IntFee588

Not to be conspiratorial, but the situation is much worse than the fed is letting on. "Trying to forestall" might be optimistic.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-12/us-moves-...

https://archive.is/FMuYW (archive)

Think of what this means, and how precarious a position the nation's banks must be in for the fed to take actions like this. We needed to reimplement Glass-Steagall yesterday.

People often act like victims of scams need to be smarter, however widespread scamming places an immense burden on the broader economy. It increases the cost of doing business, since you have to do more verification for any transaction. We don't blame victims of other crimes, scamming shouldn't be an exception.

Imagine if you went to a restaurant, and the staff refused to serve you until you showed them your bank account balance to prove you could pay. It is an immense failure of law enforcement to not crack down harder on widespread scams.

You learn category theory for intellectual curiosity. I learn category theory to pass a Haskell course. We are not the same.

That's not what he's saying. The "digital money" can be real if it is put into circulation by the central bank, by buying assets. There is no inherent connection to paper currency.

You may feel like you're above this, but this excess leverage in the economy affects everyone who has a mortgage, works a job, or participates in the traditional economy in any way. For instance, businesses regularly draw on their credit facilities to make pay, and even well-run businesses usually hold debt. The artificially set price of these "chips" has a massive effect on all sectors.

"Select and support a 'Security Program Manager.' This person doesn’t need to be a security expert or even an IT professional. The Security Program Manager ensures your organization implements all the key elements of a strong cybersecurity program."

Somewhat contradictory. A "security program manager" can't implement good security if they don't know what it looks like, even if given a checklist.

This reads like the sort of document that the government publishes because it has a fiduciary to protect the vaunted "small business owner," similar to "fraud awareness" campaigns, but is more laying the groundwork to say that they told you so, rather than real protection.

I think it's a tradeoff. As a comparison, I like learning about coding and software architecture through videos and other online resources. The field is so vast that looking at other peoples' code is the easiest way to absorb the broadest amount of material. However, eventually, actually sitting down and writing original software is key to achieving true expertise. I suspect reading & writing follows a similar pattern.

Just got hired doing firmware stuff. Core technologies seem to still be doing okay.

Reserve requirements as of 2020: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm

Remember, the balance in your account is nothing more than the bank's record of its liability to you.

The Federal Reserve Act had the original reserve requirement at 40% IIRC (as in, what the fed needed to keep).

Current reserve requirements: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm

> But the reality is that growth only works when you build on someone's strengths.

Respectfully disagree. Growth comes from going beyond what you're comfortable with.

Also not sure this is "ungrowth" and more a general misallocation of human capital. Good bosses are proactive, yes, but that doesn't mean randomly messing with team dynamics and roles like you're a chemist trying to find the philosopher's stone.

I was previously unaware of this issue, but wow. Seems like a good case for a class action against Apple for replacement SSDs.

Perhaps this is true, but this is all the more reason why giving social media sites the right to police free speech/expression is too much. Public discourse today happens online. The "uhhhh, this is a private venue, they don't owe you a soapbox" rhetoric rings increasingly hollow when we just went through a multiyear period when society collectively forced millions of people to work or go to school over the internet, often through big tech platforms. Telling people who don't like the current state of the mainstream web to find their own platform is like telling people who are unhappy with food prices to simply farm their own crops; it's not technically impossible, but there's more likely to be civil unrest before people start sowing seeds.

It is also very telling that when independent discussion platforms do start to reach critical mass (4chan, voat, wherever else) there is often collusion or pressure to take down their hosting or stop payment processors from working with them.

Freedom of choice aside, there is also a shocking lack of awareness that a major factor in the rise of the internet is that it wasn't like traditional media. There were memes, blogs, video content, music, etc. that would never gain traction with the legacy entertainment industry. There is no point in using youtube or twitter if it's all just clips from mainstream tv or shittakes from established pundits that I can see on repeat on cable all day anyways.

> During World War II military scientists invented the transistor, a semiconductor device that paved the way for miniature recording devices smaller than sugar cubes and thinner than postage stamps to flood espionage markets.

This goes against common knowledge (that the FET was first invented by Lilienfeld in the 1920s, and that the germanium transistor was invented by Bardeen and Brattain at Bell Labs in the 1940s). Points to anyone that can produce evidence to support this claim that it was invented during WWII.

Friendly reminder that nothing sent over public internet infrastructure without additional security measures is truly private. Also, pardon Snowden.

If you're someone who has pride in their work, you should want to learn. Technical curiosity is invaluable in this field and it seems odd that there are people who insist on sticking around despite lacking it.

I don't think a lack of technical curiosity/professional pride is exclusive to managerial types, but there is a surprising number of people who hate the technical side but still want to be bossman.

I have the technical aptitude of a slug but I was getting terrible uptime when hosting my site on a raspberry pi 4. YMMV.

Although I maintain that a persistent travel itch is a symptom of dissatisfaction in day-to-day life which should be addressed, I backpacked Europe and the Middle East the summer after university. I was an incredibly enriching experience and one of those things people should do if they can afford it. I plan on doing Cape Town to Cairo in a few years.

The quality to noise ratio on mostly social media platforms has become obscenely low over the past three years or so. I do think social media can be a force for good but it seems like the algorithms are best at perpetuating the lowest effort, spamiest content.

For me, reddit is the one that gets me angry. It's addicting, but also seems like teenagers and bots arguing with it each other. Instagram is increasingly inundated with ads, but at least I get to see thirst traps and cute animals.

Youtube is the only social media site that I think is a net positive on my life, because I learn so much, but I've started going for runs again because I really need time away from a screen and the constant dopamine hits.

The "protestant work ethic" promotes this vague notion that labour, toil and suffering on earth brings one closer to god. This is more deeply rooted in western cultures than you'd think and feeds into the "work hard and you'll make it" attitude of western exceptionalism.

Because of this, people have a vested interest in glorifying their own struggle, even if they had circumstances that led to their professional success. They're not going to admit that they had things handed to them on a silver platter or got lucky, they'd think of it as some sort of moral failing. They think success needs to be justified.

Completely depends on the role. Most developers aren't cranking out code all day though.

Your arrangement seems to be more common in corporate development.

It's not so much high schooler choice or HR's inability to properly assess candidates (although that is also a factor). It's the emotional and material "stock" put into degrees by degree holders that guarantees that this system will remain in place. Most people do not have the strength of character to extricate their personal identity and value from their level of education.

Post-secondary credentialism is the new form of feudalism. This book is a little too woke for my tastes but there's a significant amount of scholarship on this concept of education's rise as the new "cool guy" power structure, replacing politics and the church.

https://books.google.ca/books/about/Beyond_Education.html?id...

While these sorts of analyses are worthwhile, the primary reason they're necessary is because college has become such a raw deal and costs far too much, even for degrees with "good" ROI. I paid $40k to teach myself 80% of the material from Khan Academy and Youtube videos.

Nvm, it is ex-employees.

It seems the idea is more that current employees can help onboard their friends by eating the upfront costs.

reddit runs on hyperbole.

I understand the business case and problem it's supposed to solve (onboarding is costly), but it's so utterly distasteful.

Not saying it's "okay," but if you go to Mexico, most urban and vacation areas are still quite functional, although spillover has started a bit.

This is precisely why Ethereum and its new proof-of-stake mechanism will take over as the dominant currency in the next few years.

I wouldn't expect crypto to disappear. The market is currently worth $1.5 trillion, people will fight for its adoption to keep their investment.

There are quite a few studies that support this; higher earners generally work more hours, since their time is more valuable. The only exception is at extremely high income brackets. Minimum wage earners are being paid to show up.

https://www.nber.org/digest/jul06/why-high-earners-work-long...

Companies that are better to work at have generally seen more growth in their stock price:

https://www.glassdoor.com/research/app/uploads/sites/2/2020/...

Doubt these findings will change corporate policies however.