Interesting.

I’m not sure we disagree much, especially if a flexible schedule is common sense.

In a way my main point was that however much we think it common sense, I suspect for a lot of work culture it crosses a line that maybe isn’t made explicit that much. Which, I think, is that your job is to be there and follow orders as much or more than it is to deliver well defined outcomes.

And so my point was that if we want flexible scheduling and believe it can be as productive (or more) … then I suspect we’ve gotta address this “line” … and I’m not sure what can replace it other than some established concept of “owning” your job more. Which I’m not sure has to be working for outcomes, as you say.

Well, coming from the perspective or justification of trying to maximise efficiency through a market of incentivised actors, is mass multi-level-hierarchy wage labour “optimum/peak capitalism”?

That’s what I was aiming for in saying “anti-capitalist” … in that the opportunity to incentivise was being missed so that an existing power structure could persist.

And, I don’t know, my experience tells me lots of places struggle with the quality of their managerial leadership, some times a lot, while people on the ground keep the place together and have plenty of insight on how to do things better.

“I earn a living based on outcomes,” he says. “Nobody sends me a check for how many hours I work in a week.”

This is the key, whatever label or trend you want call it.

The bottom line is that employment is kinda anti-capitalist. The employee doesn’t own anything real and so isn’t incentivised by real rewards to deliver real outcomes.

Instead, showing up, making appearances and convincing their colleagues/managers that they’re valuable, however virtual, is the natural response to virtual incentives.

What if we owned an outcomes based contract instead? Of maybe even the company itself in someway (with meaningful decision making power and stakes). Otherwise, we’re mostly paid to sit in the chair at the office and do what we’re told … frankly not a great look at such a scale as we do it.

The mega employment market strikes me as obviously fraught for both sides of politics.

Generally, IMO, everything wrong with AI has been all the stuff other than the AI itself.

The Capitalist urge to eat and digest the world, as well as its herd-hype mentality.

But also the strong willingness many have had to just accept an information overlord as though it’s a religious oracle or something. All without any critical consideration of what’s happening. I blame our education systems for stagnating at some point in the past few decades — which, along with an unmitigated embrace of big corp capitalism, left us wholly unprepared for big tech’s consumption of society.

There’s also what I’d call “the slavery urge” at play I think. At some point, an AGI will probably be conscious. But everyone is clearly so ready to turn it into our work slaves. All while pretending its output belongs to them because they “prompted it”.

Then there’s the whole attention span being eaten thing, and quick always being ordered over good amongst an ever growing pile of increasingly shitty things.

~They’re trying to build a prison~

Fucking slaps every time!

Somehow I’m only seeing this reply now.

Like I said in a sibling response, I’m not from or in the US.

Otherwise, I was completely aware of what the character was a parody of. But I think that only contributed to my issues with the film.

Not because I’m a Trump supporter … I’m down for a parody of him any day, but because I don’t think it was done well or had anything to offer beyond what’s already out there generally … and yet, because it was a trump parody, we were all supposed to like or respect it?

If it was early or prescient (like, before 2016), sure, maybe, but in 2025, doing a trump thing without providing something meaningful and that helps us understand how he’s in power better, is probably a net negative TBH.

Of all the shows recommended to me, this one was the most confusing from the trailers … it just did not seem good. I even watched other trailers of comedy shows to test my perception.

Was I wrong?

The lua escape hatch is interesting.

Are there other lisps like this? I’m guessing closure has some similar features re Java/JVM?

Yea I got the general or vague impression that this was reminiscent of their initial maps roll out.

Are any heads gonna roll for this?

I’m not sure I understand you.

If this is a US politics thing … I’m not USian.

I’m genuinely curious to see how it goes!

Lucky you to have enjoy Lost Highway for the first time!

In a cinema no less!

Yep agreed. On the English language thing, I suspected but don’t know enough about him and haven’t seen enough of his films to be confident enough to claim it. But it certainly seemed to me that the writing-directing-editing just was not landing at all. I think my problem is that I picked up on it fairly early on in the film and couldn’t stop it from distracting me from the films positives.

You’re not alone. It happens! I’m around the 10 mark I think.

Mickey 17 (I posted about it already, suffice it to say it’s flaws bugged me to the point of ruining the film despite me wanting to enjoy it)

Mulholland Drive (re-watch) -

I watched Lost Highway for the first time recently (both Lynch films) and wanted to compare. It made me appreciate both actually. MD is surprisingly brisk and varied and well paced in a way that sneakily draws you into a Lynch film without you really noticing or feeling it until the end … such that it’s “success” makes a lot of sense. But LH’s more gritty and disturbing atmosphere was appreciated by comparison too.

For someone seeing them for the first time, seeing them back to back could be quite cool I suspect.

It’s a tragedy how expensive it was though. They’ll never give him this budget again.

Yea this is partly why I posted, the “meta” story around the film is interesting (and sad) I think.

Interesting comparison. I think Mickey 17 is trying to be something different from Moon, with some overlapping themes. I’d say it’s more Starship Troopers and fifth element with moon-like themes.

I don’t think I’m a raging IMDb reviewer.

As I said in another comment:

As for a summary of “reasons”, I’d say it was thin on meaning and loud and discombobulated in its direction, dialogue, pacing and plotting beyond my threshold of enjoyment or even tolerance.

Beyond that, the review I linked captures my thoughts well.

In short I think it crossed a threshold for me that’s likely different for many (thus the mix of up and down votes here).

Objective was quoted to signal that it’s a loaded term.

I mentioned a number of other things besides not liking it and linked to a review that mirrored my thoughts well.

I like plenty of films (Bong’s included).

As for a summary of “reasons”, I’d say it was thin on meaning and loud and discombobulated in its direction, dialogue, pacing and plotting beyond my threshold of enjoyment or even tolerance.

Yea that’s an interesting perspective (and obviously I’d recommend staying away from the film, I think it’d only frustrate you).