I remember reading a thread on Reddit[1] where someone argued that Google stocks will go down coz no one uses search engine but the person was overwhelmed by investors who still believed in Google
Just an essay in ego-bashing and showing off. While I don’t deny the author is self-made, highly successful for his age and ultra-rich, this essay is just an attempt to stroke his ego.
It’s evident in the paragraph below where he said he’s leaving DOGE to “save our government”. The writer lacks clarity and coherence of thought. How exactly is he saving the government after his DOGE stint?
>>So, after 4 intense and intoxicating weeks, I called off my plans to move to DC and embark on a journey to save our government with some of the smartest people I’ve ever met. And I booked a 1-way ticket to Hawaii.
Studying physics in the jungle, focusing on my insecurities
So now I’m in Hawaii. I’m learning physics. Why? The reason I tell myself is to build up my first principles foundation so I can start a company that manufactures real world things. It seems plausible, but I’m learning to just accept that I am happy learning physics. That’s the goal in and of itself.
Have you ever written anything as introspective as this post, particularly about your own personal shortcomings in a public forum? He seems to still have ego in some sectors of life - as don't we all - but most of the blog was incredibly reflective and self-critical. Can you say you've endeavored to do the same?
How is any of this introspective, reflective, or self-critical? The author was a caricature of silicon valley tech bro-ness throughout, followed by a final return to form by deciding to "study physics" in order to start another company and sound smart at VC parties. He ended where he started, and managed to produce a carbon copy blog post about how great fortune doesn't solve all problems somewhere along the way. The only thing missing was spiritual enlightenment and self-discovery through some combination of drugs or a trip to burning man.
If you can't read the paragraphs where he goes over several of his flaws and how they led to his failures, shortcomings and misses in several aspects of his life - both personal and professional - I don't know what to tell you.
Yes, I read the whole thing, thanks. It's the standard form letter for people who beat the startup game after a life of mindless career-maxing. To me, this sort of thing reads as humble-braggy, faux-introspective slop. Now he can point to this blog and say: "I'm so brave for acknowledging my flaws", while avoiding any real effort to change.
Agreed. There's also a healthy dose of "My biggest flaw is that I work too hard."
The DOGE section is particularly cringe inducing, as it should have been 2-3 sentences, but is instead paragraphs of self-congratulatory filler the likes of which only politics can attain. Tangentially related (even though the article is purportedly about happiness), being involved in politcs is generally agreed as being a poor path to happiness (for well-adjusted people anyway, which perhaps the author isn't).
Having children would be the logical next step in a financially successful life, but it seems as though the author also probably burned that bridge.
There are many tactful, helpful articles describing why money doesn't buy happiness, this isn't one of them.
With that money, I'm sure the author will find a trophy wife, despite his personality flaws. It feels like that might all be part of the plan for his "next chapter" after leaving his girlfriend. "Sorry, it's not you, it's me". Classic.
Last year, we had 2 consultants hired from some Big 4 consultancy. The manager told us to give them whatever info they need. They came with us on a grand total of 2 calls. The scheduled 3rd call we could not attend coz of overlapping schedules. They never bothered blocking my calendar and I never heard from them again.
I reckon the manager wanted to use them for some political purposes.
Apple leads the whole market in wrist wearable heart rate and sleep accuracy. So I wouldn't be surprised if its sleep apnea detection is also much better.
The product isn't even on people's hands, and FDA approval only means it's not actively harmful and has a fighting chance of being somewhat beneficial.
Is there anything objectively groundbreaking at this point ?
The Register is one of the few websites on the internet which makes tech articles worth reading. They make the reader realize the significance of tech, who might otherwise pass it off as nuances which only nerds should be aware of.
I don't necessarily disagree, but it should be noted that, after a few years, Magee very publicly disagreed with the direction taken by The Register, and started its own separate thing (the Inquirer).
