What made the most difference for me was strength training a few times per week. I do circuit training classes where you spend 6 minutes per station. I didn't change my diet that much, and I really didn't lose much weight. But the muscle displaced the fat and I'm slimmer and look better.
Besides payment kiosks having tipping on by default, I wonder how much of this is an indicator of inflation over the past 5 years. Businesses have dramatically broadened tipping on payment kiosks to avoid having to increase wages. "We'll still pay you 12 dollars an hour, but now you get tips!"
This is obviously a death march project. Just delay it indefinitely until the Google Gemini based Siri chatbot is ready. Why ship something half-assed?
But it’s been a complex undertaking. The revamped Siri is built on an entirely new architecture dubbed Linwood. Its software will rely on the company’s large language model platform — known as Apple Foundations Models — which is now incorporating technology from Alphabet Inc.’s Google Gemini team.
Once you have a kid, it's obvious why even besides the costs involved. There's not much sense of community, particularly in the white middle class. People are very individualistic and distrusting of others. There's a good reason for some of this, but to have a community you need to be a community member. And that means letting people in, trusting others and being trustworthy, and being out for the group instead of just yourself.
Every morning I get to my son's school about 10 minutes before the doors open. We arrive by bike and we sit ALONE on the benches near the front door.
Meanwhile, the curb is full of extra large SUVs idling with kids just waiting inside the cars. The long line of SUVs extends all through the neighborhood. My son and I are alone because people just won't leave their cars until the doors open. A vast majority of the kids live within one mile of the school.
It's just one small anecdote, but I feel like it illustrates an attitude I've seen.
> Meanwhile, the curb is full of extra large SUVs idling with kids just waiting inside the cars
Anecdotally, when my work schedule was wonky for a while I would do the same with my kids. Those few extra minutes hanging out with them in the morning were something I valued a lot. We got to talk and relax a little bit after the rush of getting ready in the morning. They had all day to spend with their classmates so a few extra minutes in the morning wasn’t going to change much.
A suggestion: If you want to make friends with other parents, morning drop off is the worst time to do it because everyone is going from the rush of morning routines and mentally preparing for their jobs. After school is better, but the best is at events and activities away from school hours completely. Our schools have done parent socials that have been great for meeting people. Sports and activities are also a great way to get introduced to other families.
It also helps to be the one leading the charge. We’ll do things like go to the museum or other activities and then send invites to 5+ other families. Tell them to invite other families.
I am friends with a lot of other parents already. I do go out of my way to make friends. I already organize bike trips to the museum and stuff like that. I'm a very social person.
What I'm saying is that there are a lot of forces keeping people solitary and anti-social. This is just one of them. I know for a fact that some of these families waiting in their SUVs live a short walk from the school. Yet still they choose to isolate themselves. Sometimes the kids in these cars are literally yelling out the window to my son because they're friends. I don't want him going close to the cars because they've LITERALLY been pumping out pollution for 10-15 minutes (those early spots are very coveted). I have to tell my son to hold his breath when we bike on the empty sidewalk past these idling cars. It all just feels very anti-social and dystopian.
Sure, school drop off is just one small aspect of life. But because of drop-off culture, there are certain people who I may NEVER have a chance to interact with. Imagine if those parents instead walked with their kid. Maybe I would make a new friend. Maybe we'd have a nice conversation.
Last year there was another woman and her son waiting with me. They walked to school every day. We became friends just through school drop off in the morning. It brought some happiness into my life and made me feel a sense of community. She could have chosen to get in her car and wait in the long line of SUVs like everyone else, but luckily she didn't.
