I see it a different way. Parents reach a period in life where their kids strike out on their own and want little to do with them beyond a safety net. That’s normal and natural and the parents move onto a new phase too. In fact they might just not be that into you anymore. It’s ok if visits upset their routine and holidays are somewhat irritating. Same for being not overly enthusiastic about taking on care giving roles for grandkids. They’re still individuals and it’s not like old age causes someone to lose their inner world. They’ve seen a lot and not as much is novel likely. They’re facing loss, mortality and decline. If they feel compelled to scroll let em scroll. I’m so glad assistive technologies and a11y will be there when I’m decrepit so I can have something more stimulating than TV. Maybe ask grandma to play some Lethal Enforcers the next time you visit you’d be surprised — mine did.
> That’s normal and natural and the parents move onto a new phase too.
Is it really ? I would say the "natural" way of things is older generation gets supported by children and they help take care of grandchildren while their children are working. The whole late retirement/both parents working situation we have these days is reliably leading to a population collapse.
People have kids later but life but expectancies and health and medicine for older people are far better than they were historically. Not for everyone, but for most people.
The rest all comes down to solvable social and economic problems, mostly as a result of putting short term GDP growth over all else.
Really couldn’t have put it better. When I was a child my grandmother retired and relocated 800 miles to help with my mother with childcare. Why? Because it’s why you do. It’s what all of her family did as far back as anyone could care to remember.
This world where your boomer parents retire to a beach house to drink margaritas, smoke designer weed, and play pickleball and ignore their offspring is the real aberration here.
It used to be that YOU help elderly parents. And they they are the patriarch ruling familly and his wife at that time. When the grandma did that help with children, it was at her terms - she was the decision maker to large extend.
That arrangement is not working from both sides. Younger generation wants autonomy and expects parents to not try to run things, not to demand more contact then they want etc.
Which makes sense. But you cant have it both ways - both autonomy/independence and service.
Younger generstion has their period of low responsibilities - before they create familly. It is shifted to later years tgen it used to ... but it is weird to then get jealous over their parents having some free time after work.
It used to be a two way street, actually. The broader family was just that, a unit.
Now it’s little independent atomic cells doing whatever with little to no regard for the bigger picture.
Ultimatel, it’s the Boomer me generation that broke this tradition. It’s not weird for a millennial to look back and say “How nice of them to have their cake and eat it too” as I raise children alone and deal with the dilemma of how to treat their greed and selfishness as they age and demand of us while contributing little.
That's not how it was. When the patriarch became too old, he'd give the farm and the "crown" to the eldest son - who would have more physical and mental strength than him.
Thirty or forty year olds in the past wouldn't take any orders from their fathers or mothers. Of course they would help them, as they are family. But the elderly would absolutely have to step aside, and those who were in their prime would call the shots.
> When the patriarch became too old, he'd give the farm and the "crown" to the eldest son - who would have more physical and mental strength than him.
That would mean very old. They kept main decision power as long as they could. By the time they gave it away, they were not helping with childcare much. Instead, they were cared for. And even with that arrangement, you are ignoring younger sons, daughters and wife's. Because childcare part is not something that concerned men - it was women's area.
> Thirty or forty year olds in the past wouldn't take any orders from their fathers
Yes they did. The dad was 50, that is not nearly old enough to give up power even in your arrangement. And yes, they were frequently pissed about it.
> or mothers.
They were taking orders from mother in law. And if you look at less individualistic societies now, that is the source of large friction - mother in law vs sons wife. Where mother in law expect her to be, basically, a maid and she does not like that at all. A woman marrying into the husbands multigenerational family is the lowest person in the hierarchy of adults, basically.
Daughter in laws butting heads with mother in laws (and father in laws) is a story portrayed in many cultures’ popular tv shows/movies. As are parents who own everything on paper, making them the ones with actual power, butting heads with their children.
It is only in the previous 100 years where young people all over the world have the power to support themselves without anyone else’s help, which is why the preference for independence was revealed.
Young people have always had the power to support themselves without anybody's help. That's how life has worked for billions of years now.
It is only very recently that the industrialized world became completely financialized, so that the cost of life has become artificially increased for the youth. Young people have always moved away from their families for marriage, or for becoming sailors, soldiers, miners, hunters, lumber jacks, etc. It was only the oldest son who would inherit anything, so the rest of them wanted to scram as soon as they hit puberty.
Inheritance-baiting your children is the oldest scam in the book, but people weren't complete fools in the past, and wouldn't stick around if the old folks went too far. A lot of head-butting between generations and in-family as you mention.
> Young people have always had the power to support themselves without anybody's help.
You do not know much about history, do you?
> Young people have always moved away from their families for marriage, or for becoming sailors, soldiers, miners, hunters, lumber jacks, etc.
