
>> You are tasked with keeping ahead of a pack of hunters who want to take you down -- and not only will your companions leave you for dead the moment that happens, the group will punish any suggestion that we might want to do something about this on a systemic level because they strive to join the hunters themselves.
...as referring to software engineers as a whole, because it fits.
We're laborers, but a significant fraction of us has misinterpreted having a comfortable salary now as being capitalists themselves, so bought into libertarian propaganda and behave like they're temporarily embarrassed billionaires (for instance, by strongly resisting things like unionization).
Unfortunately, too many of us who are actually interested in "[doing] something about this on a systemic level," are too pampered to have the focus to actually be effective, and get distracted and put all kinds of divisive stuff front-and-center (basically playing into the divide-and-conquer game of the bosses).
If you want to be a capitalist instead of a laborer then you can just go do that. There's never been a better time to start a company and be your own boss.
Yeah, just become an Uber driver and you can be your own boss... oh wait, suddenly your only customer - Uber - can dictate exactly how you do your job.
We've had that game before. Ask yourself why a the capitalists are so eager to make everyone else a "capitalist" too: Because the relationship between companies is even more adversarial and bent on domination than a formalized employer-employee relationship.
Every CEO would love to have "independent contractors" instead of employees.
Being an Uber driver has nothing to do with starting your own business.
You don’t even need to start a business to be a capitalist, just buy capital that can earn you money. That can be as simple as putting a portion of your savings in stocks or as proletarian as buying a lawnmower and a trailer and mowing people’s lawns for extra cash.
> You don’t even need to start a business to be a capitalist, just buy capital that can earn you money.
Step 1: be rich.
> That can be as simple as putting a portion of your savings in stocks or as proletarian as buying a lawnmower and a trailer and mowing people’s lawns for extra cash.
No, that's not being a capitalist. You're not living of the proceeds of your capital, you're living off the proceeds of your labor. The proof: if you stop pushing that mower, your business (or your profits) collapse. "Being your own boss" != being a capitalist.
Now if you can buy 100 mowers and 100 trailers and hire 100 people to push them (plus a couple managers), you might be able to become a bottom-rung capitalist.
You should take a look at guidance [0] to help with JSON returns from LLMs. Have been using it for some side projects and it seems to work pretty reliably.
I think this is a great point. There are a lot of items on my todo list that are super vague, and I never start on them because the next action isn't clear. However, it'd be useful to distinguish between these times, and when a task is acceptably vague (eg "take out the garbage"). I will try updating the prompts to take this into account.
It sounds like you are using your todo list more as a way to keep track of what I’d call “goals”. I mostly use a todo list like GP said, for example, “take out the trash”, “donate clothes”, “clean room”; they’re all vague tasks but I know what I mean. However, the process you’re describing sounds like it would be very helpful for setting better goals!
Maybe you’re familiar with the concept of “SMART” goals - specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound. Refining goals into sub-goals makes them feel much more manageable and ensures you actually get them done. For instance, I don’t benefit from refining “take out the trash”, but if my todo list has “learn Spanish” on it, I’d definitely benefit from breaking it down: what exactly is my course of action to learn Spanish?