By essentially saying "stop caring about school drop off and look for other opportunities" it feels like you're missing my point: building community means showing up in lots of different ways, and consistently. The school drop-off example is just one example of many. A woman who lived on my street since the 80s said that back then nearly everybody walked to school. By switching to a car-based morning drop-off feels to me like we've lost something, even if it's just a small thing
> I don't want him going close to the cars because they've LITERALLY been pumping out pollution for 10-15 minutes (those early spots are very coveted). I have to tell my son to hold his breath when we bike on the empty sidewalk past these idling cars.
social-interaction problems aside, why are the cars idling? seems like the school/city would have an ordinance prohibiting that
> I don't want him going close to the cars because they've LITERALLY been pumping out pollution for 10-15 minutes (those early spots are very coveted). I have to tell my son to hold his breath when we bike on the empty sidewalk past these idling cars. It all just feels very anti-social and dystopian.
Yes, I'm sure there's absolutely nothing you're doing to engender the general atmosphere of distrust...
Anecdotally my experience is dramatically different.
Last week I arrived by car right near the beginning of dropoff time. Pulling in right in front of me was the mom of one of my kid's classmates, carpooling with another kid who lives in the same apartment complex. The three of them met up as soon as they got out of the car, and then another one of their friends (who lives across the street from the school and usually walks) joined them from his driveway. They met up with a 5th friend before they crossed the street.
Then I walked - well, more like ran - with the 5 of them down the 111 steps that take us from the street level to the schoolyard. When they reached the bottom, they met up with 3 more friends who had just been let out of the drop-off zone in front of the school itself. Said a quick goodbye to my kid, but he wasn't really paying attention, he was already ensconced in his pack of 8.
I've gotten there with my kid before drop-off time, walked down the stairs with him, and there's been a pack of about 20-30 kids and 2-3 parents usually milling around before the school gates open.
I realize that this is somewhat atypical in 21st-century America, and we specifically chose this community because, well, it actually has a sense of community, but it's not unique. In preschool I'd take my son over to his preschool bestie's house (she lived about 2 cities away), and there'd be a whole pack of kids roaming the neighborhood going over unannounced to each other's houses.
I think it is crazy that you have gates to get into the school grounds (buildings should be locked, I get that). Like my BIL in Sydney suburbs, he lives right next to a school with super nice basketball court etc, but can kids use those on weekends? Sadly no.
The gates here are open when school is not in session, and we (and other families) do in fact use the school grounds for playdates on weekends.
But yes, it sucks that they have to exist, and that my kids have active shooter drills and the school has a plan for what to do in a mass-casualty event. Though so far, every time they've triggered the secure campus protocols, it's because a baby coyote likes to hang out on the stairs.
The community in question was put on our radar screen when we attended a party that one of my wife's business school friends threw. It's not well-known; even in our metro area, most people probably wouldn't recognize the name or be able to place it on a map.
But then when we were house-hunting, I just drove through all the residential neighborhoods within commuting distance of our jobs. And took note of where I saw people a.) out walking and b.) talking to their neighbors. Reported to my wife (who thought this was a nutty waste of time, but really values community) "I think you'll like it here", then paid the exorbitant home value to actually buy a home in the area. Indeed, we did like it here.
If the medium is the message, the SUV communicates that there is only space for the nuclear family members, speed and comfort is of the essence, and the road is the only acceptable avenue for transportation. The sidewalks are for homeless people, jogging athletes, and eccentrics.
Oh good grief, parents with SUVs aren't that complex, and they are often purchased to carry around their kids' friends as well (negating your first point).
People do what works for them within their budget, which often is a larger vehicle when you have kids. If you want to translate that as "speed and comfort is of the essence", then fine. I could say the same about someone with no kids who prefers living in a highly urbanized area because their definition of speed and comfort is different.
And virtually no one is thinking "I need to demonstrate my belief that traveling on foot is only for weirdos OR exercising" when purchasing a vehicle, both because not many (to be generous) people think that in an area with sidewalks and because it's just not relevant.
> they are often purchased to carry around their kids' friends as well
but it requires an adult to drive that SUV. Car culture has made it so kids don't have autonomy to move themselves around anymore. When I was 8 I used to be able to walk/bike around the neighborhood to see my friends. Then we moved to car-dependent suburbia and things were so much worse. Having to depend on adults to go places added a lot of friction. The end result is that we'd usually just spend a lot of time inside the house.
Just look at the dystopia we live in right now: some parents literally drive a Chevy Tahoe or equivalent SUV to school to drop their kids off. How many school-aged children can you fit into the blindspot of a car like that? Are we at all surprised that parents don't want their kids walking to school alone?
I literally have to tell my son to hold his breath as we bike by long lines of SUVs idling right next to a school
> People do what works for them within their budget, which often is a larger vehicle when you have kids
It's funny that I don't drive and I transport my 3 kids around almost exclusively by bike. Yet people who live in my neighborhood with kids insist that they need an SUV for all trips. (yes, I can afford any car if I wanted one).
I even organize bike trips so other parents can bring their kids to events by bike so we don't need to get cars involved.
I think we've fooled ourselves into thinking we need cars far more than we actually do.
Yes, there are dystopian places that are completely car-dependent and don't even have sidewalks, but even in places that aren't like that people still insist that they need cars for everything.
> but it requires an adult to drive that SUV. Car culture has made it so kids don't have autonomy to move themselves around anymore. When I was 8 I used to be able to walk/bike around the neighborhood to see my friends. Then we moved to car-dependent suburbia and things were so much worse. Having to depend on adults to go places added a lot of friction. The end result is that we'd usually just spend a lot of time inside the house.
My kids can (and do) walk around our neighborhood. You chose to live somewhere that didn't support that and lament it, for reasons that are not clear to me.
We also drive our SUV when the number of passengers exceeds 5, which is not uncommon at all in our household. Occasionally, we drive it solo or with less than 5 passengers, because it makes sense to do so.
> Just look at the dystopia we live in right now: some parents literally drive a Chevy Tahoe or equivalent SUV to school to drop their kids off. How many school-aged children can you fit into the blindspot of a car like that? Are we at all surprised that parents don't want their kids walking to school alone?
Large vehicles are "dystopia"? There are plenty cruising around my town yet a kid has literally never been hit in the 20 years I've lived there.
And kids walk to school alone or in small groups on the sidewalks, with crossing guards protecting them at intersections.
> I literally have to tell my son to hold his breath as we bike by long lines of SUVs idling right next to a school
Okay. Are these cars all from the 1970s, before any modern emission standards were enacted?
> It's funny that I don't drive and I transport my 3 kids around almost exclusively by bike. Yet people who live in my neighborhood with kids insist that they need an SUV for all trips. (yes, I can afford any car if I wanted one).
Good for you. I have zero interest in spending an hour plus biking my kids to and from the grocery store, so we just drive and then play in our yard when we get back. Or we just walk if we have the time and interest.
> I even organize bike trips so other parents can bring their kids to events by bike so we don't need to get cars involved.
Sounds great. We have these too, without the irrational fear of cars included.
> I think we've fooled ourselves into thinking we need cars far more than we actually do.
"Need" is a relative term. I don't "need" indoor plumbing to survive, yet it's nice to have and most people would consider it a need (including my wife and kids).
I see no reason to reduce my standard of living by basically taking up cycling as an unpaid part time job. If you enjoy it or just feel like it's time well spent, again, good for you.
> Yes, there are dystopian places that are completely car-dependent and don't even have sidewalks, but even in places that aren't like that people still insist that they need cars for everything.
Again, using "dystopian" to describe a place that is car dependent is a pretty fringe view. It's not surprising that not many people agree.
>Oh good grief, parents with SUVs aren't that complex, and they are often purchased to carry around their kids' friends as well (negating your first point).
If the goal was to carry more people, a minivan would have been bought, as they are more spacious and comfortable.
An SUV's goal is to use up more space and have the passengers sit higher up, to project more "power" or "status".
Nothing like a thread on vehicle preferences to rouse the extremely vocal and judgmental fuckcars crowd on here.
You may be shocked to hear this, but not all SUVs are less spacious than minivans and comfort is very subjective.
You have to define SUV to determine its goals. Most "SUVs" are basically cars that are slightly lifted and extended. The ones I assume you take most issue with are significantly larger than minivans, have 4WD (which is actually useful where I live), and also are seen as more luxurious.
