Not OP, but personally it's just sad to see someone that you view as a historically great mind getting distracted by nonsense, like if a great mathematician suddenly stopped their research to focus on flat earth and contrails
Also worth noting companies like Cutco use a similar script and a cold-calling approach, it doesn't work nearly as well as it used to though because most people don't answer numbers they don't know, so they train people to leave a message and say that a close friend (the reference) told you to call them
I'd like to see it change the way dental insurance works, so that e.g. an AI diagnosis will legally be fully covered by the insurance, and anything that can't be verified through that would be considered an elective procedure. In the US dental insurance works basically opposite of health insurance - they only cover the basic checkups and you have to pay for any real medical needs. It's like if car insurance only covered oil changes and tire rotations but not accidents
I think the biggest thing that I haven't seen in another comment is that companies aren't being explicitly ageist, they just want cheaper labor and younger/less experienced people are willing to work for less money. I'm sure plenty of companies would be more than happy if you said "I have decades of experience but I'll take the salary of a junior position".
Without something similar to a union or a change in laws to better incentivize pay raises, I don't see a great way out of this :/
I'd say my company is "grey-hair-friendly", but they're still hiring for way more junior roles than senior roles. I'm not sure if there are companies that explicitly don't hire junior engineers, but then you'd at least be competing against other people looking for the same salary range. Working with a recruiter might also be a good idea if they can help find companies that would be a good match
Agreed with this, rewarding users doesn't make much sense in this context, I don't want to know what other users are publishing I want to know what's the best result across the internet.
How much will "wikipedia" be using this search engine? They should probably be on the first page of a lot of queries but they wouldn't ever be using this.
It's definitely a cool idea but I wouldn't call it a search engine, maybe something some "community search engine"? Definitely a good use for this similar to stackoverflow for teams where you can bias results towards your own network
Relying on specific people was never a good strategy, people will change but this will be a good test of their crazy governance structure. I think of it similar to political systems - if it can't withstand someone fully malicious getting in power then it's not a good system
I agree there's somewhat more trust involved, e.g. you don't know if they go to the park for the day and just check notifications on their phone, but you still have all the performance metrics to look at. If the person is doing all their work then it might be better to let them take that day at the park when they feel like it, especially if it's a salary position then you're more expected to do a certain amount of work then to be working a certain amount of hours.
Worst case you can always ask someone "hey can you show me what you did last week?" and it should be clear if someone isn't handling their responsibilities.
COVID of course influenced this a bunch, but I've been at a company a few years and saw it grow from 30->130 employees - originally we were fully in office, then remote for covid, now it's settling back in to a hybrid approach where teams decide for themselves what works best (sales is generally in every day, dev is a few days a month if they're local), and then we have some requests to all come in to the office if the board/clients are coming in.
My hope for the future is that we basically pay for commuting time, so then employers can decide if it's worth asking someone to come in when they live farther away. Also seems like management does go in more for political reasons but I think that's specific to the org. I'm a huge fan of the way Automattic sets up their culture where it's remote-first so you don't end up with that two-tiered system - you can go in to an office if you want but everything has to be done online so there's a record to look back on later
We had one of these in my highschool woodshop - they would demo it once a year on the parents night because of the expense. I'd rather see this regulated in a way that says places like schools or production woodshops would need these from an insurance perspective, but home woodshops wouldn't be required to
This is the number we've been using recently, but it's been different in the past and there's no reason to keep using it, especially when we have data showing that 25 is the age your decision making faculties are generally fully developed
> Because at 18 people are responsible for their own actions
This is only because we arbitrarily picked an age - we used to consider people responsible for their own actions at much younger ages, it makes sense to change the number when we get new science supporting that. If the argument is that we shouldn't use brain development as a reason to restrict young people, then why not lower the drinking age again or get rid of it?
