The cities they are targeting probably send a disproportionate amount of tax money to the federal government. I really wish the mayors of these cities, and the governors of these states would start to talk about this imbalance.
You assume these organizations are filled with developers. From working for government, state higher ed, and health care for over 20 years, I can tell you, they are not. They are filled with techs who know how to call vendors (or are required to by leadership). So, when Epic (the EMR) system breaks and doctors and nurses can’t look up the info for an unconscious patient and the patient ends up dying, then yeah, the IT shop takes forever to patch things.
Just throwing this out there... Why not a simple rule to require all shares to be held for at least 24 hours before selling? It would certainly change the game in every way imaginable.
Your comment makes it so obvious why the current President, who busts norms on a daily basis, is so dangerous: no one is going to hold him accountable. "First they came..."
Given the number of job openings (491) for the company, who actually works there now? By that I mean, how can they already have a car, or know these kinds of specs, when there are that many positions to be filled...
Agreed about not looking at the keys. I know this is HN and people are always looking for technical solutions, but sometimes the best solution is the easiest.
I learned to type in college over a few weeks one summer while I was typing abstracts into a database. I thought I would never finish the work because I couldn’t type, so I forced myself to learn to touch type. I didn’t even put stickers on the keys; but I really think having real sentences to type, on topics that were of interest to me, helped. However, on the technology side, I have to admit, the clicky Apple II keyboard, with the cupped keys, was a benefit. But, if kids can learn to “type” on glass (mobile devices) as fast as they do, I think all it really takes is time and dedication.
Social media, and all of the "talking heads" on network news and talk radio, are basically in an arms race, just like advertisers have been for years. For instance, Coke can't stop advertising because then Pepsi or another brand will take over, i.e., they have to keep it up. We are now at that same point with politics: everyone has to keep it up, and even more so; constantly upping the ante. Facebook is the dominant platform for upping the ante, which gives them money, and more importantly, power.
Non-personalized all the way, and for many, many reasons. Two off the top of my head: 1) You already bought the product, and now you see ads for it for the next x weeks; 2) You may not want other people (like maybe a spouse) to know you were browsing for something (like a gift, or perhaps even something untoward).
On the second point, my spouse and I, each of us on our own devices, one of us can search for something, browse a website, and then the other one will start to see the ads for such in their Instagram feed (and for the record, it is usually me seeing the things my spouse is looking for). It is completely insidious and it needs to stop!
I have done the command-tab, command-tilde, control-arrow (for workspaces) dance for years (and it is so ingrained in me, that sometimes a second monitor makes things worse). But my point was more in reference to Fred's notion that this "new normal" of remote meetings via video somehow requires a second screen. To that I say, if you are a manager, yes, sure thing! Otherwise, no.
As a maker (and permanent remote worker, even before COVID-19), I am constantly struggling to convince people to have fewer meetings, and having a second screen for the meetings I do have, isn't the answer: the answer is fewer meetings!
I know this whole "remote-work" thing is somehow new to people, but, in a word: evolve!
I am so not into a second screen that I have embarked on using a cellular-capable tablet as my sole device, so that I can do work anywhere, anytime. The "home office" with multiple monitors is not the answer to remote-work, doing your job with simple tools, is. But, of course, this is just my opinion.
Thanks for the point of clarification: Elected officials, which should be easy for any social media company to determine, especially since, at least on Twitter and Instagram, they have "verified" profiles.
The easy thing to do is to have two policies: one for politicians, and one for everyone else. The policy for politicians will be one that holds their actions to a much higher standard than everyone else. The policy can say that metrics will be used to determine if the statements by the politician are false or misleading, and if a certain threshold is reached, they can/will(/should!) be banned from the site. They can provide a detailed analysis about how they came to the conclusion to ban the user.
1) Insist on encryption of the SAMLResponse (that way, the SP has to do it correctly, or they'll have no idea who is accessing the app)
2) If they won't do encryption, I test exactly what they are talking about in this article
To test, I have my own IdP set up, and I either do IdP-initiated sign-on or spoof the IdP URL using /etc/hosts on my localhost and try to log into the app with a signed SAMLResponse using a key the SP doesn't know about. If it works, I immediately tell our CISO. I even scared one vendor so badly just explaining that I was going to do this that we never heard from them again.
