I don't like mixing of everything 18+ in the article. I think the author wants to put all the stigma in one basket, and I don't it's as simple. For example, porn meets some actual human needs and has a certain function - but gambling? Simple abuse at scale.

I think like you argue, society shaping business is good. And some people should really reevaluate what they're going for if that's too much for them.

> For example, porn meets some actual human needs and has a certain function - but gambling? Simple abuse at scale.

Now I'm as as free-minded as people typically gets, but both of those are just "entertainment" for me, one is not more "essential" than the other, what exact "human need" does pornography meet that somehow gambling doesn't also meet, since we're not talking about "fun" or "entertainment" here but something else it sounds like.

While the porn industry has issue, at its core it isn't constructed to extract money from you.

Boiling Gambling down to just being "entertainment" is a bit too reductionist in my opinion.

> While the porn industry has issue, at its core it isn't constructed to extract money from you.

For what purpose do you think that industry was indirectly created for, if not to make money from people? Even if it might not have been created with that intent (although I'd still argue it was), today it surely is mainly driven and maintain with the (at least) implicit purpose of extracting money from people, that's literally why we call it an "industry" instead of just a "community".

Like others have said, any industry has the purpose of extracting money from the customers.

The original poster has not expressed this correctly, but I assume that the intention was to say that the gambling industry is different from all other industries, not because it extracts money like any other industry, but because it does not return a product or service for that money.

The porn industry is no different from any other entertainment industry and it provides a service for money.

Gambling does not really provide any service, it just exploits the hope of the gamblers that they might gain something by gambling, which at least on average, never happens.

I do not think that one can call the stimulation of this hope of gaining as entertainment. There are some gamblers for which gambling is really entertainment, i.e. they are rich and they do not seriously expect to gain anything, but the majority of the gamblers do not do this to be entertained but because of the irrational hope of gaining enough to solve all their problems.

I don't think that's the issue with gambling - all commercial activity is constructed to extract money from you.

The problem with gambling is that people often get addicted and ruin their lives due to it.

While that probably can happen with porn I think the likelihood is a couple of orders of magnitude lower.

Sure - what comes to mind:

- helps in managing sexual needs, which can be difficult to handle otherwise, and especially replace

- educational: whether it is about workings of sex, ideas to improve your sex life with a partner, or something to discover about yourself

I suppose there's more to it, but most other things I can think of are an extension to meeting sexual needs.

> helps in managing sexual needs

There are plenty of "sexual needs" that society says "no, you can't satisfy them." (for example, Nguyễn Xuân Đạt).

I don't think sexual needs are needs that can't be managed without media.

> educational: whether it is about workings of sex

I find when a partner characterizes porn, the sex is worse... Maybe other people enjoy the sounds or behaviors seen in the videos, but not for me.

>I don't think sexual needs are needs that can't be managed without media.

Of course they can, but it still helps - that's why I used that wording.

Also replacement of one sex need with another feels more viable than with other needs, given how the chemical machinery of the body seems to work.

> I find when a partner characterizes porn, the sex is worse... Maybe other people enjoy the sounds or behaviors seen in the videos, but not for me.

I can't say that the content isn't majorly bad, or that the field is not rife with abuse. That's a real problem, but I think u related to the original question of "does it address a real need".

In this case I think the main takeaways are the ideas, techniques, and what you can learn about body from some of the more realistic videos. Somewhat unfortunately, many people pick wrongly, but I do believe right choices exist.

Very much agree.

I have no problems with the porn industry--if anything I think the requirements are too strict. Being able to inspect the records during business hours looks innocent enough, but it assumes you have an office and business hours. And it requires more dissemination of real identities than ideal. Virtually all the sins it's blamed for aren't accurate. About the only valid objection is that porn is no more realistic sex than Hollywood is realistic life. And because we won't do something sensible like actually teach kids about it there are problems from not having other models and not understanding how unrealistic it is.

