BurdensomeCount
Unable to escape TheMotte's cycle of Samsara...
The neighborhood of Hampstead is just at present exercised with a series of events which seem to run on lines parallel to those of what was known to the writers of headlines and "The Kensington Horror," or "The Stabbing Woman," or "The Woman in Black." During the past two or three days several cases have occurred of young children straying from home or neglecting to return from their playing on the Heath. In all these cases the children were too young to give any properly intelligible account of themselves, but the consensus of their excuses is that they had been with a "bloofer lady." It has always been late in the evening when they have been missed, and on two occasions the children have not been found until early in the following morning. It is generally supposed in the neighborhood that, as the first child missed gave as his reason for being away that a "bloofer lady" had asked him to come for a walk, the others had picked up the phrase and used it as occasion served. This is the more natural as the favorite game of the little ones at present is luring each other away by wiles. A correspondent writes us that to see some of the tiny tots pretending to be the"bloofer lady" is supremely funny. Some of our caricaturists might, he says, take a lesson in the irony of grotesque by comparing the reality and the picture. It is only in accordance with general principles of human nature that the "bloofer lady" should be the popular role at these al fresco performances.
User ID: 628
a comfortable £120k a year
£120k? Even junior commerical barristers in their first year post pupillage earn multiples of that each year. From the website of One Essex Court (top Commercial Chambers), bolding mine:
As all members are self-employed, it impossible to give a particular figure for what junior tenants at One Essex Court can expect to earn. Earnings depend to a great extent on how hard members wish to work. However, barristers at One Essex Court can expect to earn comfortably in excess of their peers in comparable professions. As a guide, over the last three years, average first year income exceeded £360,000 and average second year earnings exceeded £475,000. New tenants are also offered an interest-free loan of up to £50,000 to assist with the transition from pupillage to tenancy.
Almost makes me question my life choices... I think I'd be good enough to get pupillage and then tenancy, maybe not at OEC but very likely at one of the other similar caliber sets, I know how to turn up the charm when necessary and while I don't speak in RP I think you could safely describe my accent as "exotic" in the good way.
People tell me the best part of being a barrister is getting others to effectively treat you like royalty: say a FTSE 100 CEO wants to discuss something and he wants a meeting in person. It's now his choice, either he can come visit you at your chambers, or if he's really that busy you're happy to go visit him, but he should be aware that all time from the minute you leave your house door to the minute you get back to your home's door is all chargeable time being billed at £500 per hour (plus VAT of course).
And of course the total independence that comes with being self employed means that even as a junior you can treat some very senior very commercially successful people (almost insulting them to their face when they say something legally stupid) in a way that a solicitor would be terrified of doing because they'd risk losing a massive contract with all the career implications that'd follow.
As a barrister it literally doesn't matter: make the CEO look like an idiot in front of the whole C-Suite and what are they going to do, not hire you again? That's perfectly fine because you're already rejecting so much work your diary would be full twice over. You even have the polite fiction to hide behind that you're an officer of the court and while the lay client pays for your time your first duties are actually to the court and you can not in good conscience do what the CEO wants you to do, what he wants to do will be shot down in court and he'll then have to pay the other side's barrister's fees so actually this is just tough love meant to save you money.
Plus if it's senior court litigation and you're not a natural person you need to have someone with higher rights (almost all barristers) represent you in court by law and every other barrister will give you basically the same answer as I have, so just take my advice and let the professional run the case. Fun fact: as a corporate firm you can do the work of a solicitor through your employees if you want to and you don't need to have a solicitor to run litigation in the higher courts, that's strongly recommended but it's left up to you, but legally you're not allowed to get one of your employees to do the job of a barrister, that's a criminal offense.
Also self employment means that if tonight you don't feel like working tomorrow as long as you don't have any deadlines or court appearance that's fine, there's no boss you're answerable to: you choose when you work. It's basically like being a minor Greek deity (or so my friends who're now reaching the point where they have an established practice tell me). And then there's the whole massive status that comes with being a barrister and especially once you take silk...
Yes, and if working Saturdays were expected of you you'd be getting paid more for the job. If you're arguing instead that as a white collar worker you're paid for what you produce rather than time put in then yes, I agree, if through future tech people are able to do in 4 days what they currently need to do in 5 then we should move over to 4 day work week as standard: the results produced by the job are the same for the same pay for the employee, they just get an extra day of the week free for them to do what they want with. It'd be the great increase to general societal welfare in the last 100 years. There's no reason why the benefits of the extra productivity should accrue to the owners of capital rather than labour.