Eh, for a bulk of history, people stayed in village where they were born. Women moved to husbands house, rarely other way round, but that is basically it. Miners and hungers and lumber jacks did not moved away from village.
If you take care to learn about history you will be surprised as to how wrong you are. You are mostly believing in simplified myths.
Of course young adults have always been able to support themselves. If people in their prime can't support themselves, then nobody can. Young adults have always supported themselves + other people.
Take any time period of history and any place, and there is a mobility which will surprise you. Evidence for this is for example the colonization of the New World.
And as I have mentioned: Only the oldest son would inherit the village farm, so the other sons and daughters were often anxious to get moving.
>Of course young adults have always been able to support themselves. If people in their prime can't support themselves, then nobody can. Young adults have always supported themselves + other people.
Maybe pre-property rights when an individual's ability to inflict violence was more correlated with their status, but not post-property rights when first mover's had an advantage in gaining ownership to be able to collect rent and have a group of able bodied young to enforce it (e.g. police). Once that dynamic is established, the game favors those who can benefit from previous generations.
After that, the option for a young person to support themselves is mostly based on expanding to unclaimed or lower priced land, which is a big gamble because it is usually unclaimed or lower priced for a reason (hard to reach, no infrastructure, enemies, climate, clean water, etc).
>Take any time period of history and any place, and there is a mobility which will surprise you. Evidence for this is for example the colonization of the New World.
The internet might have been the most recent world that was available to be colonized, but it is not clear to me that these worlds will always be available.
People also used to marry younger and have children sooner. When people were getting married and starting to have kids in their teenage years, it meant that new grandparents would only be in their mid-30s or so. That put them in a much better spot to assist with the grandchildren.
Now many people I know are waiting until their 30s to have children, meaning that the grandparents are already 50-60s.
When was that? The average age of marriage in medieval England was early 20s as far as I can find out.
There are cultures where it is usual for grandparents to help where people are having kids in their mid twenties or later.
I know and have known lots of people who are perfectly capable of looking after kids (maybe not full time permanently), but for holidays or during the day, in their 70s or 80s.
In fact standard retirement age (insofar as it still exists) here in the UK is 67 so most people will still be working in their 50s and most of their 60s. It really is not that old.
I think one thing that has changed-both my parents and my wife’s parents are divorced, which makes things socioemotionally more complicated in terms of grandparental involvement in our children’s lives-it still happens, but I think it involves difficulties which didn’t exist for my own parents and grandparents when I was young, and were it not for those difficulties, it likely would happen more
Both grandparents divorced means you go from two family units involved to four-which in itself adds logistical complexity-and new partners doubles the opportunities for interpersonal conflicts
TBH it was also expected trade - you will take care of elderly parents in exchange for their help with kids participation, so since boomer parents don't help they also can't expect help
my (divorced) parents (5+ and 2.5+ hours away by car) didn't help us with kids at all (wife's parents are 7500 km away), but they can't expect I will be taking care of them when they will be really old, after all my father and his sister put their own mother to retirement home, when she could not live alone by herself, so they should kinda expect the same treatment (although I was against it and wanted grandma rather die alone in her house earlier than suffer slightly longer in retirement home without her garden/animals), actually my mother put her mother to retirement home as well, though I think she wanted to go there, it was pretty great facility, it was very small house (studio), each separated part had one occupant with minigarden with meals minutes away + it was also <1km from her old big house, so not much change and not much difference for her since she lived in front of the living room TV anyway
> Parents reach a period in life where their kids strike out on their own and want little to do with them beyond a safety net. That’s normal and natural and the parents move onto a new phase too.
This is at best extremely cultural. It is certainly not a global norm and not really viewed as desirable, just necessary.
Average American doesn't move very far at all from their parents and America is where the idea of time limited parenting is most prevalent.
My parents moved from Texas to Chicago this year to be near my sister instead of me (their son) because in their very traditional minds they need to be taken care of by a daughter in their old age. I get to send checks. I thought it was a terrible idea, they have friends and family here and Chicago is very cold. That being said they moved into a community of her 11 kids and their spouses and their kids — probably 30+ relatives in their orbit. And they are surrounded by people who love them and help them. It’s really been good for them. Much less scrolling and much more conversation, group meals, board game playing, storytelling.
Your sister has 11 kids? Smart of your parents, then. That’s a good pool of caretakers for them to live around. But I’m surprised they didn’t move sooner to help raising that many kids.
I live in Texas now, and think I’d ultimately prefer Chicago too. Don’t have to drive as much to find stimulation, and the cold preserves.
Altman tweet:
“Two of our most important safety principles are prohibitions on domestic mass surveillance and human responsibility for the use of force, including for autonomous weapon systems. The DoW agrees with these principles, reflects them in law and policy, and we put them into our agreement.”
From that it reads like the administration quickly agreed to the terms Anthropic wanted with OpenAI instead.