The US has laws against interfering with GPS, but I don't think there's any global laws about GPS jamming, you'd need something from the UN but it doesn't seem like most countries would want to give up that ability - we can't even get people to stop making nukes and they have a much higher danger
> If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and pull it out six inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out that's not progress. Progress is healing the wound that the blow made. And they haven't even pulled the knife out much less heal the wound. They won't even admit the knife is there.
This is a big pet peeve of mine, I can't think of a reason to ever send a docx or similar over email - if it's not done yet then it should be somewhere we can both access it so we don't end up with different versions, and if it is done then PDFs are easier to work with.
I think it's habit more than anything - if you've been using Word for 20 years and there wasn't a better option than email you're likely to continue that instead of taking time to learn a new workflow
Uploading word documents to Teams like that is extra ironic because Teams uses SharePoint to store attachments, so you're taking more steps to do the same thing and end up with less functionality
My main use case has been when you need to work on a document on multiple computers, or collaboratively. In that case it solves a big problem of dealing with flash drives, different versions, and email attachments/updates
My partner has had issues that could be fixed with a few messages and the doctor just refused to respond and said they have to wait until the next appointment. It begins to feel like malpractice when they're refusing to fix simple issues because of billing limitations. I think the core issue here is that we're trying to make healthcare profitable when it probably shouldn't be. Stuff like healthcare, housing, and education _should_ be losing money because it's an investment in the population. If you have a hospital that's making money that seems like a bad sign
This type of thing makes me wish the only option was public defenders so you aren't able to just pay more and have better chances in court. That said - I still don't think Musk has a good chance here, he's lost cases against people with far less resources by just being confidently wrong, at some point paying more for lawyers doesn't help you
I'd even go a step further and set a maximum amount of parking in a given area to disincentivize driving. As an extreme example, if a mall is only allowed to have 5 parking spaces then they'll need to design around supporting public transit. So many places in the US are almost impossible to live in without owning a car - you might have bike paths if you're lucky, and in many places there aren't even sidewalks
Not at FAANG - but my company was scaling up and bought a much larger office space right before covid, so a lot of the push does seem to be "We just spent a bunch of money on this and need to justify it to investors, it looks bad when they come in and the office in 90% empty desks"
If you own a big office building and companies don't need as much office space then you can't charge as much for rent, and the property loses value. Similar to how online shopping has led to a bunch of malls closing down
> the decision C-suite have to make when planning projects
> in the setup that's decided
I'd argue this shouldn't be a top-down decision - you can just let teams and individuals decide what works best for them, then that can be communicated upwards so the company can plan office space/resource allocation
It's been around for a while, but interesting to see this and a Fireship video on it the same day. I was wondering if they did some new release or something but doesn't seem like it
I do the same! Using it for non-serious things just adds an extra level of irony. Funniest example I saw was "This is not a place of honor" on the back of some booty shorts
That is the point where we started adding greenhouse gases that lock in energy from the sun, we need to at least get back to those levels to start releasing some of the heat. Otherwise we're containing to add insulation to an oven that already overheating - you'd ideally want to take off all the insulation and the metal casing since you can't turn off the heat, but the casing isn't an option so we need to remove the insulation and hope it hasn't gotten too bad yet
In my experience the focus is on human connection and that why this criticism is here - this is a business which necessarily can't prioritize human connection over profit trying to motivate people to work more. I think it's all about the outcomes - if you say "we're a family - we give plenty of second chances and then help people find a new job" is very different from "we're a family, so you need to work late tonight to get this project done"
I'd agree that "family" implies you're going to put the relationship itself over most rational reasons, and businesses can't do that. If you want to say they're family then the business should also plan for a pension that all employees get or something similar - otherwise it's just a tactic to manipulate people
Of course you treat family members well when they "deliver" for you, the real part is when they can't deliver and you still support them.
At that point I'd think the general opinion is that they're operating as a company _instead of_ a family. Pitching investment ideas and getting cut off from support doesn't sound like a family. I think this is just something you kinda need to do with that much wealth, but I don't think it's an example of how any average family operates