I would say the primary goal, especially for parents, is occupant safety, which does come at the cost of the safety of others. Good luck convincing anyone to change with your attacks though.
Yes, we can be critical of ourselves. I guess your description of SUV-drivers looking at pedestrians with disdain and buying a car with room for more passengers to intentionally exclude potential passengers is an accurate reflection of your own opinion?
As I said, I don't believe those are very widely held and they certainly don't reflect my thoughts, so my criticisms would be quite different.
The majority of the SUVs I see driving have exactly 1 person in them. It's ok to admit that.
We can also look at the facts, which do imply a more recent disregard (if not disdain) for pedestrians:
> Drivers hit and killed 3,304 people walking in the United States in the first half of 2024, down 2.6% from the year before but a staggering 48% above a decade ago, according to a new analysis from GHSA. [0]
> The majority of the SUVs I see driving have exactly 1 person in them. It's ok to admit that.
I don't need to "admit" that, because I agree it's true.
In your rush to prove a point, you completely missed mine, which was: At least 99% of families buying SUVs to transport kids around instead of a car or minivan (which is why single occupant use didn't come up, as it wasn't really relevant) aren't intentionally firing a shot in an ideological war, they're just picking a car that works for them, they can afford, and they like.
Obviously a lot of that is subjective and has been shaped by regulation, marketing, and an interest in conformity with peers, but what will definitely not change anyone's mind is endless hostility over what is a generally benign decision.
You seem to have completely dismissed the factual data I provided that vehicle deaths of pedestrians have increased 48% in the past 10 years. This certainly implies that something has changed in how Americans drive and interact with pedestrians. It also perfectly correlates with a time period where SUVs went from 30% to 60% of vehicles on the road.
There is research on how car cost (with SUVs being the most expensive vehicle type) impacts driver yielding behavior [0]. There is also research on how being in a car changes your perspective of pedestrians and others not in the car [1][2][3].
Yea, it sure seems like we are talking about different things. I've re-read the exchange and can't find the disconnect or where the hostility came from. Maybe you thought I was another poster from a different exchange?
You clearly stated your opinion that "SUV-drivers looking at pedestrians with disdain" isn't widely held. I then provided actual data and studies that disagrees with that opinion. I'm not sure why that was so upsetting.
The data you provided isn't upsetting, other than it's sad that people are being needlessly killed.
Interacting with insufferable transit "enthusiasts" is exhausting though, especially when they jump into discussions without reading the entire thread (as you did here apparently).
You and your peers seem incapable of doing anything other than attacking, insulting, and looking down upon anyone who isn't as "enlightened" as you, making you zealots, which is why I want absolutely nothing to do with any of you even if I agree with many of your positions.
If you all ever figure out that the first step to improving a situation isn't "try to make everyone who disagrees with me feel bad about themselves via hostility" let me know. I won't be holding my breath.
> the first step to improving a situation isn't "try to make everyone who disagrees with me feel bad about themselves via hostility" let me know.
Is an eye-opening comment from a person who called me "insufferable", "incapable of doing anything other than attacking", and a "zealot" just in this one comment. Further up thread are plenty of other insults you have lobbed at anyone who dares to challenge you. All while continuing to claim that everyone else is attacking, insulting, and looking down at you.
This conversation is over, you can project on someone else.
This conversation was over before it started, because you saw a need to interject (without reading everything that was written beforehand) with a challenge to get me to "admit" to something (that I already agree with by the way because it is a fact) and I'm not going to participate.
You're the one who chose hostility, and of course you fall back on a display of offense when you get it back in kind.
I helped start the chapter at my kids’ school and I’ve been impressed by the enthusiasm given how car-centric the school is (we’ve got the big SUV line, too).
Like you, we were usually one of two or sometimes three bike families. Walk N Roll days are now packed with bikes, and the bike population has increased substantially on regular days, too.
We’ve met some cool families, and the “goddamned big cars idling, you live three blocks away why don’t you just walk” grumbling in my head has quieted a bit.
