I think there is a bit of survivor bias here. People like to say "everything is shit now, I've had this item for 20 years and it still works." But that's because they can see that 20 year old item, not all the shit they bought 20 years ago that broke and they got rid of.
I'm kind of glad this is all happening because it provides a nice example to point to when I try to explain why I don't want to be dependent on a vendor for these sorts of things.
For real, it's been the most validating of my use-open-source ethos than any other examples I can think of! For this open source isn't about the cost, it's about the vendor dependence/neutrality, and that's quite important when it becomes essentially a business requirement.
A label is fine. With USB the risk is that the thing doesn't work as well as it could. It's been the situation forever with extension cords that they have the wire gauge printed on them, and in that case the risk is that if you choose the wrong cable you will burn your house down. Labels are good enough.
Yeah we were trying to develop an internal corporate MacOS desktop app and the amount of shit I had to go through just to get it to the point where someone who isn't a developer was able to run it was absolutely insane. In the end a lot of this is probably even counterproductive as people get used to these sort of things coming with instructions to disable all security and paste these sudo commands into a terminal to get it running...
It has been a known thing in security for what has to be decades now that taking a security/usability trade off in favor of "security" is the fast way to train users to mash the "allow all" button from muscle memory, thereby severely impairing security.
The premise of the scary banner has to be that the first time the user has ever seen it is when there is actually something wrong.
This is, of course, fully incompatible with the corporate incentive to present the scary banner whenever an honest third party hasn't paid them the danegeld or satisfied a bureaucratic process documented by Franz Kafka. If the thing you care about is actually security.
As an American that stuff is fairly inconsequential to me, although I am already aware of those things so I wouldn't even have a reason to ask. Likewise a Chinese person probably wouldn't have much interest in topics that a US-based model would censor. I guess the answer is just for everyone is that if you are going to talk politics with a chatbot, don't use one from your own country.
Of course he presents a hypothetical person who honestly earned a billion dollars, because he can't name an actual example. All you have to do is double your million dollar business every month for a year and a half! I'm sure this genius would take me up on my offer to work for him for $1 on the first day and doubling it every day for a month, right?
Why would remote working have anything to do with the amount of junior hiring? You can maybe make the case that remote work isn't as helpful for juniors etc etc. but that has absolutely nothing to do with the decision to create a job requisition or not.
I would guess it's a talent pool thing. If you're hiring in-office you're limited to locals and candidates willing to relocate. If you're hiring remotely, the pool is much larger not only in terms of size, but in range of compensation. For example you might be able to get a mid-level engineer living in the midwest for the cost of a junior in a major city.
I would think the general situation would be that it's probably harder to develop juniors now in a (more) remote environment so we shouldn't hire them and hire more experienced people instead.
reply