fhbdukfrh

Well it may seem obvious, but work to eliminate "stupid" meetings. Hold people to scheduled start times and time limits. Push hard for agendas and stick to them. Question the need for meetings you think are redundant or unnecessary.

Or do you mean meetings in general?

If I'm hiring super creative or deep planning or design roles i want "bursty" people who can do super intense periods, more common lower intensity cycles and then recharge for a planned period of time.

If the workload dictates requirements I'd love to find anyone who wanted a constant queue of variable days but I've never met them aside from contractors who want a minimum and will bill extra, but they still seem term-based and want vacation.

At a managerial level i can plan around predictable days off, but not variable days when i need to coordinate more than a few people.

How do you force employers to treat you better, some sort of artificial regulation?

We've never had greater labor mobility, remote options or demand for software developers; I question your premise of limited number of companies.

Modern examples of this are GTA5 and Zelda: Breath of the wild. They are not endless but huge open worlds that evoke similar feelings and emotions to what you describe

If this is a real problem (of which I'm doubtful) McDonalds, being one of the most responsive large companies in the world, will fix it first by adding to human janitorial duties and soon after have the kiosk self clean, or remove it and push everyone to the my McD app on their own, filthy phone

This is not about making your experience "more enjoyable" it is a direct response to wage increases that directly target these workers and the company responding. Same with the grocery store. Or mobile ordering from Starbucks, or using an ATM. The experience ranges from much better (ATMs) to much, much worse (grocery stores) , but the only way they will "fail" is if everyone forgoes their big mac to go somewhere else and pay more for human cashiers. That is not going to happen.

So basically regulation that impacts them directly or materially?

The ideal of some arbitrary cut off point has been tried in lots of scenarios, and is gamed by all parties.

Example: Copyright will protect new works for x years, at which point Disney lobbies for the arbitrary goal posts to be moved.

Yes, this approach assumes universal parity in the result of the act, which is far from true. For example the leaked health records of a healthy individual are not as damaging as those of someone with a lifelong condition, yet both cases are very, very bad.

They do not carry the as-is, where-is clause you describe unless explicitly. If you can prove prior knowledge they are still liable. Proving the prior is the hard part, but private sales most certainly enforce a good faith clause

It's also easier on a steeper slope. Kind of counter intuitive but similar it's easier weight a bit of speed,... until you find yourself floating and catch an edge

The GP was talking about going to grad school after finishing an undergrad in a different country; you're discussing getting a job without a degree.

All either of these anecdotes illustrate is it really depends on the circumstances.

I have one. The best part is the "case" it's huge compared to the hardware inside, do it's super light.

It's like an Arduino inside a shoebox.

Ha! I have one of these that i built into a portable arcade machine. Some of the hardware has Xbox references on the pcbs, though i suspect the just didn't bother to remove from the source, though it could be surplus from earlier versions.

The games are hilarious and completely ripped off, some the Japanese only market versions, others weird mash-ups (like 8-bit Mario but with looney tunes characters).

Mine most certainly does not output 4k (what would a 4k gb-color emulator exactly look like? Gigantic, crisp pixels?)

You may not like the process but it is completely legal for the MP to compel the third party to turn over this information and then use parliamentary privilege to publish it. If FB has sent Zuck to talk to parliament in the first place this would not have happened. Instead he told them to get lost, and what are you gonna do about it? Well, this is it.

Not sure what you mean about a formal censure. I'm not familiar with any legal mechanism for a state judge to formally object to foreign parliamentary procedure; how would that even work between a republic and a commonwealth?

You'd be waiting more than 5 minutes. China has told lots of companies to get lost and built compelling substitutes internally. This is about Google wanting into the biggest global market in a bad way, not finally relenting to China's long term overtures.

Well the flaw i see in your logic is that all those awesome engineers that don't work for Google are spread all over the place. There's a special magic when you get a bunch of really good engineers working together...

Also I'm not sure where you get the idea that Google churn is higher than elsewhere or that it's grown significantly. To say those remaining don't care anymore implies there has been a dramatic attitude change, what are you basing that on?

As long as Google attracts the best(which i think they generally do) working there will be a signaling trait of a good engineer.

