insightcheck

> "I wonder how often people succeed with these sorts of business models, which seem to be summarizable as "copy something extremely successful exactly, wait for them to fuck up sufficiently badly, and make sure migrating is really easy."

It definitely happens: another example that seems fitting was with LastPass. A lot of users (at least a few I know personally) migrated to Bitwarden after they changed its free plan, and many other long-time premium users also switched services due to bugs. Switching between password managers is a lot easier than one might expect (due to standardized database formats).

I'm not sure if many companies follow this plan intentionally, as it's not a given that the market leader(s) will eventually fail, but companies certainly benefit when former market leaders slip up.

It's a normal, universal human response to protest when something you're used to is no longer there. Even though I don't share the outrage, there's nothing 'current year'/particularly contemporary about it.

The fandoms for indie games (e.g. Papers, Please [0] and several others for less popular games) remain active, though not particularly curated. It's still nice to find some for particularly niche games, as some information (even if too opinionated or incomplete) is better than nothing for smaller games.

[0] https://papersplease.fandom.com/wiki/Papers_Please_Wiki

The more fragile presence of the information is actually a feature to some. If messages are more permanent and accessible, people can be more likely to stop and think before replying for more substantive discussion, instead of having a free-flowing conversation.

I generally also prefer forums that are searchable and public, but it's nice to have a real-time communication with someone over Discord (e.g. a couple sentences per message that gets responses, with some jokes sprinkled in). I think it's a lot easier to develop a one-to-one interaction or relationship with someone over Discord, versus forums structured like HN or Reddit.

It depends on the user. You could argue that many users in technical roles would see a professional interface, as one with less white space that allows for more information on the screen at once. However, many users in non-technical roles actually prefer more white space. This is why the default options for newer software redesigns (e.g. Outlook) favor more white space, with a "compact" options in the settings for users who prefer more information.

I think the Teams design team tried to compromise by making the interface approachable enough for the greatest number of users. But for one reason or another (strategy to differentiate from Slack, company DNA, or other reasons), they couldn't make the interface subjectively feel more casual and less professional.

Everything from the name ("Microsoft Teams") to the logo (a bunch of people, versus the Slack logo with eyes and a mouth) is more serious, even if the team tried to soften it a bit by using less formal language in the interface.

An interesting partial solution to an older, niche Discord community I've found was the creation and sharing of a "lore document" of important insights and parts of the community's history.

I generally agree that knowledge-sharing helps more people if it's easily searchable via Google, but then again, it's also possible that the interactions would be different without the exclusivity. Many events in the community's history may have never happened if it were more public.

The main advantage that Slack has, especially for many people in non-technical roles, is the just-professional-enough user interface over the casual look of Discord.

I've been in Discord servers for volunteer work, and while it generally works pretty great, the system feels a lot more casual to users (e.g. with non-human profile pictures). On the other end of the spectrum, Microsoft Teams is almost too professional, and has an emotional association of being too corporate/formal for more pleasant use.

Discord is also tougher to create group conversations easily (you need to be Friends first). Though, if message history is really that important, it could be a worthwhile tradeoff.

My initial reaction to Slack's change was that it's not a big deal. In the small communities I've worked with through Slack, we generally assumed that Slack messages are temporary, and we'd hit the former 10,000 message limit someday. We used email for more permanent communication, so the expectation of permanency wasn't changed.

However, it was interesting to see the company's data that is supporting the headline's assertion (in terms of migrations to the service after the Slack change). I'm also part of a smaller Slack group of a few people, and in abstract, it's understandable that it will be sad to see the older messages disappear. But then again, even in the tiny group, I always thought we'd hit the old 10,000 message limit someday, and never personally expected the messages to stay permanently.

The academic paper that the article reports on is at (PDF): https://www.edworkingpapers.com/sites/default/files/ai22-591...

