I agree, the responses give the vibe of "your questions are dumb and I'm too smart to waste the effort to engage with them." If you don't want the job, then don't interview!
> It's easy to be happy, bubbly, carefree and say money is not important to to you when you're set for life
I’m not sure this is true. I know plenty of miserable rich people. What is easy for someone who to look at a rich person and say “I’d certainly be happy if I had that money”.
>I’m not sure this is true. I know plenty of miserable rich people.
Because those rich people are only driven by greed and don't know when to stop. They don't see money and and means to and end, but their life purpose is just being richer than the other rich people which is an exercise in futility, leading to misery. Kind of like the men who's life purpose is being an "alpha male".
Having more money doesn't make you more happy, but having a lack of money can definitely make you more unhappy.
Blaming this on cost doesn’t really make sense. Sex and minor delinquency are extremely cheap forms of entertainment (as long as you successfully avoid pregnancy).
Both of those generally involve you being in the same physical place as some other kids, which requires some combination of transportation and real estate, both of which cost more than they used to.
Meanwhile if they know you can't afford to do anything other than get into trouble somewhere then your parents aren't inclined to give you a ride, so instead you sit at home on your phone.
The human and chatbot went into a delusional spiral together. I’ve talked to a couple people recently IRL who are into fringe, new-agey “science” and had their half-baked ideas amplified and strengthened by chatbots. Most of my own chatbot experience has been pretty straightforward professional stuff, and it’s mostly stayed pretty close to reality for that. In contrast, this seems pretty clearly harmful.
As a test, I just came up with a random bullshit theory to unify QM and GR. ChatGPT told me it was “promising” and is currently “running numerical simulations to verify the theory’s plausibility”.
“First things first, obviously AGI is going to solve all these problems for us within 10 years. So do you think your work will matter beyond then?” (Paraphrasing)
What universe is this guy living in where this is an obvious fact? I’m deep in the tech filter bubble, and even among my peers this is certainly not treated as a given.
To be fair, that question is often asked half tongue in cheek. It's a useful way to start off a discussion or understand if the other person has thought about it and takes it seriously or thinks nothing of it at all
What about university students? They also start their classes in September, and while they have no "budgeting deadline", they still need to buy some computer around that time.
interestingly, i have a teen that will be heading off to college in a couple years. My plan is to send him off to the dorm with a Macbook and not his gaming rig heh. Although, inevitably, it will be up to him to decide how to make the best use of his time..
One of my first jobs was working for my university while attending. We had a small student lead team of people that did IT work for other students, and faculty. We'd fix or at least attempt to fix any software issue or hardware issue that we feasibly could with the tools we had available.
In my unsolicited advice, I recommend your son take both devices. I'll spare you my countless war stories, but I can confidently say I have seen many students up a creek without a paddle at some of the most unfortunate times.
Not the original commenter, but if I was that parent, I’d explain to my kid the amount of money I would be contributing towards their education and expenses if they bring it…and if the don’t bring it. They can make the educated choice then.
That seems to me to be the least likely outcome of that decision.
A common outcome would seem to be a year spent bombing in their classes because they can’t separate themselves from some stupid game to study while accumulating $10-20k in student debt.
I think Apple has historically used the college student market to clear out their remaining stock of last year’s MacBooks. Otherwise why release the new models just after classes have started?
Considering a base MBA M4 can be had for $899 (and it's a monster) and a base MBP is about 80% more, I can’t imagine the bulk of freshman buyers who have so many things to buy just to go to university for their first year would opt to spend an extra $650 on an MPB.
As someone who's worked at a (small) university for a decade and a half, IME most of the ones who get Mac laptops get the Air. This has been especially true since the Apple Silicon transition, as the chip in the Air is still damn good.
I think you might be surprised at the extent to which iPad sales cannibalize MacBook sales in the current crop of undergrads, especially ones who don't anticipate having to write papers or code. An iPad Air will do everything many college students need at half the price and size and weight, and it can have a pen, which the MacBook can't. When you do get a surprise assignment that the iPad can't do, there are always lab computers, and many universities will loan out laptops upon request.
reply