You're referring to MIT's championship football team?

Tenure is a pretty artificial condition intended to prevent controversial research from being eliminated out of fear of losing your job. It seems in the corporate world execs do something controversial, get fired and get paid off. I believe average length of tenure in c-suite positions is actually decreasing, so moving in the other direction without any law limiting it.

So the worst of both worlds? You're trying to both eliminate irrelevant bias and emphasize it. Your result will be "we hire the least white, white males"

I have a business and tech background, I massage and prune experience and roles based on what type of position I'm applying for. Example my early years in sales and marketing are pretty irrelevant as a developer, my webGL experience does little to promote me as a business analyst

In most jurisdictions it's hard to hard someone. In all jurisdictions it's expensive.

I think what the GP is stating is that if we only assess accomplishments and we do it at this stage (later in life after many different phases) those systematically disadvantaged will not be competitive (example: If you went to a crummy public school you have a harder time getting into an ivy league, harder time getting a prestige internship, getting a premium job, etc)

Affirmative action laws were introduced to address this, but the trend toward meritocracy counters them.

My guess; we end up with the worst of both worlds: One stream blind to these factors and a bunch of regulated exceptions.

If you're not working by yourself though, the things that make you a human really matter. I work at a company full of talented, smart developers with no focus or priority on communication or people skills. As a result we really lose out on collaboration and fail to leverage good work done by any specific team. I don't need a name or age to assess these traits but i sure need to get to know the person behind the resume facts.

This entire article kind of reads like someone visiting a foreign country then coming home and reporting on how different everything is. The truth is bicycles have not really changed that much, especially since the 90's. There has been tonnes of evolution and everything works better, but we're still shifting with derailleurs, road bikes still slow you down by squeezing the rims, locomotion comes from spinning one set of rings and transferring it to another with a chain, regardless of material or literal form the frame is still 2 triangles.

Bikes these days have new geometries, exotic materials and everything works way better, but not because we're doing anything dramatically different from 25 years ago.

As far as #2 i don't see this as much as you; there are a couple of different attachment styles but the actual chain rings are usually individually replaceable. Cassettes are not but (a) they are often machined out of a single piece of material or rivetted together and (b) the range is so big there's not really any point to swapping anything out. The entire drivetrain wears together so you can maybe replace the chain once before you should swap the entire cassette, chain and chainring(s).

Once you have your first job, the top 80% are rarely ever again actively looking unless they have some sort of extenuating circumstances, so the reality is they're only going to hire the to 1% of the bottom 20%

The top 5, 10, 20 out even 50% rarely hit the open market, inbound recruitment process. They get poached or go where former coworkers are

In Canada, home of the often proposed single payer solution to the problems in the US, ambulance services are generally not covered and must be paid directly. You even pay id one gets called for you and you refuse assistance.

I gp is rarely going to be in a situation where they need to call an ambulance for a patient; generally it's going to be the organization (like a nursing home) or management/administrator to avoid potential liability

I'm in Canada so not covered by the same laws as US states, but a few years back i went to my gp with what he quickly diagnosed as a life-threatening blood clot. He explicitly stated "i don't think we need to call an ambulance but you need to go to ER immediately". He gave me a note for the triage nurse to expedite admitting and i was into the ICU within the hour.

My wife drive me by nothing stopped me from using a taxi or ride share.

Doctors definitely have a duty of care that must consider emergency transport, but it's be surprised if laws explicitly stated you need to call an ambulance for stable patients that need emergency treatment.

This is so true. You can be a customer for over a decade but you still need to continually phone and threaten to change providers in order to get the same deal they offer people who switch every 6 months.

I used to work at shaw on the data team, so I'm aware the problem is perverse incentives for selling to new clients over existing, but the cost of win-backs is so high (re-signing a previous subscriber) that you can usually streamline the affair by just asking for customer retention right at the start. The generally offer you the best deal they can right away because the goal now is to keep the subscriber in any form.

Still a massive pain in the butt.

I pay cash for coffee at Starbucks at least once a day and coworkers can't believe I don't have the app and collect stars.

Yet somehow I'm the sucker who doesn't get it.