Schilling fences are a recognised term going back to the Great Scott himself: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Kbm6QnJv9dgWsPHQP/schelling-fences-on-slippery-slopes
Even reading this makes me go "yuck" at the whole business model of these places. Prop shops etc. manage to produce more value per employee by only working them 40-50 hours a week (notable exceptions excepted) than investment banks manage. All that talent which could be put to good use elsewhere to benefit humanity gets wasted in IB make work.
I know places like Jane Street etc. are expanding out into more traditional type banking and trying to eat the lunch of these dinosaurs billing $100m on something that can be done faster and better by smarter people running a leaner operation but providing a more complete service for under $10 million (while the employees still work something resembling a 9-5).
Similarly in the legal world I know there are now barristers who with their junior bill around £700-£800 an hour but as a one two team coupled with a very hands off instructing solicitor produce more robust documents with a faster turnaround than the overcharging magic circle firms but the MC firms still get a ton of business from clueless corporate charging more to produce worse results just because clients want to communicate with people that have "Clifford Chance" on their letterhead rather than "4 Stone Buildings" even though your average junior at 4SB is higher human capital than a partner at Clifford Chance.
If you want to work for money you can also work 6 days a week over 5 and get more money, and yet very few people, even those who enter the white collar world for money, do this. If there's a societal shift working Fridays is going to end up looking as quaint to Westerners as working Saturdays does to the right now (plenty of parts of the world where working Saturdays is normalized). We keep it at 4 days to start with because we need to take baby steps, it's a small move of the Schilling fence and once its normalised and if productivity has gone up so much we can shift over to a 3 day week as a society then we'll do that, the down to 2 days and so on if general societal productivity allows it.
Techbros really have had horrendous PR as a class and it's not helped that people associate the average techbro with the people at the top of the techbro pyramid like Zuck and Musk etc. and so are happy with seeing them suffer, even though their suffering is often done to benefit people like Zuck and Musk etc. (less headcount, more automation).
Fortunate log(N) grows really slowly compared to N. Doubling N only requires adding a constant amount of extra overhead regardless of how big your company is, which can easily be handled by big employers.
The true extra costs of doubling N is the doubling of the total salaries you'll have to pay out, not the O(log(N)) extra overhead and if AI increases productivity to the point where the former is viable then the increased costs of the latter will be easily covered by a few extra months of productivity gains, your argument is at best one that this transition might have to be delayed for a few months to account for overhead costs, not one that it's not feasible.
You're already getting O(N) increase in costs due to the extra headcount by paying people the same but working them for half as long, the O(log(N)) increase in overhead is a minor triviality compared to that.
Nah, I don't think the people in charge of decisions like this think far enough ahead to consider the increased amount of internal competition etc., rather their thought process is a lot more base: they want to win the status competition with their current peers, and the way they do this is by having higher PnL per partner etc (PnL envy, like I said) and if they have to treat their workers as badly as possible to eek out those last few percentages then they'll absolutely do that for their own self ego.
Story I was told about someone who witnessed this event first hand (and who I have reasons to trust): Apparently one year Ken Griffin (Citadel dude) got visibly super angry at his senior team and demanded changes because Millennium (run by rival Izzy Englander) had managed to make more money than Citadel had done that year, even though it had been a very good year for Citadel compared to its average performance too. People like that don't belong anywhere near the reins of power in a society that has its head screwed on correctly.
that works
Due to the usual cost disease considerations if the rest of society moved over to 30 hour weeks you'd see big pay bumps for 45 hour days in retail environments compared to the current situation.
This is obviously the correct solution. AI is going to reduce the need for human labour by increasing productivity; rather than transferring the fruits of this productivity to the owners of capital it's much better to transfer it to labour instead by mandating a three (or even two) day work week as standard on the same pay as before, thereby not only creating a lot of jobs to coutneract the job loss from AI but also helping people get more of their own free time.
I've long been a proponent of a forced average long term (over say 6 months) 40 hour work week for Investment Banks etc., sure they can make you work a 100 hour week when a deal is close but to make up for that they need to give you a week and a half off to rest and recover. If the IB wants to preserve its man hours it can simply hire a lot more people, it's not like there's a shortage of capable people who want to go in that area or they don't have the money to do this.
