You're accusing people of moving the goalposts on the tariff conversation, the goal posts were doing backflips and jazzercise from the day they were announced.
So yeah, the tariffs are still a net negative on the economy, but have been so erratically and poorly implemented that they're not nearly as bad as they could have been. It's like a plastered drunk guy swinging a knife at you. It's a lethal threat, but he's tripping over himself constantly and can barely stand so it's easy to dodge for now. Could be a more serious issue if he ever sobers up.
I agree they've been very erratic. What does that have to do with whether or not our economy tanked as a result? It didn't, the prophecies were FUD, everything he does is bad, blah blah.
Trump's a lethal threat that is too incompetent to be lethal? Okay. So quit with the FUD then.
So you'd turn your back on the knife wielding drunk guy and turn on Netflix because he hasn't managed to stab you yet?
FUD stands for fear, uncertainty and doubt. If you didn't feel any of that in the previous year you haven't been paying attention or don't have any serious responsibilities.
You underestimate how sclerotic large corporations can be. I've seen people do zero work, quite visibly, at fortune 500s and not be fired for over a year.
There are people at my office who haven't really done anything since March 2020 when we all got sent home. They probably weren't doing anything before then either, but at least they were there eight hours a day.
I've never understood this meme. Maybe I'm naive, but why would a company hire someone to "not do anything?" How would they stay employed if their performance review showed they "weren't doing anything?" Everyone around me is busy doing 3x the amount of work they can sustain because we're so short staffed. Where are these companies that have people just sitting there picking their nose watching YouTube? I've never really seen this either in BigTech or MediumTech companies.
Maybe these employees are actually doing things--just things you don't see or appreciate?
To defend ICs against middle management a bit: a lot of IC work is dependent on decisions that need to be made by upper level managers. A 2 week contiguous workstream can take 2+ years easy once a few managers ask a few questions and need 10-20 meetings to get 5 bullet points clarified (so many projects can't even produce that). But if that person gets replaced their institutional knowledge and work readiness evaporates.
I've been on 10+ projects at big companies and have begged to do work. Mostly it was showing up to 3-5 meetings/week while managers try and figure things out, and their VPs reconfigure budgets, priorities, and resources. Sometimes I do the work and hold it until someone wants it.
There's usually no standard top-down view about what happens when 3 VPs change the scope on 5 projects. But in reality, that usually means 10-30 people downstream are paralyzed. This is also where the tension between "new work" and "scalable processes" comes into play (need a consultant?).
Add regulatory compliance and approval gates, and then..
If you're a contractor, it's often preferable to keep qualified people on staff even if they have nothing to do because it makes bidding for future contracts easier. You can say "I have X people qualified in Y ready to go" instead of "we'll have to hire X people to do Y".
But there's also just bad hires who can get through interviews, they won't just leave, and building a case to fire those people takes time and management that gives a shit. At a large enough program at a large enough company with uninvolved management (and they can afford to be uninvolved because the program's doing well on all tracked metrics), you can get away with being negligible deadweight for a shocking amount of time. I wouldn't recommend it because your team will hate you, you'll build no skills or relationships, and you'll be the first to go when cuts happen, but some people are fine with that trade for whatever reason.
Headcount increase means growth which means stock go up which means short term profit at the expense of long term quality of product or service.
Soooo many people doing absolutely nothing and really no one cares.
It is beneficial to have someone doing nothing as oppose to someone pro active, because doing things breaks things.
Think about, companies optimize for inertia. Extraordinary levels of burocracy, governance, quality assurance...at some point it becomes impossible to move. Measures are in place not because they increase quality, but they reduce movement, and then this is perceived as safer. Think about it, less movement == safe.
People doing absolutely fucking nothing while virtue signaling is a perfect fit.
To be fair I've never worked at Amazon, but at this point they have 1.6 million employees worldwide. I don't care what their hiring brochures say, if you think they don't suffer the same ailments as every corporation that size I have a bridge to sell you.