A caveat is that the results apply to elementary students taking a math course. A quote from the abstract that summarizes part of the results is: “Upper-elementary teachers who excel at raising students’ math test scores often are less successful at improving student-reported engagement in class (and vice versa). Further, the teaching practices that improve math test scores (e.g., cognitively demanding content) can simultaneously decrease engagement.”

Speculatively with my own analysis, perhaps rote practice is the best way to improve early math scores, though I wonder if this turns people away from math as they grow older.

Thanks, that makes much more sense. I was visualizing the problem vehicle as a stick shift with the neutral in any of position but the center (aka in an "in gear" position), which in hindsight wouldn't work.

Yelchin's case looks like a consequence of an unconventional user design for the gearstick, rather than a consequence of manual cars in general.

From The Washington Post [0]: "The parents of Anton Yelchin, the “Star Trek” actor who died in 2016 when his SUV rolled down his driveway and trapped him against a security gate, have reached a settlement with the makers of Jeep Grand Cherokee.

"[..] [In 2015], [the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration] began investigating the unconventional gearstick design on these cars, which was causing crashes because drivers were mistakenly shifting to neutral when they thought they were shifting to park.

"With a regular gearstick, drivers choose a transmission option (park, reverse, neutral, drive, etc.) by moving the stick into the corresponding notch or detent. Drivers can feel the stick settle into position.

"But a new, different, design was used in the cars affected by the recall, which include certain recent models of the Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger, and Jeep Grand Cherokee."

[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/w...

I can see it both ways. I initially thought the employer was already nice enough to give the applicant a chance, instead of denying at the outset.

But then I remembered my own experiences of putting in a lot of work to apply for an opportunity, and then getting a curt denial saying I wasn’t what the employer was looking for, or not up to the task at the time.

I think it’s important to remember the feelings of getting rejected like that. Later on, when I was in a position of rejecting candidates, I volunteered the time to send longer responses with minor feedback despite the opportunity cost, just because I remembered what it was like to be an applicant.

Eh, the McMurry textbook is fine and credible. At least several universities with top undergraduate chemistry programs still use it for assigned reading for their introductory courses.

> "It has nothing to do with students - it is all about the publisher wanting more money and wanting to shut down the used book market."

The publisher could have charged for both the book (at the least, a relatively small fee just for online access to a version with DRM that needs special software to view) and the online supplementary materials.

The move initiated by the author to make the book open source leaves money on the table, while also making the latest edition of the book easier to access for students.

[SPOILERS] If you click "Present" lots of times, there are other variations too:

"These are the best iPhones we've ever created."

"Wow, what an amazing day!"

"This is a big upgrade!"

Out of curiosity, why would you move the power button to the top? I remember this was the configuration for the old iPod Touch, but with the power button along the side, it's easier to press the power button with your thumb in one-handed use.

The mechanism of becoming open access via a legal loophole was quite interesting. From the article:

“The author of a popular organic chemistry textbook is making it freely available to students after learning about a loophole in his copyright agreement with the publisher.

“John McMurry’s Organic Chemistry has been one of the best selling chemistry textbooks since it was first printed in 1984. Under his agreement with Cengage Learning, the book’s publisher, McMurry realised he could ask for the book’s copyright to be returned to him 30 years after it was first printed. Without copyright of the first edition, the publisher is unable to produce any more new editions, McMurry notes.

“McMurry, an emeritus professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Cornell University, US, says the move was a tribute to his son who passed away from cystic fibrosis three years ago.”

Haha. I was thinking along similar lines as kuboble, but then I'm someone in the process of trying to learn C.

I agree, upon further thought, that at least an error message would be better for the user (e.g. "Maximum timer duration exceeded").

> "If I was a creative writer then I think the AI could help me with plot outlines or get over writing blocks. But otherwise I'm not grasping why this is going to automate some huge number of jobs."