This is exactly how it was for me and my family when we lived in Wisconsin. We live in Germany now. Everyone walks to school or bikes - there is community.
I'm not a parent but where I live in Portland a big trend has been bike buses. A couple of parents ride with a group of kids to school, I see them often. That time before class started was always an awesome time where we'd talk about video games and trading cards and stuff, I'd be really disappointed not to see that.
The book Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam is about the decline of civil society.
Church membership is down. Labor union membership is down. Parents got crushed in the pandemic with school shutdowns, daycare shutdowns, and formula shortages. It takes two incomes to afford a family's lifestyle. Someone has to take care of the kid. Two people have to do the job of three people.
It is cool to live in a place where everyone questions the roles society might impose on them, but it's too extreme lately. The cost of community is inconvenience. The price of individuality is loneliness.
So much of life is brutally inefficient without networks of trust and reciprocity.
> It takes two incomes to afford a family's lifestyle. Someone has to take care of the kid. Two people have to do the job of three people.
Being stay at home parent is one of the most lonely thing you can do. Yes, the parent who works in office and goes bowling with collagues is less lonely. But the one who is spending whole day with a small kid and no one else is much more lonely .They cant go bowling either, because they need to put kids to sleep. So, they have to try much harder to have any social contact.
I wonder if what you describe is a consequence of suburbia. In any sort of proper town, there's quick and easy access to parks where you encounter people on the walk to the park, which gives a great sense of community. When you have to pack up the kids in a car you are isolated from community, except through the negative community of bad driving.
The stay at home parents k know are not lonely and go out and engage with other parents and have perhaps a far stronger community than the working parent.
Suburbia is the easiest place to take the kids and go find things to do on a walk.
> The stay at home parents k know are not lonely and go out and engage with other parents and have perhaps a far stronger community than the working parent.
Same. As long as you don’t literally stay at home, being a parent with kids is such an easy way to meet more people.
That is not my experience with California suburbia in any way, it is extremely desolate and lonely compared to any proper town or city I have encountered. But I'm very glad that others are having better experiences!
The comment you're responding to is about a decline in social institutions in general. As someone from a tiny town, when I was growing up, stay at home moms were always outside and talking all day. They'd watch over kids together as well. The loneliness aspect of parenthood is a modern invention.
YMMV. Plenty of groups out there to meet other parents and become friends with. I know several people who had kids and were SAHP and made lots of friends this way. Mind you, as the kids got older everyone moves around so friendships might not always last but it’s very possible. And you have a very obvious thing to bond over - being a parent.
I work at faang and have no friends from that. I’m surrounded by thousands of people every day I’m at work. Everyone is there to work - not be social or hangout or be friends. People show up to social events to grab food and take it back to their desk.
I had a period of behind effectively a stay at home dad and I disagree with this completely.
Being a stay at home parent doesn’t literally mean you have to stay at home. Take the kids and leave the house. Go on adventures. I met so many people randomly during that time.
It was vastly more social than sitting in an office or working from home alone.
I wasn't a SAHP but I'd spend time with my kids at a park nearby and people would give me dirty looks for playing with my kids if my wife wasn't present.
The internet convinced me it was going to be a problem, but it literally never happened once.
We rotate through parks because the kids love seeing new parks. Nobody has ever given me a dirty look for bringing my kids to the park. It’s a completely normal thing for parents to do.
Stay at home parenting doesn't literally mean physically staying in the house. There's far more opportunities for socialization for those not burdened by work, kids are portable, they like doing stuff, and there's really not ALL that much to taking care of them.
> But the one who is spending whole day with a small kid and no one else is much more lonely
So...don't do that? Let the parent who works in the office come home and spend time with the kid, and go out for drinks (or hiking or the gym or whatever) with other friends. Do all the chores beforehand during the day, so that the working parent only has kid duty.
If both are working, both have chores and kid duty after work.
I imagine this is due to the decline of local civic life. When you're a stay at home parent, and you are a part of some voluntary association, a church, PTA-type organizations, and the neighborhood is filled with other stay at home parents that you can organize play dates with (or hang out with while the kids are at school), life is less lonely.
