Wow, that's hilarious. So essentially hiring could be identical across all age groups, but due to a glitch in the analysis (young people don't stay young, who knew?), it appears that younger people are losing jobs more than the rest.

I'd be interested to see more discussion on Section 174, how engineer salaries suddenly triggered a higher tax bill in 2022. https://qz.com/tech-layoffs-tax-code-trump-section-174-micro...

Did Section 174 changes accelerate tech job losses? It's unclear from the paper because they only look at the data excluding tech firms, not only tech firms.

I want to see cause-and-effect: the cause being tax changes, the effect being tech firm layoffs, but they don't analyze the effect.

I think it will be effective. This stuff is hard. There used to be many competitors capable of the best process technology: TI, GlobalFoundries, Intel, IBM, Samsung, TSMC.

Canon, Nikon, ASML all used to have competitive lithography machines.

Now it’s just TSMC and Samsung at the edge, and only ASML supplies the latest lithography machines.

China will probably catch up quickly but the pace will be nonlinear and illusory. They will hit diminishing returns just like everyone else has.

They’ve probably stolen every bit of semiconductor IP they can through economic coercion or espionage.

All they can do now is out-innovate everyone else and that will take a long time. But who knows, their pace of advancement since Mao died has been impressive.

I don't think humans are good at assessing the accuracy of their own opinions either and I'm not sure how AI is going to do it. Usually what corrects us is failure: some external stimulus that is indifferent or hostile to us.

As Mazer Rackham from Ender's Game said: "Only the enemy shows you where you are weak."

See other comment on that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44697990#44698111

I’d prefer to invest in languages that are actually useful to my team. I want to eat my team’s dogfood so I can help them with issues.