Writing definitely looks like the key use case. The New Yorker used GPT-3 to write the concluding sentence for one of their articles [0], and I believe The Economist did the same (but for a slightly greater length; though I couldn't find the source just now). It's actually a bit hard to come up with a good conclusion, so this could save some effort and trouble. Separately, GPT-3 can also likely be used for articles about sports, especially if the purpose is to track changes on a scoreboard and present the changes with an article written in prose, versus displayed in a table.

It's quite fair that marketing blogs may not be interesting to many readers, but they can be useful for SEO/boosting the search engine rankings of a website. So, a cash-strapped early or small company could save money from freelance copywriting to GPT-3 if they're not looking for anything fancy, and a lot of people work as freelance copywriters.

I agree that this may not displace anyone in the high-end/high quality segment of copywriting, but it could reduce demand for content farms in the future (i.e. any application where low-quality copywriting written on a short notice is in-demand).

[0] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/10/14/can-a-machine-...

I was curious and looked up reviews for Sceptre, but according to some discussions on Reddit, they have build quality issues. One of the threads [0] had a discussion on picture quality and build quality issues.

Another subreddit [1] even has an automoderator comment that says getting a smart TV and not hooking it up to the internet is the best option. The automoderator also writes that if one is certain about going non-Smart, then one should "look at a projector or a Commercial Display. A projector means you will also 100% need audio with it. A Commercial Display or Hospitality TV you could pay up to twice or even more for the same TV (or worse) without smart features."

However, I'm not sure how reliable that automoderated comment on r/4kTV is.

[0] https://old.reddit.com/r/hometheater/comments/a25d5m/are_sce...

[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/4kTV/comments/qt9wvf/nonsmart_tvs/

It's a valid option, but an alternative is to stay in the country and try to lobby and advocate for change within the country.

There is a certain point where lobbying and advocacy can be futile, and emigration is a stronger option. For example, in Venezuela's recent history, it went from a prosperous country to an economically devastated one, and the population fell in the 2010s as a result [0].

However, Belgium is in a much better place in terms of political stability. It's far more likely that advocacy can be effective. However, it takes a lot of time, and you can give up a lot of potential earnings by staying and trying to advocate. If one has an attachment to a country, especially as a citizen, one can find a lot of value in trying to introduce reforms instead of emigrating.

[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=Venezuela+population+over+ti...

> "if he wrote/called each one of them, would he get a better response?"

Honestly, yes. From the social media post in the article, it's quite easy to interpret the question "How come I can’t find something similar for Belgium?" as rhetorical, and intended to raise awareness more than to get a response. The tone is also accusatory (nothing wrong with this, but it's less likely to get a response on social media), so there's less benefit for an official response on social media that will invite further scrutiny.

The post also tags multiple representatives. If he tagged just one, there would already be a greater likelihood of a response, otherwise each person can deflect the question to the rest of the group.

If he sent a personalized email or letter to a single representative with a question or proposal (then waiting, and emailing a new representative if they didn't respond), then he could have been redirected to the most appropriate person. It's generally recognized that calls/emails/letters are quite effective. You can see it in campaigns where people are asked to "call/send an email" to their representative, instead of getting asked to tag them on social media.

Alternatively, one can think critically on a case-by-case basis, instead of either trusting nothing at all or giving uncritical trust based on a source.

I'm not the same user, but this HN thread from 2018 covers the "brain drain" of Canadian technical workers to the US due to much higher salaries: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16996420

The general idea is that the most talented Canadians leave the country. This argument has a lot of merit, but if you look at the right places, you can still find a lot of really high talent in the country (e.g. medical research, computer science research, and animation).

I initially thought along the same lines from first principles, that there is no incentive for physicians to suggest euthanasia.

But in addition to the case from Foley quoted by another commenter, the article backs it up with another claim given by a named source: "Frazee cited the case of Candice Lewis, a 25-year-old woman who has cerebral palsy and spina bifida. Lewis’ mother, Sheila Elson, took her to an emergency room in Newfoundland five years ago. During her hospital stay, a doctor said Lewis was a candidate for euthanasia and that if her mother chose not to pursue it, that would be “selfish,” Elson told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation."