This is why "Moms clubs" are a thing. I get that safe spaces are wanted, especially if the mothers needed to nurse, but dads were unwelcome in the chapter near me.
I mean church people love to think of this as a decline of society but this is more about the destruction of the church itself as an out of date institution that was using itself as a control mechanism and that broke the moment we discovered the world wasn't made on hocus pocus.
The thing is the essence of the church could still maintain a huge amount of social control because people need to socialize.
I agree and am very anti-religion across the board. That being said, it certainly had and has a place in modern society. As a form of third space community and as a mechanism by which to provide social pushback where the law is lacking or lagging.
> There's not much sense of community, particularly in the white middle class. People are very individualistic and distrusting of others.
My experience couldn’t possibly be more different.
Once we had kids it was like our world opened up to a whole new set of communities and other parents. Most of the other parents we’ve met have been very friendly and helpful, and we’ve tried to do the same for others.
This is absolutely not our experience, but we've been intentional about joining communities / activities that involve lots of in-person time together. Church is a huge one (especially joining small groups / service groups), but we also do 4H (they have them in urban areas too!), and my wife started an educational co-op with cool field trips, and we organize neighborhood events like caroling at retirement homes, a pre trick or treating party, and a New Year's party for kids.
Community isn't the default that everyone's forced into anymore, but if you are intentional about it, you'll find lots of other people are feeling the same way and are happy to join in.
Same boat, with 4 kids between church and co-op we barely have enough time for the amount of friends we have. Finding a good church might be a challenge for people but it’s worth the time and research, we just moved to be closer to a good one.
this really depends on where you live. i’m in an extremely safe family oriented suburb, there’s lot of community, kids have freedom to go outside, good friends with lots of neighbors and parents, my social life is busier than it was when i didn’t have kids.
I'd say (and this is painful for many) that it really depends on who you are and how you act - if you're outgoing, or force yourself to pretend to be, and you talk, and you listen, and you don't immediately judge people (by whatever metric you come up with) - you can build community anywhere
Is it easier if you're in a group of tightly-knit people all nearly identical to you? Sure! But it's possible with work anywhere that has any population at all.
Social media and the Internet have let us self-select for "friends" who are as close to us as possible, there's ease because of the lack of friction, but that same lack of friction prevents our rough edges from being sanded off.
The number of people who could list what they want in a community, and when presented with a community that matches their list, cry that it votes wrong is way too high, just as an example.
It was a lot easier to get along with people who voted differently when it was about differences in fiscal policy and taxation.
It's hard to respect people who support mass racial profiling by unidentified masked secret police. My American friends of mexican descent have to go about every day knowing that they might get harassed or detained for the way they look. In my book white supremacy is outside the bounds of legitimate political opinions that I can look past.
> kids have freedom to go outside, good friends with lots of neighbors and parents, my social life is busier than it was when i didn’t have kids
Don't have kids myself, but this aspect seems incredibly obvious just reflecting on my childhood in suburbs of Chicago through the 80s-90s.
But the causes for what's keeping the kids indoors now instead of literally running the neighborhood are manifold. In the 80s there were far fewer indoor forms of entertainment to occupy the kids without driving mom batshit insane and making a mess of the place. Now the kids have tablets and gaming consoles, the outdoors is such a scary place when it's not full of gangs of children who know all the backyards better than the parents ostensibly owning them.
It's all rather depressing and the longer I live the more convinced I am that not adding my own kids to this state of affairs was the right move.
If I'm being honest, this is the same as other times I've encountered people talk about community. I've noticed that a lot of people talk about this in a very "other people are like this" sense. I have noticed the opposite. Other people are not like this. In fact, the normies are out there living normie life in a way that is perfectly community oriented and not at all problematic.
I think the explanation for lack of children is much simpler, but one that most cannot really admit: there is an opportunity cost to having children. An entire class of lifestyle will no longer be available to you realistically. Children are not expensive for the value they provide, but there are things you cannot spend a large amount of your time on.