Gambling, nuke from orbit. Large scale gambling operations have no redeeming social value.

I've heard OpenClaw got over 600k lines of code vibed over 80 days.

I have this theory that the bloat will follow to the full extent possible. OpenClaw has this, the OpenEye or whatever that comes on another day, with better models, will have 3 million lines of code. All of the possibilities that you mention will not come to fruition the way you'd like to, because speed is preferred over building better things, and to hell with maintainability.

Eventually these things will become a ton of black boxes, and the only option will be to write them from scratch with another next gen LLM. Lots of costly busywork, and it will all take time.

Tech debt and maintainability were important because time was of the essence in another era. If the cycles get compressed by say 95%, to hell with it, just trash the old and write everything from scratch, start from a clean slate each time?

That may be good enough for consumer facing systems. Rewrites seldom go well for enterprise systems of record because the code embodies a lot of undocumented but critical requirements. If you start vibe coding from a clean slate then all of that knowledge is lost and you've created an even bigger problem.

I don't think that needs to be true either anymore. Exhaustive specifications and comprehensive test suites are easily created now too. That's why I think software engineering will not go away, it will just change drastically.

It will change and most likely for worse. The new applications will be even buggier and worse than what we have now.

So fix a system's known bugs by creating an entirely new system with a fresh set of unknown bugs?

Claude Code is similar. It's fairly clean for AI coding standards but it's also most likely much, much bigger than what it should be for what it does.

There's something to it. I personally am happy to have one of these few precious places left where I can find content to read rather than watch.

I think an even more likely explanation would be that x86 assembly programmers often were, or learned from other-architecture assembly programmers. Maybe there's a place where it makes more sense and it can be so attributed. 6502 and 68k being first places I would look at.

For 68k depending on the size you're interested in then it mostly doesn't matter.

.b and .w -> clr eor sub are all identical

for .l moveq #0 is the winner

6502 doesn't even have register-to-register ALU operations, there's no alternative to LDA #0.

8080/Z80 is probably where XOR A got a lead over SUB A, but they are also the same number of cycles.

Why would it? Shareholders of the major stocks are generally vibes-based, and I'm sure that if Apple undertook that, they would find a way to build hype around it.

It would literally sell more Mac devices I'm not sure what the argument is that OP is making

> It would literally sell more Mac devices

The Mac has never been more popular in its 40 year history than it is now. The recently released MacBook Neo broke all previous Mac sales records. Needing to sell more Macs isn't an issue these days.

i can think of absolutely zero publicly traded company boards of this size that would opt for "we're already selling enough devices, we know there's more demand we can't meet, let's not scale up we're really happy with these numbers"

Due to the RAM shortages, Apple isn't able to meet demand as it is.

Apple's Mac revenue last fiscal year was $33.7 billion. I suspect the number of Linux users that might buy a Mac if it could run Linux natively is probably in rounding error territory.

Apple has been around for 50 years and has a market-cap of around $4 trillion. All without supporting Linux. I think they're okay with that.

I think lots of backend stuff is getting better over time, but I fail to think of a single thing facing a regular consumer.

Out of curiosity, what are you developing? While regular usage stuff such as HDR is indeed lacking, and general UX leaves a lot to be desired, Linux was always best for me in any software development discipline that I took on, and macOS was a "death by a thousand cuts" instead.

The offensiveness of many comes from the original intention of the word, which was generally some sort of a condemnation of another person (or perhaps sometimes some other taboo). To repeat it is to repeat some of that original intent, at least at times... But I think now a simple "fuck" has all but lost that meaning, and I would say it's not really inherently offensive. And well placed, sparingly used, it can be a good way to extend your range of emotional expression. Well, as long as it's not at cost of everything else.

I see this behavior in many people, usually conflict averse. In a poor attempt to mediate, spread incompetence like butter on a slice of bread. Ranges from tiring to infuriating.

If you charge every night from say 50%, that's not a full cycle.