Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | wredcoll's commentslogin

Aside from the part where you have to raise them, sure.

If everyone had kids at 18-20, then the grandparents could take care of the grandkids while in their 40s while the parents build their careers from 20-40, then start taking care of the grandkids as the cycle repeats

And then you end up raising your grandkids instead of the kids you gave birth to. It's not something that comes without cost. And what if you don't particularly trust your parents to raise kids? I suppose you would have no idea whether you did or not, because they would not have parented you...

Peoples 40s and 50s are their most productive years. We would be better off just letting people take 10 years off in their twenties - but most people would just party party party (what they do anyway)

Given two parents, there are four grandparents. Sharing the load across six people is much better than sharing between two.

Those four grandparents could end up with anywhere from 1-8+ grandkids though, depending on how many children they had, and how many grandchildren come along

have you heard of people not surviving into old age, or not being present or not being able to take care of kids? What the fuck is wrong with people in this comment section?

> have you heard of people not surviving into old age

not really, overall the life expectancy is growing well over 80 years old. unless you live, like, in the woods and feed off berries and hunting or something like that.

and yeah sure there might be somebody that loses their parents at 15, absolutely. i'm sorry for them, but they are not statistically representative in any way.


ladies and gentlemen, the fucking state of hn.

grounded in reality you mean?

It really seems you have no idea what you’re talking about.

I have a couple of friends married for about 4-5 years, with a 4-years old son and a one year old daughter. They both have graduate degrees and stable jobs. They are near 40 years old.

Man, they are two zombies. They are drained. They push forward for the immense love of their kids but it’s incredibly evident they’re drained.

And the thing is… having kids at almost 40 should really be discouraged. They simply don’t have the same energy they had when they were 20, of course. Heck, i’m 33 and it’s evident to me I don’t have the same energy as when I was 23.

This modern idea that one should postpone having kids is incredibly stupid, I hope at some point society will self-correct somehow.


ya’ll are talking about 2 separate extremes. Of course each extreme has its own set of cons. Hardly surprising.

At the end of the day it’s a moot point. You can’t pick when you find love and a suitable partner. :)


> You can’t pick when you find love and a suitable partner. :)

that's a moot point as well.

people find suitable partners all the time, but they don't even take having kids in consideration before a certain age


What do they look like when I put it in a url?

Use whatever encoding you want? Base64 is probably one of the most practical, but you're not obligated to use that.

UUIDs don't use base64

You can absolutely encode a UUID in base64, as you can any string of 128 bits.

128 random bits in some random format aren't a uuid. 0.2ml of water isn't a raindrop. If I say "you can provide me with a uuid" and you give me a base64-encoded string, it's getting rejected by validation. If I say "this text needs to be a Unicode string" and you give me a base64-encoded Unicode string's byte array, it's not going to go well.

Why are you implying that converting from base64 to and from standard UUID representation (hyphen-delimited hexadecimal) is more than a trivial operation? Either client or server can do this at any point.

Does Postgres not truly support UUID because it internally represents it as 128 bits instead of a huge number of encoded bytes in the standard representation? Of course not.


Yeah but if he's just a little crueler to brown people none of this will matter.

> Many cool clubs already put stickers on phone cameras.

Can you elaborate on this?



Must be an apple thing

AI involves a large corporation profiting from violating current copyeight standards in a way that enriches a small minority while appearing to harm to large majority, as well as being hypocritical.

Random people arguing for expanded public domain is not the same thing.


Really it just continues to demonstrate that "code quality" is not and was not a requirement.

Even with supposedly expert human hand written software powering our products for the last decades, they frequently crash, have outages, and show all sorts of smaller bugs.

There are literally too many examples to count of video games being released with nigh-unplayable amounts of bugs and still selling millions and producing sequels.

Windows 95 and friends were famously buggy and crash prone yet produced one of the most valuable companies in the world.


It's like it's a big place with more than one thing happening at the same time.

Yeah, those parents whose kids died from tainted milk products sure were lazy. How dare they cry that the state should do something?

How is giving spoiled milk equivalent to not being able to talk with your child on how the computer works?

> not being able to talk with your child on how the computer works?

What?

"The internet" is extremely widely available and full of hazards of all sorts, some intentional, some deliberate.

I'm pushing back on this idea that it's desirable or even possible for "the parent" to completely protect their children from these hazards. Most of them can't even protect themselves.

We can demand that services, especially child accessible ones, be safer, without also expecting parents to abandon all responsibility.


The argument is that they are selling a product they know is "spoiled", but the analogy breaks down and actually becomes more like you allow your children to smoke cigarettes or dink alcohol regularly. They often knew they were lying and saying they were over 13 to access services, but hey, your kid can't be the only not one smoking cigarettes or drinking, right?

Not too long ago, it wasn't that uncommon for children to smoke. Hell, now they're starting to vape.

What percentage of those do you think are being "allowed" to do so by their parents?


As a present parent: there is no way your child smoked cigarettes daily and you didn't know as a parent.

Literally no, thats not what that sentence says.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: