maratd

You've made a couple of points here.

With regard to the Pizzagate incident, using the same set of arguments, I can claim that fringe leftist publications resulted in the Congressional baseball shooting where people were actually hurt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_sh...

So are you arguing that all those groups he participated in should be banned? That's what it sounds like.

Are you willing to ban Bernie for incitement?

> It is rather audacious to me that you seem to assert that speech in social platforms that are owned and operated in the US with US citizens talking to each other is somehow separate from the rule of law of the US government. The internet was essentially created by the US government. The notion that internet companies somehow supersede individual governments is- dangerous.

It is not the job of private companies to enforce the law. That's the government's job. And there's a reason for that. You do not get to be judge, jury, and executioner because you have some superiority complex.

If the government took action, we can have a substantive discussion over the merits of the case ... but it's irrelevant, because they didn't.

> The decision of social platforms to enforce their policies in this matter is in part in response to the will of their stakeholders, but also to insulate themselves from anything remotely close to being a party to defamation.

It doesn't matter what reason they had for doing it. They may not even have had a reason. It is their right to do it ... but just because you can, doesn't mean you should. That was my point. It's a poor decision.

> If you've gotten this far in this thread, please spend some time with Alex Jones' greatest hits and give me your honest opinion of its merit.

What merit does the WWE ( https://www.wwe.com/ ) have?

He's the equivalent in the talk show space. It's entertainment.

Do some people take it seriously? I'm sure they do. Some people take the WWE seriously too and think that it's real. So what?

Even if the content has no merit whatsoever, so what? Again, we're not talking about the government censoring him. That's when merit would come into play. It's a private party.

They can absolutely do it. And they shouldn't, because censorship is bad. Really, really bad.

And let's not pretend like their censorship is targeted at only undesirables. Well, I suppose it is, but it depends on who is pointing the finger. These same shitty companies censor perfectly legitimate content in China, because $$$. Not cool.

All these private companies that banned him, they all categorize content. They can easily have a nutjob category and if I want to watch that, it's my business. I don't need the social engineering, thanks.

Also, social engineering usually backfires. I hear Alex Jones has a really popular app and website now due to all the publicity?

That’s a list of speech that can be justifiably repressed by the government. It doesn’t apply here. We’re talking about private parties and about speech that doesn’t meet those thresholds, but is nevertheless reprehensible.

> Its obscene, flagrant garbage.

It is. So what?

> there isn't a place for that kind of conduct on platforms with any kind of standards.

Flag it as "obscene, flagrant garbage" and hide it. Allow the user to decide. If they want to switch their account to "allow all", that's their choice.

Google does this with search. They can easily do this on YouTube.

They choose not to, which is unfortunate.

> the environment is not something the market will automatically solve

Not quite true. The market can easily solve for it. You just have to internalize the external costs. Usually done through taxes (ie carbon tax).

You would have learned the same if you had lived in those neighborhoods instead of simply swinging by. Of course, most people choose to segregate, but you always have the option in NYC.

> but it is not enough.

Not enough for what? It's clearly enough for millions to live very comfortably.

> I am sure that much of that take-home pay is offset by higher medical costs and the need for more retirement savings

This is not true. Those same workers get most or all of their insurance costs covered by the company. Same goes for retirement with 401k plans, etc.

> Not to mention the fact that the American work week is longer and vacation days are rarer.

This is true.

This is a terrible idea for numerous reasons. You will be personally liable for any defects in the work. If you get dragged into court, it can ruin you for life. You will be unable to take advantage of tax benefits that would accrue to you if you incorporated. Various business-only services would be inaccessible to you (like a business bank account, lines of credit, etc.). Also, good luck getting health care in the US as an individual.

> licensing, certification

You're a business now and this is upkeep. Business expense. You would receive training and licensing under normal circumstances through your job.

> life insurance

This is provided as a benefit by most businesses to their employees. Talk to your HR. If you're working for yourself, you pay for it now.