Shortly after that happened, I found myself at a tech-conferance-adjacent soire (financed by, in El Reg's parlance, Chipzilla, open bar natch) with several Reg hacks and Magee hisself. Despite the parting of ways, all seemed to be getting along famously.
Mike handed me his business card, with the Inquirer imprint. I examined it carefully, looked at him gravely, and intoned "but you've misspelled 'Register'".
He looked back at me quite chagrined.
Great guy, and an amazing history. Godspeed Mad Mike!
Very true. Their journalists understand the technology they are writing about and explain it clearly. They also provide background and a bigger picture. One can view them as sceptical, perhaps even jaded hacks, but what they write generally stands the test of time.
I understand where you are coming from but silly stuff like that is one way to encourage what I am now going to call: "harmless tribalism".
You may not be familiar with the extensive campaign to find a suitable name for Microsoft. The winner was Micros~1. It took quite a lot of discussion and once the winner was declared, most people hated it but it became the standard. That's the nature of proper, decent, discourse. People riffing on all sorts of stuff and basically having a laugh. No one was hurt and a lot of fruitful chat was had.
el Reg has changed. It is rather more "professional" these days or as we say in the trade "boring". However, it is still there and you never know, vestigil thingies can re-grow. It is certainly more alive than /. but it is bordering on lumbering around with its arms outstretched looking for brainzzzz.
`MICROS~1` being how 32-bit Windows abbreviated the first file or folder named "Microsoft $BLAH" for 16-bit code.
So while (IIRC) Office 95 installed into C:\Program Files\MSOffice (in DOS, "C:\PROGRA~1\MSOFFICE"), Office 97 called its folder "Microsoft Office" which in DOS looked like C:\PROGRA~1\MICROS~1".
The Inquirer's name for Microsoft was "the Vole". The British field vole's specific name is Microtus agrestis.
As a full-time staff member there are obviously limits to what I can say.
Yes, it has been toned down a little. This is intentional, and there are good reasons. For example...
* El Reg has more writers in the USA than the UK these days. As a rule, Americans do not react well to British sarcasm and cynicism. Many take it at face value and find it offensive.
* A great many readers these days are not native English speakers and struggle with wordplay and so on. So, we reduce that.
It's all a bit more international. OTOH it's alive and thriving. That is a good thing.
I thoroughly understand what you both say and don't say. We are all a little flabbier than we used to be and the world is rather more madder and increasingly so.
"As a rule," - in the main but I have some fabulously sarcastic American mates.
There are some very dodgy commentards on el Reg. I don't mean "Jellied Eel" and other Johnny come latelies, who are clearly state sponsored nonsense.
Back in the day there was a single whipping boy, whose handle was "eadon" (I think). He was obviously human and came across as somewhat mad and seemed to enjoy being a bit bizarre. Nowadays we have amanfrommars who is a bit strange and probably a bot. Then there is the usual collection of noddies from various dictatorships.
As you say, it is thriving but I do think it has lost some of its edge (as I said we are all a little flabbier).
There used to be a fabulously foul mouthed Canadian writer who majored in virty stuff and of course, we all lament the passing of Lester who was frankly barking mad (in a sane way).
I often think that el Reg and Private Eye are in a similar space in the hyper-dimensional space of reporting (yes, I said that without blushing).
Increasingly, both sides of the pond are getting the hang of each other, thanks to the internet and a few other less important things, such as shared values.
"are not native English speakers and struggle with wordplay" - hard disagree (as a HN noddy would say). English is the French language, as you know well. People who are proficient with English as a second language appreciate being stretched and those that are not, have access to enough machine translation to get a good idea of what is going on.
I do think you have lost a little bit of your edge and I think you know what little means in this context. You could quite easily create ... sorry ... re-instate in house personalities and "el Reg ... things" that work for at least both sides of the pond.
What about running a bot outing competition? It could end in tears or be hillarious.