Certain sectors are high performing centers of excellence whose staff write blog posts that get posted to HN, publish papers, get put on the covers of hiring media and give speeches. The majority of the company is somewhere in the middle holding down their relatively uneventful but important functions, and probably a larger chunk than Corporate leadership would like to acknowledge are deadweight hiding in the cracks.
Yeah, if that culture is actually widespread I imagine their deadweight is more the variety that's figured out how to game the system or has connections, rather than the "I'm going to do literally no work and watch youtube all day" varieties that I've witnessed.
Of course it's biased. I'm just saying I find it quite believable that some program was funded 5 years ago under different financial conditions and has remained funded until now despite no longer being viable.
People generally don't like losing their jobs, and will put a positive spin on every report that might be good enough to pass muster with middle management bureaucracy at a large firm. All it takes is for enough people in the chain of command to shrug, sign whatever docs are needed and move onto something they care about more.
Yeah I remember a few projects attempting "grid computing", where the idea was distributing application threads across CPUs over freaking ethernet.
Have to say that would be a fun puzzle to try and optimize for, but network latency would always be a hard physical constraint no matter how fast. Maybe some niche use cases, but then multi-core CPUs and GPU processing really took off and I guess it just got even less useful.
Not to be that guy, but if the majority of sightings coming from nations capable of producing advanced military aircraft... well perhaps the aliens thought the F-15 was badass and wanted a closer look?
US sightings get publicised best due to the nature of international media (wide distribution of US films, TV and books)... But there certainly are other places claiming to see them. There are a lot of supposed sightings in Chile for example, which doesn't have a huge air force.
Same here, you either move past it or go crazy, if the UFO subreddits are any indication. Given the population was already obsessed with blurry clumps of pixels in short video clips, AI is going to send a lot of those people into trailers in the desert with a lifetime supply of aluminum foil.
And now that we have mass-produced hyper-maneuverable quad-copter drones, the whole "it moved backward in a way that no aircraft ever could!" doesn't really hit as hard.
My current UFO conspiracy brain is that the UAP makers want Greenland as their home, and the US wants to get the benefits of that. Because that would be less crazy to me than what it's really about.
Yeah, unless there's some automatic backup/snapshot implemented before any actions are taken, hard pass on this. Or at least I won't be using it on anything I'm not willing to 100% lose. Maybe give it read-only access and have it put results in a designated output folder?
Particularly in a work environment, one misfire could destroy months or years of important information.
It's funny how easy Plan 9 would make all this. Just mount the work dir as readonly in Cowork's filesystem namespace and mount a write-only dir for output.
We can still do this via containers, though. But it does have some friction.
Unfortunately there's no money in privacy, and a lot of money in either outright selling data or cutting costs to the bare minimum required to avoid legal liability.
Wife and I are expecting our third child, and despite my not doing much googling or research into it (we already know a lot from the first two) the algorithms across the board found out somehow. Even my instagram "Explore" tab that I accidentally select every now and then started getting weirdly filled with pictures of pregnant women.
It is what it is at this point. Also I finally got my last settlement check from Equifax, which paid for Chipotle. Yay!
Interestingly in healthcare there is a correlation between companies that license/sell healthcare data to other ones (usually they try to do this in a revokable way with very stringent legal terms, but sometimes they just sell it if there is enough money involved) and their privacy stance... and it's not what you would think. Often it's these companies that are pushing for more stringent privacy laws and practices. For example, they could claim that they cannot share anonymized data with academic researchers, because of xyz virtuous privacy rules, when they are actually the ones making money off of selling patient data. It's an interesting phenomenon I have observed while working in the industry that seems to refute your claim that "there's no money in privacy". Another way to think about it is that they want to induce a lower overall supply for the commodity they are selling, and they do this by championing privacy rules.
As new moms tend to change their consumer purchasing habits they are coveted by advertisers. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.h... Certain cohorts and keywords are very valuable so even searching a medical condition once or clicking on a hiring ad for an in-demand job can shift ads toward that direction for a long time.
It seems more important than ever to have self hosted apps or browser extensions that will intermittently search for these valuable keywords. Ad Nauseum is much better than bare Ublock Origin for the same reason.