Does "putting them in the agreement" mean "we will never allow them," or "we will not allow them if they are illegal?" Here's a link which says that the DoD was willing to make up with anthropic any time if they allowed surveillance of Americans: https://www.axios.com/2026/02/27/anthropic-pentagon-supply-c...
Seems like Altman wants to spin this as the same principled stand anthropic took, but they really caved to the DoD's "all legal applications" framing. Up to you to decide how much you think the law restrains the Pentagon here.
I’m doing enterprise coding tasks that used to take a month of whole team coordination from mockups to through development and testing in 3 days now. It’s all test driven development, codex 5.3 and a small team of two people who know how to hold it right orchestrating the agents. There’s no reason not to work this way. The sociotechnical engineering aspects of this change are fascinating and rewarding to solve.
I work for an old enterprise, so far rather conservative with LLM/AI usage. However the copilot cli adoption in the last 2 weeks is spreading light wild fire. Codex 5.3, a good instructions file and it works. Features are getting done and delivered in days, proper test coverage is done, proper documentation in place. Onboarding to it is also very fast.
Porting tons of untyped js legacy front end code to vue with typescript and figma designs. Highly configurable business to business app (i.e lots of permutations). Everyone seems to have a “system”. I recommend looking at the OpenAI Cookbook for long running plans and do TDD to the extreme. https://developers.openai.com/cookbook/articles/codex_exec_p...
The 40k lines of code a day crows are amusing. In solving any problem solvable by code, there's a ratio of non-coding work to coding work, and codex et al all help immensely with the coding work but help less with the non-coding work.
Non-coding work is thinking about the system architecture, thinking about how data should flow, thinking about the problem to be solved, talking with people who will use it, discovering what their objectives are.
Producing 40k lines a code per day simply means you're not doing any of that work: the work that ensures you're building something worth building.
Which is why the result is massive, pointless things that don't do the things people actually need, because you've not taken any time to actually identify the problems worth solving or how to solve them.
It's a form of mania that recalls Kafka's The Burrow, where an underground creature builds and builds an endless series of catacombs without much purpose or coherence. When building becomes so easy when it was so hard -- and when it becomes more fun to build and watch codex's streams of diffs fly by, than to plan -- we forget the purpose of building, and building becomes its own purpose, which is why we usually so little actual productive impact on the world from the "40k lines of code a day" cohort.
Just because tests pass does not mean that they're testing the right thing to begin with. Reviewing tests is as important, if not even more important than reviewing code.
I agree with your point that the original claim is unlikely to be true (and would be extremely foolish behavior even if it were true). I don't think it's good to flame people though, even if they did say something unreasonable.
> "I am able to push 30-40K lines of nearly perfect code a day now."
It is physically and physiologically impossible for anyone to be reviewing "30-40K lines of nearly perfect code a day" to the extent needed to push it with confidence in a sensible development process.
Why do you and many of your industry friends conveniently never actually post their 'perfect code' when asked for proof? I've asked like five different people now that make these claims and they just vanish into the ether.
I wonder if a large chunk of the population choosing to only buy non-discretionary goods for an extended period of time might freak policy makers out more. Not a targeted boycott. Not a strike still going to work. Lower effort to participate. For example if this caused US Amazon orders to fall by a 1/4 for two weeks and similarly across all retailers.
Low effort to participate isn’t a feature. The point of these kind of actions is to show that there’s a lot of people who are really fired up and won’t be placated or deterred unless policymakers meet their demands.
Sort of? You want something that's going to actually affect the corporations involved. It's not about showing effort, because the government doesn't care how much effort you put in. It's about showing power, making a statement that we "the people" have power and can use it if you don't do what we want. A long-term "nonessentials boycott" might be more impactful in that sense.
Thanks this made my day! Well done. Currently exploring “I’m a bowling ball and need all surfaces and obstacles to be smoothed and graded so I can progress through the game. You must accommodate this for me or I can’t play.” The GM is creating gusts of wind for me to get around.
What if someone distributed contraband rechargeable tablet devices running an offline open source LLM into a knowledge desert where the government limits education, censors information, and blocks the internet to control?
I agree. I have a Nord Drum 3P that’s FM percussion modeling with drum pads. I can get close to these sounds and a lot more stuff that bends when you hit the pad harder. About half the price on Reverb. The Phase 8 is a cool idea.
Recently I was using docling to transform some support site html into markdown and replacing UI images with inline descriptive text. An LLM created all the descriptions. My hope was descriptions like “a two pane..below the hamburger…input field with the value $1.42…” would allow an LLM to understand the UI when given as context in a prompt. Maybe I could just put ASCII renderings inline instead.
I visited a heart doctor at Duke research medical center a few years back. His comments then were that dairy products were the most inflammatory foods for humans and a major contributor to heart disease by gunking up our bloodstreams.
reply