My experience having kids is that we walk around with our baby and people love her. Random people will look over and say "oh my goodness, what a cute baby"[0], people will hold doors for us, airlines let us transport car seats for free and discount a seat for the child. In fact, I'd say the actual reason for a lot of things is more structural.
e.g. home regulations like double-staircases, or height restrictions, and so on constrain the form factors of homes that can be built; car regulations and market demand in a few-child world emphasize form factors that constrain family size; things like that.
Besides there is a great deal of social contagion in this subject. A friend of my wife's texted her saying (paraphrased) "to be honest, after seeing how cute your baby is I changed my mind on wanting kids"[0].
0: And as the father, I definitely think my baby is exceptionally cute, but in reality this is likely everyone else's experience.
> being out for the group instead of just yourself
This is so far removed from present day US. A large portion of the country enthusiastically/fanatically/religiously supports someone who thinks exclusively of himself.
I’m a father of 4 and I’m overloaded with community, have you tried finding a good church? That’s where people have found community for thousands of years.
We lived in one of those American planned communities shaped like a kidney. Our kid went to primary school just outside the HOA gates. He had been cutting through the bushes of our neighbor to get to school because it was faster than walking the 2.5 miles through the kidney shaped neighborhood. The one day the neighbor yelled at him and chased him all the way home. We started driving him to school after that and eventually left the neighborhood entirely.
I think we understatement just how hostile western society is to children these days. It's the small things, like an unwalkable and unbikeable neighborhoods, flights that force you to pay more to sit together, and the endless liability waivers.
Yeah I think the meritocracy pushed by America is at least in part responsible for this. Social validation for being a high-performing employee is much greater, than for being a member of the community.
There are plenty of volunteers at community events in my area that have prestigious jobs, and the strivers working to maximize opportunities for themselves actually seek these out as another opportunity for accolades and networking.
You just need to find people who actually have an interest in their community. You know who those people often are? Parents. I suspect the decline in birth rates, especially in urban areas, amplifies this in both directions.
I think the fear narrative in America is just completely out of whack. Besides gun shooting and ICE, there are no real threats.
The politicians have made it seem like there is a lot of there is so much threat but realistically normal people just exist. Stop filling for fox news and maga hate messaging.
It's tough convincing people that Google AI overviews are often very wrong. People think that if it's displayed so prominently on Google, it must be factually accurate right?
"AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more"
It's not mistakes, half the time it's completely wrong and total bullshit information. Even comparing it to other AI, if you put the same question into GPT 5.2 or Gemini, you get much more accurate answers.
It absolutely baffles me they didn't do more work or testing on this. Their (unofficial??) motto is literally Search. That's what they're known for. The fact it's trash is an unbelievably damning indictment of what they are
Testing on what? It produces answers, that's all it's meant to do. Not correct answers or factual answers; just answers.
Every AI company seems to push two points:
1. (Loudly) Our AI can accelerate human learning and understanding and push humanity into a new age of enlightenment.
2. (Fine print) Our AI cannot be relied on for any learning or understanding and it's entirely up to you to figure out if what our AI has confidently told you, and is vehemently arguing is factual, is even remotely correct in any sense whatsoever.
My favorite part of the AI overview is when it says "X is Y (20 sources)" and you click on the sources and Ctrl+F "X is Y" and none of them seem verbatim what the AI is saying they said so you're left wondering if the AI just made it up completely or it paraphrased something that is actually written in one of the sources.
If only we had the technology to display verbatim the text from a webpage in another webpage.
That's because decent (but still flawed) GenAI is expensive. The AI Overview model is even cheaper than the AI Mode model, which is cheaper than the Gemini free model, which is cheaper than the Gemini Thinking model, which is cheaer than the Gemini Pro model, which is still very misleading when working on human language source content. (It's much better at math and code).
I've gone through this cycle too, and what I realized is that as a developer a large part of your job is making sure the code you write works, is maintainable, and you can explain how it works.
reply