> vacation

This should be obvious. No work, no pay. So vacation literally costs you double. Loss of time + the cost of vacation.

> technology

Computer equipment to do the actual work. Nobody will provide this to you for free.

> bills, travel, parking

Nobody will reimburse you for these expenses. If you have to visit the client on-site, they're on you.

> emergency funds

You must keep 3 month's of salary at a minimum sitting in a bank account at all times. This is a cost of doing business. There are ups and downs, don't expect contracts to come in immediately one after another. It doesn't happen.

> general and umbrella insurance

This should be obvious, you bear 100% of the cost of all types of insurance.

> car maintenance, car fuel, carl detailing and regular cleaning

If you use a car to get to the client, well, this is obvious.

> house maintenance (yard, inspections, upgrades, insurance, etc.) or rent

If your home is your office, all of these are now business expenses to some extent even if you had to do them before. You're spending double the time in your house. That will increase upkeep, electricity, etc.

If you work at home, while those things would need to be done anyway, should be piped through your business to some extent since your business is taking advantage of those resources.

2.5x is the golden rule. You will need to double the salary to cover additional expenses (some of which weren't mentioned, like employer's side of FICA in the US, time spent on sales because contracts end, legal, etc.) you will incur. The .5 of that equation is your profit. Because you're running a business.

> They need to standardize package sizes.

Both services already do this. They provide free boxes for you to use of standard sizes. So if you choose to ship in another dimension, you're bearing that cost. They incentivize you to use standard sizes.

Neither company commented on the situation with any detail. However, that account was not disputed by either party.

Yes, after Mobileye (now Intel) learned there was an internal Tesla effort to replace them.

Peretend I said something politically incorrect and insert your outrage below this comment. Be sure to use some derogatory adjectives, unrelated to anything previously said, to describe me.

Focus on leaving a high fidelity fossil.

> Tesla's Autopilot seems to be little more than the same lane keeping and adaptive cruise control everyone else has with the safety tolerances lowered a whole lot, to the detriment of several dead drivers.

It seems that way to you because you haven't used the system. It is not operating with "tolerances lowered a whole lot" or really, at all.

> You can readily buy other cars with the same EyeQ3 board that powered AutoPilot until Tesla's breakup with Mobileye, and their new Nvidia-based clone of it does little more than the original.

It's quite silly to talk about the hardware when it's obvious that it's the software that will truly differentiate the systems.

Tesla's system is much more impressive than anything else on the market because of the software involved for both hardware revisions. It is able to operate in environments where other systems fail and is able to do so reliably on more roads than their competition.

> You're taking their marketing at face value while their EAP/FSD packages have largely been vaporware for 2.5 years now.

You're correct here, but then again, the same can be said of their competitors.

> Alas, there were statistics posted here on HN in one of the Tesla accident threads

3 year period, 6 years ago. Zero citations, just a blank statement.

Not only that, it's not believable. The Honda Odyssey sells in the hundreds of thousands per year. Nevermind the other cars.

There are over 30,000 vehicle fatalities per year in the US, but those models that have been around for years and are extremely popular with consumers ... have had zero fatalities?

Let me guess, it's because they're not Teslas. Who's really drinking the Kool-Aid?

> your accusations of FUD and being paid for it strongly smell of spiked Kool-Aid

I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong, but I'm getting tired of the lying.

> But what does it have to do with there being quite a few (better selling, cheaper) models with 0 fatalities?

Pretty sure there are no car models out there with 0 fatalities that have been released for more than a year.

How much are you getting paid to spread this FUD? I genuinely want to know. If the gig is sweet enough, I might want to get in on the racket =)

It's definitely every few minutes. I can attest to that from personal experience. Alternatively, you can just keep your hands on the wheel and then the warning doesn't come up.

