43 karma · joined January 2, 2014
I think the word they're looking for here is "internship". That's a longer duration and more expensive, but probably(?) less distrustful to the regular team.
In large quantities, stuff taxes also include how large a dwelling you need and how difficult it is to move.
Studying abroad made me more aware that there are penalties for not having stuff, too. It was mostly basic cooking implements that I missed, and also things that are just useful to have around, like tape and plastic wrap.
I do think that personality and behavior can influence attraction really, really strongly. And I suspect that how much each factor matters, and what kind of personalities and behavior are attractive, would vary a lot from person to person (given the variety of reasons why friends have said they're attracted to people). But I also think intense attraction to personality is something that wouldn't show up on a test like this. Personality doesn't really come to life just from a description, and for most people who've told me about being really strongly attracted to a personality, it was something kinda unusual, or that would require really getting to know the person before it was visible. Then again, I also wouldn't be surprised if my friends' ways of being attracted to people aren't a representative sample.
(I'm a former intern and not currently working there, and not a recruiter; pretty sure their hiring managers don't read Hacker News.)
No idea if the change of banana varieties also affects it, or not.
But good signalling involves some additional factors. Signalling is usually used when you want to say something about yourself, but it's something that people would want to say about themselves whether it was true or not, so you have to say it in a way that is difficult or impossible to fake. A good signal is one that is highly visible (in the context where it matters; clothes are good for in-person signaling, profiles or photos are good for online signaling), and either cannot be sent without having the quality they're supposed to signify (you can't afford expensive things to show off if you don't have money), or are much easier to send if you have that quality than if you don't (it's easier to get a high StackOverflow score if you're good at programming and communicating than if you're not).
If you're giving employees extra stock to signal loyalty and trustworthiness, it's "cheaper" to do that if you actually value being loyal and trustworthy (rather than just wanting others to think that of you), because then you get value from being the sort of person you want to be and being thought well of by others. At least, that's the theory; you could just want other people to think you're a loyal person really, really badly.
When people first start learning digital painting (painting in Photoshop, Gimp, etc), a lot of them draw landscapes with chartreuse grass, because they used the greenest green on the color picker. Artists in other mediums don't usually have this problem, because rarely-useful colors like #00FF00 aren't included in the typical pigment set.
It really depends on your priorities for the use case. Sometimes you want to give as many options as possible, sometimes it's more important to make it really easy to get something that looks ok and hard to accidentally get something overly neon.
There are benefits to picking something you don't already do - or rather, something that most people who start startups don't do. People naturally think the most about optimizing things they do often, and when most of them are being told to "scratch your own itch", they do even more of that. So most software startups will be about things that people who write software and found startups do a lot of, and those markets will be the most competitive. If you solve your grandmother's problems instead of your own, there's a lot less competition.
(Problems are food intolerances, some cause unusually painful gas, others affect my mind. My doctor has no idea what causes it, and some of them are to really common foods, so staying on my diet is difficult.)
I also got a really strong gut feeling of "spam" being used as a "boo!" sign, for some reason.
I think there may be technical constraints in making such an interface customizable enough, though. Salesforce and Warcraft make a lot of assumptions about what sort of program you're making. An application-builder that's as general-purpose as a programming language sounds like it'd be really hard to build. (Although I'm not sure how much harder that is than just building something like Drupal.)
We also don't have a graphical way of describing behavior, that I know of. Even in tools like Salesforce and Warcraft, custom logic is shown as plain text (though Salseforce gives you some buttons to insert variable names and operators). It sort of makes sense to just use text, if the alternative is making people learn a new set of symbols.
(The original example I heard of for this is that people are usually advised to be less selfish, but some people have heard that messages so much that they think it's never ok to do things for themselves. If you're more selfish than you want to be, advising people to be more selfish sounds evil. If you're so unselfish that it's hurting you, advice to be less selfish might seem kind of unnecessary. So when advice to do more or less of something seems like bad advice, sometimes it's just because you're not the target audience.)
> It's fine to say "change the environment" but that's not always an option. ^ good point.
I've had this habit for about a year. So far, called the police too late to do anything about it twice (once because my phone was dead, once from a combination of negligence and not knowing the right number to call), and once called the emergency number for a guy who fainted in public (but ran off before help could arrive). In the last case, a handful of other bystanders also stopped to help the guy, so bystander effect mysteriously didn't work that day. So I haven't been terribly helpful to anyone, but I was surprised how often I saw problems once I was looking for it.
(I don't think I would have been terribly helpful in this situation, though - I don't know how to break up a fight without being hurt, and probably wouldn't have thought of some of the better ideas like trying to single out a strong-looking person in the crowd and get them to help.)
Of course, on the supply side, the best way to validate this is talk to some tailors about what their job entails, and learn how mass-produced clothing is made. I suspect that making this work would require finding a way to hire tailors very cheaply, in a location that's within 48 hour shipping distance.
I'd consider buying from a company like this, if I were confident that it actually would fit well, and the style I wanted was available in a lot of different colors. (Some parts of fit are personal preference - like the tradeoff between freedom of movement in the arms vs. clean-looking sleeve caps.) Also, as a woman who'se been shopping with other women, this should also work for womens' office clothing if it works for men. Differences in bust sizes add an extra variable to finding things that fit, and in certain styles (like fitted shirts and dresses that don't stretch), it can make things hard.