So, it looks credible that it's happening in practice. I can only speculate as to why, but I revised my initial belief because it was hypothetical, after reading about the accounts that look objective.

Wow, that's completely correct. From the article:

"Roger Foley, who has a degenerative brain disorder and is hospitalized in London, Ontario, was so alarmed by staffers mentioning euthanasia that he began secretly recording some of their conversations.

"In one recording obtained by the AP, the hospital’s director of ethics told Foley that for him to remain in the hospital, it would cost “north of $1,500 a day.” Foley replied that mentioning fees felt like coercion and asked what plan there was for his long-term care.

"“Roger, this is not my show,” the ethicist responded. “My piece of this was to talk to you, (to see) if you had an interest in assisted dying.”

"Foley said he had never previously mentioned euthanasia. The hospital says there is no prohibition on staff raising the issue."

I'm shocked. For the benefit of the doubt, since the quote doesn't include broader context, it's possible that the information was relevant in some way independent of guilting the patient, or the ethicist was being unintentionally awkward.

But given the information presented in the article, it's not a good look for the hospital, which should be prioritizing patient outcomes far above cost savings.

Yeah, the vast majority of people would see it as erratic to break up with someone for not responding to a text within a few seconds. It's not culture or technology that's the issue, but the personality of the anxious person who ask to break up over just that.

I can show you one counter-example, which should work.

Hunter College High School in New York City is a public school, and its students disproportionately end up in top US universities (from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_College_High_School).

The graduates of the private high school near the neighborhood I grew up in, however, mostly ended up as accountants after attending a local public university. For specifics, you can take most private high schools in the US (even many of the very expensive ones), and they won't have as good outcomes recorded for their students as Hunter or its equivalent public schools in New York City.

My view is that voting can still have a significant impact, even if you lose an election. A district seen as "safe" for one party that suddenly becomes more contested after one election (which happened many times recently) can inspire more attention to the district and its issues by more parties.

A narrow win or loss, in many contexts, can also lead to different decisions by the winners (especially if they seek re-election later) compared to a massive win or massive loss. In addition, voting is free (except for the time spent), whereas the costs from lottery tickets can add up.

I agree with you, though, that the lottery can actually have societal benefits. A notable example is that in Georgia, USA, a scholarship program for university is funded entirely by the state's lottery system (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOPE_Scholarship).

I couldn't find data from a quick search, though I did find a study where researchers groups with a higher diversity of "ethnicity, age, gender, and affiliation" tended to have higher citation counts. [1]

Still, it's not too out there to say that a researcher who grew up in a low-income family can provide a very useful perspective for designing research for addressing poverty (even at least for designing research questions and better recruiting participants). I concede that the evidence may not reach the bar for large, massive investment, but it could at least be promising for at least some funding as a starting point—at least some needs-based scholarships.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6701939/

I can think of a few specific cases where social media status can have an effect for a regular person (more specifically, a non-influencer), though you're right that status typically doesn't block off main features.

- For LinkedIn, there have been cases where certain job positions (typically sales, marketing, and social media management) actually prefer candidates to have a certain number of followers (500+) as evidence they are good at using social networks.

- For Twitter, some people in certain social circles allegedly judge potential dates based on their number of Twitter followers. At a less extreme sense, some people judge others with wariness if they have no social media accounts. You can easily avoid having deep relationships with these people, but status can have real-life effects. Separately for Twitter, you may be more likely to get customer support by publicly mentioning a company, if you have more followers.

- Lastly for Reddit, having less karma or a newer account raises suspicions you are a bot (some subreddits actually forbid newer accounts).

In practice, none of these really matter if you don't work in sales, don't date or befriend people who care too much about social media, don't comment on more mainstream subreddits where there are karma thresholds, and can do without mentioning companies publicly on Twitter for support as a last resort. However, there can be real-life effects from internet points.