Well, it's either a "glorified golf cart" or you're a short seller with a financial incentive to spread the nonsense in your post. I'm going to bet on the latter =)

You don't see those headlines because short sellers aren't obsessed with those brands like they are with Tesla. Not because those brands are actually safer or don't have accidents.

"Tesla is, by a wide margin, the No. 1 short stock in terms of money at risk and exposure within the global auto industry"

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/teslas-roaring-start-to-20...

> If Tesla had called this something like "lane-assist adaptive cruise control" I think your average Joe would have had much more realistic expectations around how the technology actually functions.

Which would be foolish on their part, since it would equate their system with that found on other cars. The systems found on other cars are garbage to the point of being unusable. The system that Tesla has is in a different class.

> Does that not trigger an audible alarm by default in a Tesla

No. That's a standard warning that triggers every few minutes if the car can't sense your hands on the wheel. If you don't place your hands on the wheel at that point, then there will be an audible alarm. If you ignore that, the car will slowly reduce speed and come to a halt.

You're right. I touched on this a little bit.

Your estimation skills have to be top notch. If they're not, work hourly for an agency so that they bear the risk. Use that time to hone your estimation skills. Even then, multiply your estimate by 2 and that's what you charge.

If the project is risky, lots of new stuff you've never done before, then multiply your estimate by 3 or 4.

The idea is that you cover your ass so that the "$10/hr" never happens. And of course, never take on projects with vague scope. Make sure everything is clearly defined. That's a skill too and should be honed as well.

The key though is that the "$10/hr" project will be so painful for you though, you will be sure to never repeat that mistake.

> More specifically, don't do fixed cost contracts.

Strongly disagree. I've been doing fixed cost contracts for a very long time with great success. You just need to know what you're doing.

> They misalign all the incentives, and encourages you to do a worse quality job.

Billing hourly does that. It encourages you to "fit" yourself within the estimate that you had to provide. That's fine if you overshot, but if you were way under, now you're under a ton of pressure to get things done quick and you end up doing a quick hatchet job. All because you want to avoid explaining how you were wrong on the estimate. If you keep missing the target, which can happen even with the best of us, the entire project can turn into a pile of excrement.

With fixed price, there's no timer on the side of your table. You take the time to do it right. If you're off by a day or two, the client will take that delay a lot easier than a bill that's twice what they expected AND took twice as long.

Do you lose out since you worked time that you didn't get paid for? Sure. You also win when you get the work done faster than what you estimated. It will even out, but the client will be happier since the experience is less volatile for them.

Which is the point. Clients much prefer a fixed price, since it lets them budget accordingly.

Think of it this way, if you were hiring a plumber, would you want the guy to show up and say his rate is 300 an hour or would you prefer him to show up and say this is going to cost you 150. Which is less stressful? What are you more likely to say "yes" to?

> And it encourages them to take up your time with meetings and support and new "quick" features to add.

No. I set the meetings at the beginning of the project. We meet on a regular basis. There are no surprise meetings. All communication outside of those meetings is via slack/email.

Also a "quick" feature in my book is something that takes me 15 minutes. I do those at no additional cost since it would take me longer to bill for those. I get less than a dozen per project, which works out to a few hours of work which is already expected and added to the budget. Anything over 15 minutes will get a fixed price cost and additional time added to deadline. I've never had a client push back on this way of doing things.

> Best is a fixed hourly rate, providing them an estimate, and setting it up so that you won't exceed a maximum (after which you can reevaluate with them whether to continue).

Clients hate this, since they have no idea what it'll cost. Even if your way of doing things will cost them less. They hate uncertainty. They already have enough of that.

The maximum you're setting is my fixed price, which I simply get paid every time and the client is happy because they know what's coming their way.

On top of that, you're stressing on your end when you start to approach that maximum and start cutting back on the quality of work. I just focus on getting the job done.

> This lets you be flexible on the spec and respond quickly to changes they may want

I can do the same with fixed price. You still need to provide an hourly estimate for any changes. It's really the same thing as approving a fixed price change.