You would have to do this every day, too. Getting tested doesn't mean you are not exposed on the way home that day, or the way back to work. Also, what if you wanted to go to multiple places in the same day? You would have to be tested n-times, as you could have been infected going from one business to the other.
What I do not hear people talking about is this: Getting tested once is not enough. If you do not have COVID-19 today, it doesn't mean you are not going to have it tomorrow. The only test that can tell you that is an antibody test. Also, we don't even know yet (for sure, anyway) if people can be re-infected.
I look forward to the first test of 1000+ self driving vehicles going through a swerving road, multiple merge, plus toll plaza situation (like merging onto the lower deck of the GW bridge east-bound). If this technology is as good as claimed, it really should put human drivers to shame. Imagine no more traffic jams because of the needless “jockeying for position”, or the drivers who are clueless about the boundaries of their own vehicle. As someone who has been driving for over 30 years, I honestly can’t wait for the day this promise materializes.
Of course, if self driving cars defer (in a predictable manner) in order to prevent collisions, I can easily see how one or two human drivers could reap havoc to their advantage. It would become a new sport.
But the opposite is true, too: They can't, because their vehicle is not capable of it. You don't need to be doing 60 MPH in 3 seconds, but being able to it in 5-6 is much better (for everyone) when merging onto highways.
0-60 in 9 seconds is not only terrible, it is dangerous. Despite what state rules are regarding merging onto freeways/highways/tollways/etc., a car really should be doing the speed of the other cars on the road at the merge point, otherwise all kinds of bad things can and do happen. I drive a lot, and the pokey cars merging are terrible for everyone involved at the point of merging.
> "The majority of the building owners, and certainly retail brokers like myself, all are aggressively trying to fill these vacant spaces," wrote Hansson. "In almost all cases, the rent is not the stumbling block; it's the high cost of starting the business, strict government regulations, and the risk of ultimate success."
I don't buy that argument fully. Why is the place vacant in the first place? Usually because the pervious, sometimes long-term business, could not afford the double, or triple rent increase. The question is, Did the owner of Sparky's really want to close, or were they not able to afford the rent increase? And now, we are suppose to believe that the place is empty only because a new business wants to pay that new amount and they're just waiting on permits?
Government must remove the ability to claim an income loss on the balance sheets of property owners that purposely leave spaces empty. There is no reason to double (or more) the rent on a space. They are doing it because maybe someone will pay, and until then, they get to claim the loss of income as a write off on their taxes. If this is not true, then how can property owners, who claim that they need the new rental rate, afford to leave a place empty for a year or more???
You obviously didn't read her blog post where she stated the following:
"This kind of code change happens all the time. We frequently add things to make our jobs easier or even to just share hobbies or interests. For example, someone changed the default desktop wallpaper during the walkout last year so that the Linux penguin was holding a protest sign. The company has never reacted aggressively in response to a notification such as this in the past. It’s always been a celebrated part of the culture."
I do really feel badly for (mostly) young people who have no frame of reference for things other than Amazon and comparison websites. I would probably never go to Amazon for something like gloves (or most other things) because you have no idea what you are going to get. When I do know what I want, the first place I try to buy it from is the company that makes it. If they don't sell it direct, then they will probably tell you who does. If they have their own store on Amazon, I will use that, even if other providers on Amazon are selling it for less.
> Nah. Let's keep ourselves honest. It was the suit; or, at the very least, it was what the suit represented--professionalism that separates private, personal life from work life. Yuck. Who has time for that when you're trying to get rich off the next big exit? /s
That is so very well stated I want to highlight it! Thanks for putting it so succinctly.
> Don’t cheat: We believe in playing by the rules of the game, abiding by both their letter and their spirit. If we don’t like the rules, we work openly and collaboratively to improve them.
I can't help but think this is a huge swipe at companies like Airbnb, Uber, Lyft, and any of the others that knowingly break laws (or aid others to do so) and hope they can get away with it, or change the law(s) later.