Says every smart person before they end up in a situation they cannot respect their financial commitments...
Of course, it's easy for you just to take anyone that does out of the smart pool and put them in the dumb pool. The problem is this is in no way a predictive measure. With the rules you have henceforth set you will be unable to classify that a person is smart before any trouble occurs.
This is how the rules you setup look like
You: This person is smart because they put X money in savings and have a backup fund.
[nothing interesting happens to this person]
You: See they were smart...
----
You: This person is smart because they put X money in savings and have a backup fund.
[person gets crashed into and injured, then a poorly timed market crash eliminates 70% of their savings driving them into bankruptcy]
You: This person was obviously dumb...
---
See, the thing is you, and the vast majority of US on HN are far closer to that second person then we'd like to admin (well short of some of the multi-millionaires that post here). We can just make ourselves feel better by saying we're smart instead of lucky.
> person gets crashed into and injured, then a poorly timed market crash eliminates 70% of their savings driving them into bankruptcy
I think you need to collide your imagination with reality by asking whether majority of the recipients of this subsidy ended up there due to these terrible situations outside their control similar to what you suggest.
The crash, injury, market crash are all events that have happened to everyone and sure, it does affect a few people worse than others, but, for the problem at hand, are those the root cause, or something else entirely?
and should society as a whole ensure people have the training and skills to be more resilient to impacts from crashes, injuries, market crashes?
Extrapolating exceptional situations and weaving them into a story that feels good and fits an evil narrative that will have a terrible impact on future generations to come isn't a step in the right direction.
This is a political trick that exploits people in bad situations and does nothing to ensure that future generations don't end up in similar bad situations.
Schools are not getting the feedback they need to be useful and political tricks like this further distorts the feedback loop.
We should really take a few minutes to consider what this means for not just our future but our future generations.
I think arguments that go along the lines of "I worked extremely hard to minimize my loans and now I felt betrayed" is missing the bigger evil lurking in the shadows: schools in the U.S. don't teach what really needs to be taught and political tricks like this further distort the feedback loop.
Schools should teach logical thinking, clarity of mind, decision making that includes knowledge of finances and projections so you can answer the question "out of all the things I can do, what should I be doing right now?"
"Follow your passion" worked when the U.S. was enjoying extreme wealth growth right off WWII - at that time you could shine shoes and own a single bedroom house away from the city. Weaving baskets and selling them could be the only thing you did and rent half a home for the rest of your life.
This is a cheap political trick that makes things worse. This is a perfect example of why a government shouldn't be trusted to allocate resources efficiently.
I am also concerned that this now opens an expectation that this current party will periodically forgive loans in the future - so, as long as you keep voting them into power, it doesn't matter what decisions you make, you won't have to suffer too terribly for them.
The right call would have been to invest these dollars in reworking education and schooling so that our future generations don't repeat the same mistakes we did and end up looking for handouts because we failed to learn how to make the right decisions.
While the intentions for this might not be evil, the effect is terribly so and disempowering for future generations.
To those who got some relief from this subsidy - I hope this helps you feel a bit better but hold those who put you in this situation accountable. Don't let politicians take advantage of you like this. Take a few minutes to write a letter to your school and college and tell them how they failed you and what you wish they had done instead.
The future of our country depends on your feedback
> when the U.S. was enjoying extreme wealth growth right off WWII
So I don't really believe in economics anymore, but wouldn't they say that we are actually much wealthier per capita and more much productive than we were back then?
> wouldn't they say that we are actually much wealthier per capita and more much productive than we were back then?
Wealthier (higher QoL, longer life expectancy etc) and more much productive, yes. However, affordability is lower precisely because everyone is more wealthy, so they demand more compensation (incentive to work), so every person has to now earn even more to afford to pay someone else more.
Globalization has put an upward pressure on wealth globally and has a deflating impact on affordability, which is in contrast to the unique position the U.S. was in allowing its citizens to enjoy extreme wealth growth right off WWII.
So yes, people are wealthier and more much productive, but they can afford less because everyone else are wealthier and more much productive as well and can compete for the same resources better than they were able to before (it's not that exciting to be a millionaire if everyone is also a millionaire).
> "out of all the things I can do, what should I be doing right now?"
I mean aren't you really asking "What should I be doing X years from now"?
If you're looking at your feet you're only going to notice you've walked up to the edge of a cliff moments before you get there. I mean, even with re-education you're taking long term training now in hopes it will work out in the future.
So, pretty much you've said nothing interesting here other than survival of the fittest, which didn't work out great in the past when the unfit were destitute but still alive to cause problems like crime and vagrancy. Is part of your great plan in making things better just unaliving these people?
> I mean aren't you really asking "What should I be doing X years from now"?
For a person to answer what they should be doing X years from now, well, they first, need to be able to answer what they should be doing right now, very well.
> Is part of your great plan in making things better just unaliving these people?
