| > everyone in the world wants 'puters to predict what could they want to see or buy next. This doesn't strike me like something "everyone in the world wants", but rather something a small group of leaches is pushing on the rest of the population, to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else. I'm yet to meet a person that would tell me they actually want computers to tell them what to see or buy. And if I met such person, I bet they'd backtrack if they learned how those systems work. Exercise for the reader: name one recommendation system that doesn't suck. They all do, and it's not because recommendations are hard. Rather, it's because those systems aren't tuned to recommend what the users would like - they're optimized to recommend what maximizes vendor's revenue. This leads to well-known absurdities like Netflix recommendations being effectively random, and the whole UX being optimized to mask how small their catalogue is; or Spotify recommendations pushing podcasts whether you want them or not; or how you buy a thing and then get spammed for weeks by ads for the same thing, because as stupid as it is, it seems to maximize effectiveness at scale. Etc. > I'm sure that you can delete all of that, only leave languages like Rust, C and C++ and get a 100x jump in performance. But you'd also be annihilating 90% of the software development workforce. Good luck trying to watch a movie in Netflix or counting calories on a smartwatch. I'll say the same thing I say to people when they claim banning ads would annihilate 90% of the content on the Internet: good. riddance. Netflix would still be there. So would smartwatches and calorie counting apps. We're now drowning in deluge of shitty software, a lot of which is actually malware in disguise; "annihilating 90% of the software development workforce" would vastly improve SNR. |