Yeah I'm less shocked that it got picked up and more how quickly it spread to literally every platform we use, even those that wouldn't have much if any hint that it was happening.
There's clearly quite the active market for this information
Could be as simple as buying a bunch of scent free soap / lotion and some specific vitamin supplements. Walmart / Target were able to detect pregnancy reliably back in 2012 from just their own shopping data.
Just shopping in the store and lingering by those products for a few moments is enough for the algorithm to detect a possible pregnancy. They use Bluetooth beacons & camera software to see how long you look at everything in the store.
Facial recognition may be possible. BLE beacons were a useful technology that is dead now because even ten years ago it was being abused for this. It's fully blocked without a ton of jumping through hoops.
> the algorithms across the board found out somehow.
It's worth keeping in mind that this is basically untrue.
In most of these algorithms, there's no "is_expecting: True" field. There are just some strange vectors of mysterious numbers, which can be more or less similar to other vectors of mysterious numbers.
The algorithms have figured out that certain ad vectors are more likely to be clicked if your user vector exhibits some pattern, and that some actions (keywords, purchases, slowing down your scroll speed when you see a particular image) should make your vector go in that direction.
But there should be and there should be punishments for data breaches, or at least compensations for those affected. Then there would be an incentive for corporations to take their user's privacy more seriously.
Your personal data is basically the currency of the digital world. This is way data about you is collected left, right, and center. It's valuable.
When I trust a bank to safely lock away my grandmother's jewelry, I have to pay for it, but in return, if it just so happened that the bank gets broken into and all my possessions get stolen, at least I'll get (some) compensation.
When I give my valuable data to a company, I have already paid them (with the data themselves), but I have no case whatsoever if they get compromised.
Maybe I'm just lacking in creativity, but I don't see the appeal of developing anything with less than 2 monitors and a full-sized keyboard. Even for those who find the act of coding intrinsically entertaining, do you want to dance so badly that you'll do so even if you can only use one leg?
I'll bite (even though I think the proposed setup is dumb tbh) : why do you need 2 monitors? Can't you just alt-tab from one window to another?
FWIW I do code on the go and I 100% prefer to code at home with my neat setup... but also quite often when I'm on the move and inspiration strikes, I do enjoy having a way to tinker right here and there.
I can, but I find the friction it induces to be extremely irritating. I have to memorize snippets of documentation before switching back instead of just having it open on the other monitor to reference at a glance. Plus the act of switching windows itself is extra keystrokes/touch gestures and tedium. Coding on a small touch screen sounds like absolute hell. Like being forced to drive in stop-and-go traffic with a manual shift.
I'll do it only if I have no other choice (i.e. logged into a remote terminal-only server at work). If I have some flash of inspiration I'll write it down in Google Keep and try it out when I get back to my 3-monitor workstation.
How are they more keystrokes between one screen and N screens? Don't you have to switch windows regardless of their visibility? I mean if you copy then paste elsewhere you still the same number of key strokes, don't you? Maybe I'm missing something.
Regardless what I'm suggesting, and I believe OP too, is NOT to replace your setup with a mobile one, only that they can complement each other. Namely if you are on your way somewhere, you do not have to stop programming, you can still do it even though in a different way, so I do not believe comparing them helps. The point is not to convince somebody to go from their favorite setup to something they like less, rather to show other ways in which some parts of the process are still acceptable on the go. Nobody is suggesting to remove a screen or keyboard.
Show me the incentive, I'll show you the outcome. More than once I've had my hand slapped professionally for taking ownership of something my immediate superiors wanted to micromanage. Fine, here I was trying to take something off their plate that was in my wheelhouse, but if that's where they want to draw the line I guess I'll just give less of a shit.
If you actively deny your employees ownership, then the relationship becomes purely transactional.
It's also possible OP is just a bad employee, but I've met far more demoralized good employees than malicious bad ones over the course of my career.
Nope. Check again. All the manufacturers are switching to HBM, the market will be flooded with useless soldered on memory that nobody can use outside of running local inference.
That and people were expecting the tariffs to be consistently applied as stated, instead we got... this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sr7OVWgqDIM&t=27s
reply