That is quite a stretch.
Let us simplify things down a bit: on an individual basis, these subsidies are a few hundred dollars a month - which means that while that's nothing to scoff at, the recepients already have something else going on and making a living already. It might not be a great living but this subsidy isnt going to, for example, take someone destitute and homeless and put them in a position to become financially independent.
What would have stopped destitution and homeless would have been a better education. Now yes, there are well educated people who due to bad luck have become destitute and homeless but those are the exception, not the norm for well educated people to end up in.
> If you guys don't see the value of being able to click on a button on a website to deploy, perfectly, everytime over some guy sshing into the box and running git pull I dunno what to tell you.
Maybe clicking a button that sshes into the box and runs git pull?
> honestly, who needs the ability to manage complex applications with any semblance of ease?
The argument being made here is majority of applications are rarely complex and hence dont require managing that complexity.
A simple webservice fronted by a simple reverse proxy like Caddy running on a single "modern PC" can do wonders without any Kubernetes needing to get involved.
> All those things you (a developer) could mostly clone, slightly customize and ship both to a development k8s cluster and to a prod k8s cluster (with all the safety nets already in place).
How did/does the devs create, test new code and debug issues? Can they do that locally on their local laptop? If so, how?
>> How did/does the devs create, test new code and debug issues? Can they do that locally on their local laptop? If so, how?
I used to buy the idea of this when there were monoliths.
Then I had the joy of running a shop with dozens of web properties.
Local dev became untenable. My systems admin was an early adopter of Xen. That shop ran like a dream... devs could come in and have a new environment update in place and just start to work. Staying in sync with prod was never a problem.
By making systems guys keep devs fed, by making devs work closely with systems folks you get better software. Containers just hid developers shitty decision making in a wrapper that Systems folks can tolerate.
And how DO you debug... cause what you do to figure a problem out locally is not how you trouble shoot when the shit hits the fan in prod. These tools should be the same, sane and well used and loved by everyone. Local debugging is part of the problem, even more so if your service based app that lives and dies on the wire.
Then I assume you have a custom Kubernetes LB that can handle non-HTTP TCP and UDP traffic because you choosing Kubernetes and the design restrictions that comes with it does not affect how the dev solves problems?
The underlying orchestrator definitely affects how the software needs to behave and is definitely not irrelevant.
> Then I assume you have a custom Kubernetes LB that can handle non-HTTP TCP and UDP traffic because you choosing Kubernetes and the design restrictions that comes with it does not affect how the dev solves problems?
nginx-ingress-controller does that. no custom stuff required.
Kubernetes is/was a way to fight off walled gardens from cloud providers. The other path would have been to learn the bespoke implementation of each cloud provider depending on what that employer ended up using.
Kubernetes was at the right place, at the right time just as AWS was trying to force feed people their own proprietary solution, as Azure was trying to wall off people into their own walled garden, as GCP was being Google just not giving a damn about any other usecase than what works great at a massive search company.
With Kubernetes, developers can learn one API to deploy their applications and hopefully it works on AWS, Azure, GCP, DO, OVH or a laptop at home.
So that way, developers can learn one thing and transfer their knowledge at an employer that hosts on AWS, and then another that hosts on Azure and so on.
This is in contrast to the experience of a Python developer who's mastered FastAPI/Flask/SQLAlchemy and feels absolutely lost in a Django project or an Angular developer who stares a Next.js project wondering what the heck is happening and how it all works. Neither a Next.js or an Angular developer would start off with an AWS Amplify solution if they could help it.
> With Kubernetes, developers can learn one API to deploy their applications and hopefully it works on AWS, Azure, GCP, DO, OVH or a laptop at home.
That's one of the lies developers tell themselves, because at some point you're going to need to manage Accounts, VPCs and ELBs, Certificates, Security Groups, IAM policies, and everything else. All of those underlying primitives that are required and have massive differences in behavior that are expressed differently in GCP, Azure, and AWS.
On top of that Kubernetes is itself a walled garden.
You will inevitably end up cargo culting the entire ecosystem of plugins, like Cilium and Helm and so on. All of this IaC is meaningless outside of Kubernetes. Soon enough, you have 10,000 lines of YAML configuring highly proprietary infrastructure with multiple variants for each cloud. At some point you will have to rewrite controllers to add functionality or correct bugs the upstream maintainers don't want to prioritize, and so on.
Your "knowledge" of the stack ends up being the ability to orchestrate 15 levels of templated YAML. Eventually your company ends up hiring people who only know how to copy/paste YAML, and lose institutional knowledge of how underlying systems work. You didn't break out of the walled garden, you created an elaborate prison. And Amazon and GCP and Azure love you, because you're their #1 customer. The more complex you make it to deploy a CRUD app the more they profit.
smart people don't typically land themselves in a situation where they cannot respect their financial commitments.