The reason this doesn't happen is simply because the people at the top want to maximize their "PnL per partner" which is an argument I've started to see as more and more bullshit over the years (if you're happy with a yearly $2 million PnL per partner you shouldn't be any less or more happy if the people in $RIVAL_BANK are making $0.5 million or $5 million in PnL per partner, anything else is just PnL envy and should be beaten out of you by the government).
This genuinely could be a real false flag.
Yes, but their EU operations exist because the Eurocrats allow them to. Such a proposal would mean their EU operations are no longer viable and they have to choose between the US and EU. Yes of course they are going to choose to keep the US operations but that means a full sale of the EU operations to an entity which will be EU based and therefore comply with the Eurocrats.
This will give the EU ready made versions of their own services that they don't need to build up from scratch, a bit like how McDonald's still exists in Russia after McDonald's International left the country, the restaurants just changed their name but offer basically the same food at basically the same prices, Russia didn't need to build up their McDonald's replacement from scratch.
Just shows the importance of having your own versions of the services which are necessary for daily life. Europe made the mistake of funneling its resources to paying for the welfare of low human capital instead of developing indigenous service providers. Now it's suffering the consequences. The hope would be that they learn their lessons, cut welfare and move the money into long term US (and China) independent services. Payment processors are a good starting point, even places like Nigeria have fully functional home grown versions like Verve.
In the short term they really should force the American companies to lift these sanctions or suffer just as nasty consequences in Europe as not following the sanctions would inflict upon them in the US. This would basically force a divestment of the EU business by the company which would give the EU a good starting point for their own versions of these services.
I haven't seen the rdrama pink theme etc. but have been having loading issues over the last few days. Something somewhere is broken.
These days I just use Google Docs which is browser based. Exactly the same product on Windows vs Unix. Microsoft Office is basically dead (plus if you really like Office there's an online version which works on Linux).
If GabeN brings about the Year of the Linux Desktop I will praise him to the end of my days.
And here we see C users talking about how bugs are actually features one should be glad of. All I'll say is that this would never have happened in Rust (which is unironically a superior language) because the type mismatch between a struct and a struct* would mean the program would never have compiled and rustc would have provided a helpful error message bringing up the mismatch and told you the correct thing to do.
And what's more, AI + third worlder is closer in productivity to AI + westerner than the third worlder alone is vs a westerner. Prepare for more offshoring of western cushy jobs.
Ubuntu UI is very good these days, and MacOS is known for its UI. You hardly ever have to use the Terminal these days unless you want to (which you should, writing commands to do a simple task is faster than the multiple clicks normally needed to do the same thing via GUI).
I'm fine wirh backend delays forcing the end of the ad, it's better to stare at a blank screen than have typical advertising slop served to you.
If you're not using a Unix based system in 2025 what are you even doing?
Adblock and it's mobile equivalents like AdGuard/NewPipe mean you never need to subscribe to YouTube etc.
I agree with HBD. That doesn't mean there are no 130+ IQ Africans that it's good for a country to bring in. Yes there's some reversion to the mean but that just means increasing the thresholds on what you admit people so that even their children are still significantly above the western average.
I do dispute the Lynn IQ numbers. They're really not accurate. Sasha Gusev had a pretty good writeup a while ago. But that's neither here nor there for my main argument.
I agree IQ is a very good measure of who you want vs don't want. I agree it's fine to make probabilistic judgments. What happened with Indians in Canada was Canada's own stupidity in importing low IQ Punjabi farmers by the boatload, which they are now paying for, it's got nothing to do with importing top tier human beings. The reason low tier people are imported is that there are lots of low tier jobs that must be done which top tier foreigners or low tier natives refuse to do at reasonable wages, it's a completely separate problem to that of high skill immigration. I'm perfectly in favour of a policy which puts the yoke back on the necks of low tier natives so that they do low tier jobs for proper pay (thereby removing the need for low tier immigrants, what I find galling about low tier natives is not tha they are low tier, but that they are low tier but pretend to be equal to their betters) but democracy means they have more votes than me...
Nah, I'm happy here in the UK, I'm in one of the few industries where the pay disparity between the US and UK is tolerable (plus the pay is high enough anyways). Since the Trump election (and even for a while before then) I've found the charms of Old Blighty (minus the people) growing on me.
- Prev
- Next

Ah, my fault, I didn't even know they were spelt differently.
More options
Context Copy link