> "As a rule," - in the main but I have some fabulously sarcastic American mates.
Sure, me too. They are my favourite kind of American mate. :-D I stand by the point though.
Parallel example: Lobste.rs bans Reg links being posted as stories, at all, 100%.
The mods said it is "snarky" and mean and mocking and feel it is not worth sharing.
> There are some very dodgy commentards on el Reg.
I said nothing about commentards, and I'm not now.
> As you say, it is thriving but I do think it has lost some of its edge (as I said we are all a little flabbier).
Please note: I am a writer, not an editor. I have zero editorial control and in the context of the Reg I don't want to be an editor again. I've done it, for a much smaller site, and it's very hard work indeed. I do not fancy the job of doing it on such a high-profile high-traffic site, not one bit.
All I will say is this: the change in style is conscious and intentional.
> I often think that el Reg and Private Eye are in a similar space in the hyper-dimensional space of reporting (yes, I said that without blushing).
Fair. Aspirational, I'd say. I like and respect Lord Gnome's mighty organ.
> "are not native English speakers and struggle with wordplay" - hard disagree
Ha!
This again is a policy decision, but at coming up on 3Y full-time there now, they are right. You would be amazed how little people understand. I was.
And the ones who understand least do not know it.
General reading comprehension on the Internet at large is extremely poor.
> English is the French language, as you know well.
You mean, "lingua Franca"?
You know the Franks spoke an ancestor of German, right?
But yes, it is.
I also note I lived in Czechia for nearly a decade, speak poor intermediate-level Czech as a second (er, 6th) language, and in that time I had to totally redefine my understanding of "fluent English speaker".
I stand by what I said.
Globish is a thing. It is not the same as standard English, and British English is, sadly, not the standard form: that is American English.
> enough machine translation to get a good idea of what is going on.
Which is precisely an example of an area where idiom and slang and elliptical figurative speech goes wrong the worst.
The decisions were made, and made knowingly. It's not my place to question them, but anyway, the reasoning was sound.
Might be a British thing (assuming you're not?) in magazines with a tongue-in-cheek character. For example Private Eye always refer to "the Grauniad" and "Carter-Fuck"
Given the British influence on Iberian Penisula culture in computing, and the amount of BBC stuff we consume, I always have a special place for that kind of humour.
Oh, so that's where "the Grauniad" comes from? I never knew, although I've occasionally used it myself. Fairly sure I first saw it on Usenet in the late '90s, from Charlie Stross.
Private Eye is a satirical magazine though. It's not a primary news source in the same way that The Register wants to be for tech news. At one point The Register would have been one of my primary news sources, with multiple visits daily. They definitely* ramped up their absurdist side some time in the 2010s. It's not that I'm specifically against satire, but for me they just overused it to the point where visiting their site was annoying.
I guess that I should note that I haven't really looked at the site other than the odd linked article in probably close to a decade.
* okay, not definitely, but that was my impression
Do you read private eye? the satirical pieces are confined to a few pages in the middle, definitely not more than a third (maybe the purely humourous sections count as a third if you include cartoons). They're primarily investigative journalism if you ask me, admittedly the news pieces are often sarcastic and witty. Look up their role in the post office scandal, or the Paul Foot awards.
> They definitely* ramped up their absurdist side some time in the 2010s.
Huh? Naah. Or, maybe -- perhaps they ramped it back up in the '10s, if they'd ramped it down a lot in the '00s. Because they were wildly satirical in the '90s.
They also enjoyed slagging on corporate rebranding. When PriceWaterhouse Cooper spun out their consulting arm in 2002, they became a target for a minute[1][2]. I still have a "We like donkeys la la la" t-shirt and mug as a pair of weird and obscure artifacts from that stage of my IT career. I am heartened to see that archive.org provides a way to experience the silly Flash animation[3] they created just for that second article.
Personally I love that they insist on calling Google "The Chocolate Factory", but I can certainly understand you perspective. It easily gets to much if you have the feeling that their are trying to hard to come up with "cute" names.
I totally disagree with the last paragraph. Shedding blood != waging war. China has never dared until now, and will never dare in the future, to engage in a heads-on conflict against the USA. It has skirmishes and conflicts with almost every neighbour. The PRC defence forces do not have the worldwide fighting experience which the US has. Nuclear deterrence acts strongly against the PRC, and they won’t do anything stupid against Taiwan as long as US Navy is positioned in their backyard.
PRC fought US+UN (Nato typo) in full scale war in 50s, to stalemate, while PLA was dramatically inferior vs gap now, and when PRC didn't have nukes, while US did. So not only did they dare to fight US on much worse odds, they did so not deterred by nukes, which US planners mused about using. Shedding blood with several nuclear powers isn't nothing, there's simply no country more willing to challenge other nuclear powers / be less deterred by nukes than PRC on security issues.
IMO US global war experience doesn't amount to much relevant in peer war, in peers backyard, against peer whos spend last 20 years soley fixated on countering US. IMO most don't realize how meagre current USN (and general US posture) is in IndoPac relative to current PRC size and what PRC has in threatre (everything), and how extra meagre 7th fleet in indopac is, CVN76 (carrier group) + desron15 (destroyer squadron) is like 10-20 ships depending on deployment. Last few years PRC coast guard messing around in Senkakus, dozens of incidents every year that should on paper trigger US defense obligation, but nothing from US. USN hasn't been credible deterrent for a while. US not sending carriers through TW straight for years, current US planning has carriers operate out of PRC backyard during shooting war to hopefully figure out way to do standoff strikes. Assuming they're not sunk before that. Or assuming they can operate more than a few days since PRC missiles can hit most replenishment sites/fleets. For reference invading 90s Iraq took 5 carriers group + regional basing + french selling out Iraqi air defense. Eisenhower carrier / CVN69+DDGs aren't exactly defeating houthis right now. Current PRC is like 80x larger than Iraq then by population, 100x larger by gdp, and 100x+ more industrial output. Current one year PRC ship building is outputting cumulative US 5 year WW2 which is proxy indicator for other domains (like munitions). USN formidable against PLA 10-15 years ago, but that's also how long PRC took to close gap which they are likely to extend.
Ask how much can PRC arm Mexico, Caribbeans etc to prevent US from destroying Cuba if US really wanted to. The reasonable answer is no amount, the proposition is borderline stupid because the force balance size between US vs rest is just that lopsided. Same force balance trend in PRC vs US+co in IndoPac now. PLA growing/modernizing faster than everyone else combined, US containment partners who can't comtain are now liabilities - US still obligated to defend in PRC unfavourable ground of PRC backyard.
Trend of geopolitics indicate US allies are less than ready, and outside of theatrics, has signalled _zero_ actual formal commitment. SKR opposition drafting legistlation to prevent SKR from assisting US in TW scenario a few weeks ago. JP avoid openning up main islands for expanded US basing despite US asking for ~10 years now. All those "war games" propaganda that US can win in variety of scenarios against PRC... depends on those expanded basing (and a bunch of PLA hardware not working). Current US posture (again without expanded basing) is not sufficient. PH is more or less irrelevant. What can India do on other side of Himalayas?
Hence current US military posture (which includes allies) is not sufficient, because allies have repeatedly demonstrated through action & inaction that they are extremely unwilling to seriously help US for TW, because as import dependant islands they don't want to be PRC missile sinks, and regress into developing countries if PRC decides to do their own "operation starvation". And when PLA occasionally do leaks like cruise missile gigafactory that makes 1000 components a day i.e. a few days production will satuate all US interceptors in 1IC, every year it becomes increasingly obvious US can't prepoposition enough hardware to shift balance vs PRC, not just TW in scenario, questionable if US even able defend JP, SKR, PH etc.
