Given the FAA rules on this (line of sight from operators), there's just no way that this could work. It basically defeats the whole purpose of using autonomous drones in the first place. Even if the rules were modified in their favor, it's dubious whether the infrastructure investment and potential for liability would be worth it for Amazon.
Half of the FAANGs don't even have such a title and the title even among those companies varies quite a lot. Google principal >> Amazon principal, for example.
Titles are not standard across the industry. Also, comparing Box, which has had a mostly flat stock price, to FAANG is a bit unfair. Most of the FAANGs have done really well over the past few years, so when you hear about compensation, people will often quote you their expected comp. Netflix and Facebook are probably the only true outliers though.
> Still, as an Amazon investor, I do wonder why Amazon has to do everything themselves. It makes me nervous that they are essentially building or their own ride sharing network rather than leveraging existing networks.
When Prime Now started, there were no other companies that were doing what Amazon wanted to do. Let alone, keep up with the expansion that Prime Now has realized over the past few years. In addition to all that, Amazon loves to optimize every little detail. Flex is the logistics infrastructure that didn't exist to support Prime Now and other delivery programs such as Fresh, .com packages, etc.
This is not exactly how it works. Managers at Amazon can request headcount all they want, but the request bubbles up and needs to be approved. Sometimes, there are top-level hiring freezes as well. The planning and hiring process is more complicated than that though.
These alliance or partnership deals rarely work out in the long-term. Voice shopping is still very nascent. Having two companies in the shopping pipeline can only cause problems and/or miss blind spots. Being vertically integrated is a huge advantage for Amazon.
Can anyone comment on how Waymo might come up with such a figure? Especially in the context of something that hasn't materialized yet (no revenue)? I assume this is towards the high-end of what they expect to get. Also, why would Uber want to push for making this figure public? Seems like it would be against their interests at this point.
From a tech perspective, we have developed systems that actually work much better than what Uber has to offer for our use-cases. Their systems have been developed to solve for the "real-time" dispatching scenarios. That's not what we're optimizing for with Flex. Hint: it's the opposite.
Watson winning $1 million on Jeopardy has to be one of the most remarkable marketing campaigns in tech history. I don't think they get enough credit for it. Every time I hear about IBM's Watson, the story is always prefaced with this Jeopardy event, which must be a huge help when getting business contracts. I think it's absolutely brilliant.
I'm completely aware of that. My wife is actually a school teacher so her salary is freely available online. I'm only arguing that being called out like this by name in a news article, is pretty...bogus. That's all.
Even though they want to use this specific person to showcase an example, I think that it's highly inconsiderate to post this fellow's name in the news article. The way the article is written, it just sounds like they're making an example out of him, when in reality, he's literally just doing his job.
Are they liable for those promises though? I am legitimately curious to know if they are contractually obligated to grow at a certain rate or be at certain valuation at this point in time.
This should be a warning to everyone that was affected by this. Even the dependencies that you don't normally think about go down at some point. For DNS, make sure you are using multiple DNS providers.
Was this when it was still in preview? Lambda is still pretty new having launched in November 2014. Reliability and features for Lambda are getting better though [1][2]. AWS seems pretty invested in Lambda, so I think it's just a matter of time until it feels like a 'mature' offering.
I would assume that they were lied to or deceived about the hours that they had to work given the monthly wage that was quoted in the article. I'm also guessing that since most of these workers came on visas, they probably thought that they could seek better work once they were in the US.
Amazon does this all of the time. They set the terms for what can be sold on their website. If the vendors can't agree to those terms, then they can't sell on the website. This is what happened with the recent e-books debate. However, you only hear about the high-profile cases. AWS really doesn't have much to do with those decisions, so I'm not seeing the argument this article is making.
This is huge for HBO. Although it will be a difficult battle, it seems that they are fully committed to breaking ties with traditional TV cable providers.
I love this idea, it's quite interesting. On the flip side, I made a change in some software at my work the other day to replace the use of a random in a unit test. The use of random was being used to populate some data. This language would make matters incredibly difficult to recreate bugs and even test software
Why is this surprising? CS is a relatively young major compared to other engineering degrees. Also, I would bet that a large majority of CS degrees have been handed out in the last 20 years. Probably more skewed towards the last 10.
I think what he is trying to say is that it could just emulate the terminal and read whatever is coming to it after it's executed. "Listening" for when the user types in sudo...
I don't think it's a concern. The investors were out there all along, she just had to find them. Talking about efficient/inefficiency doesn't make much sense here.
I don't agree with this. Good developers realize that no work is beneath them. Getting things 'right' takes hard work and part of that work can be menial at times. Part of being a good engineer is understanding that completing a project is both glamorous and boring at times.