> it lets you get compensated for all those little things that you don't plan for like meetings

Again, meetings suck, they should be kept to a minimum and should be 100% controlled by you. They should be a highly predictable part of the equation or you're wasting time.

> and you no longer have to give your time estimate a padding to ensure you meet the deadline.

Yes, you do. A deadline is a deadline, regardless of how you charge the client. Estimate what it'll take you and then multiply by 2. If your estimate is still off after that, you need to work on your estimation skills.

I've never had a client get pissed at me for finishing early. Hell, you can just finish the work early and then do something else for a week, then deliver on time. But don't be LATE. People HATE that.

Always pad your time. By as much as possible!

> Although they pay less on average, I think you also make more on average.

No =) I tried both ways, for years at a time. You make more when you're not a commodity and when you're hourly, you'll be seen as a commodity.

> Consider, for a fixed cost project you need to create rigorous specs that take weeks to develop

You need a clear SOW (statement of work) regardless of how you bill. If you're not doing that, you're in for a world of hurt.

> then negotiate over how hard different things are.

No? Just price all the options and let the client choose.

> And god forbid they want to add a new feature or change a spec

When they ask for changes, I just price them out over email. It's literally one sentence. This will cost X and will take X extra days. That's it. You need to do that if you're working hourly as well?

> necessitating either you just doing it for free

Never work for free.

> negotiating a whole new add-on project.

Love additional work.

> I'd way rather take on two clients and not spend my time negotiating and doing paperwork.

I'd rather take on three =)

Look, I think you're conflating some bad business practices with how you bill. How you bill does NOT force you to engage in those business practices. It's just how you bill.

I prefer to bill in a way that makes my clients less stressed out which makes me less stressed out in turn. I also have an easier time divorcing PRICE from TIME. This is REALLY important if you want to make more money.

I've done lots of work where I've been paid $1000 per hour when I break it down by time. Can you say the same?

It is when you do it publicly and announce it to the world.

> No benevolent dictatorship has ever existed.

I can quibble with this just a little. A truly benevolent dictator will recognize how harmful dictatorship is and will immediately remove himself from it.

http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdstatehouse/html/gwresignation....

> Yet another of China's many advantages

Yes, you can fire everyone in China, throw them in a work camp, take their property for the greater good, etc.

Funny thing happens when you walk all over people that way for the "greater good" ... a few people at the top, who define what the "greater good" is, tend to become extremely wealthy and powerful. The society becomes lopsided. The peasants become frustrated. Then there's violence.

Not that the people at the top are idiots. They understand this.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-spends-more-on-domestic-s...

> After you've been coding for almost 2 decades across multiple industries, coding becomes predictable and tedious.

Move out of your comfort zone and take on some projects outside of your established expertise.

> Unlike many other fields, the returns that you make from investing in yourself as a software developer/engineer don't compound; they start to depreciate as soon as you stop trying to keep up.

This is only true if you invest in frameworks/libraries/languages/etc. If you invest in understanding problems faced within industries and how to solve them with software, that's not something that depreciates.

Just so that doesn't sound like something abstract, take for example an e-commerce marketplace. Knowing that you need to create two objects, one for the order and another as an invoice for each seller within that order, isn't knowledge that will depreciate with time.

On top of that, there is general knowledge of algorithms and a thousand other things that are sufficiently generalized that they can be applied at any time.

Virtually every project that I take on is in a new space and I learn constantly, keeping things interesting. For reference, since we're talking about age, I'm 37.

> If you 'contract' to just one employer you're an employee for both tax purposes and protections.

That's not the case in the US. Our laws bar the contractor from having set hours, a set place of work, and a myriad of other rules. So if a contractor comes in 9 to 5 and has his own desk, he'll be classified as an employee. Honestly, I would prefer a similar % rule, that seems simpler and I think would accomplish the intent far better than what we have now.