HN user
I think the 2 laptops you mentioned are targeting different markets.
The Surface Laptop you linked to is - 16GB of RAM and 512GB of Storage (no 8GB of RAM option)
The $599 Mac Neo is 8GB of RAM and 256GB of Storage. It doesn't have a 16GB RAM option but a 512GB storage option is $699.
8GB RAM seems to me to be targeting folks who don't run a lot of local apps or multiple big apps
I refused to use chatGPT until they created the public version that you could use without signing-up.
I later started using Gemini but I use it without signing in to try to ensure my privacy.
I recently came across this App [0] and I've been trying/using it. I end up going back to Gemini if what I need is quite complicated but it's not that common these days.
it's written to please every customer under the sun
Disagree with this. In the places I’ve worked, I’ve lost count of the number of times we turned down feature requests with the explanation that - this isn’t common practice and seems to be unique to you.
I was in Enterprise software and even though I didn’t visit users, I dealt with them regularly eg through video calls or engaging with them via support forum if support escalates an issue.
And yes we were judged on how pleasant to use our software was. If we miss a feature or ship a feature that customers intensely dislike, best believe that we’ll get a torrent of negative feedback on our support channels
1) This also happens to non-workspace (regular) gmail accounts
2) I didn't change the policy on the workspace email when I signed up for it
The point is still - why ask me to authenticate via different methods and then reject them after I've correctly authenticated? If some policy is overriding these, then you shouldn't have asked me to authenticate via those methods in the first place.
It isn't just the backup codes.
More than once, I was in a different country and tried logging into a workspace gmail account. Google flags it as a strange activity (fair enough) and needs to authenticate me. It asks me to enter the complete address for my recovery email (I do this), it sends me a code to use for sign in (I do this) but it still refuses to sign me and says it can't authenticate me. It says I need to sign in from a location that I've signed in from before.
So, for the period that I was out of the country, I couldn't access my email. This happened each time I'm in a new country. My only work around was to sign in to my email (on my laptop) before traveling and not sign out (for security reasons, I don't like to do this).
Something similar happened when I used a new laptop.
I just don't understand this. What then is the point of having recovery email and phone number if you won't use them?
….every ERP sales process includes an you can customize the edge cases…
This isn’t what you think.
First, large ERP vendors will repeat the mantra that you shouldn’t customize and that they don’t advise it. At best, implementation consultants will be the one talking about customizing.
Secondly, ERP sales process isn’t as simple as you think. Buying firm have a detailed and documented list of requirements and these are checked off as they’re being demoed. If customization is needed, that specific customization needs to be shown before that item requirement is checked off.
I don’t agree with this.
Yes, there are times when processes/procedures are truly unique to a firm but it usually isn’t and the firm can ‘standardize’ their process so that it fits into the ERP flow.
These ERPs are usually shipped to handle common/different scenarios/usecases and clients simply have to configure them accordingly (configuration is totally different from trying to customize)
People love to blame Oracle or SAP for every botched rollout without actually looking at who is responsible.
If you used consultants for the implementation, how is a botched rollout the ERP vendors fault?
This article says …… The council initially customized Oracle but now plans to reimplement the software out-of-the-box, adopting standardized processes..….
The above tells you the issue isn’t from Oracle the ERP vendor.
I'm not surprised at that. It ties in to my responses [1] [2]
has their own set of rules so most HR software doesn't bother calculating it -- you just figure it out manually and input it every year for every employee
Beg to disagree. This is the complexity that large ERP firms handle and why Oracle, SalesForce, etc are expensive to implement. They figure out the commonality (if any) and build for it. Then they add on features specific to countries they target and then they add the ability to configure for your own situation (to a certain level).
PeopleSoft did this for Payroll and workforce administration which is part of how they cornered the market for HCM.
Not ERPs.
Customizing ERPs is where consulting firms make money but the ERP vendors themselves advise against this because it becomes expensive maintaining the customizations as new versions of the software and more features are released.
There's a bit of selection bias going on there though. The reality is that SAP and similar products are designed for a business that works a certain way
ERP products are designed following "standard" or "best" practices/processes. It's common to see companies first contract a consulting company to "re-design" their processes before they then try to implement an ERP system.
They have a fixed methodology and they also revise it as data comes in - usually after the report has been released for one or more months (see [1], [2])
1. https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/revisions-to-jobs-numb...
2. https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/sep/12/revisions-job...
It’s hard to be a Product Manager without owning a product
I'll say it depends on the size of the product. If you're dealing with say ERPs (Oracle Fusion Apps, WorkDay, SAP, etc), a PM can't own an entire product. Instead, they'll own multiple features where each of those features are complex in themselves and being ERP typically involve integration with multiple other products.
But I agree with the general thrust of your point which seems to be that the PM should own something 'significant'
This mindset is also part of the reason why some products are atrociously bad. Developers build products with the latest tech, whizzes, bells and whistles and totally miss the 'actual' requirements and/or how their users use it. When bugs/issues are raised, dev complains that users aren't using the product the 'correct' way.
At the end of the day, whether you should have a Product Manager or not AND the number of PMs you should have will depend on various factors such as the product itself, team size, size of the company, type of company (B2B, B2C, etc). But saying that PMs are NEVER needed and Developers should just build is wrong. Someone has to wear the hat of a 'Product' person. Whether it's a separate person or the developer is dependent on the factors earlier listed.
My comment here [1] and the discussions for that post is a good example of this mindset of PMs are NEVER needed.
Not the OP, but I think my comment here [1] might be a good example of what the OP means
These varied schedules won't work in every situation. Sometimes, people need to meet (even if virtually) or they need answers to questions and situations where people's schedules aren't kind of synced becomes problematic.
That still doesn't address the specific issue I was responding to.
Are you saying they told Mira they were going to fire Sam and they didn't give her a reason but she was still okay with it?
but had to immediately demote the new CEO (Mira) after she rejected their plan
According to reports, Mira was informed of the decision to fire Sam the night before Sam was fired. There's no indication she was against it and she also didn't inform Sam. So, I don't get this "she rejected their plan".
If the board informed her they were going to fire Sam, it seems logical that they also informed her they were going to give her the interim CEO position. I have no knowledge of this (it just kind of makes sense to me).
I received a letter from a company called Welltok and I almost discarded it since I didn't know the company (thought it was spam mail). I glanced at it and noticed the sentence - Notice of Data Breach.
The letter went on to inform me that they're a vendor to Sutter Health and they were impacted by the MOVEit breach. In summary, the letter was to notify me that my personal data including treatment information and diagnosis were potentially affected. To say I was surprised was an understatement given that Sutter Health hadn't notified me about this incident. And this incident seemed to have occurred between May and July.
I Googled this and found a discussion about this on Reddit [1] and just like me a lot of people were surprised because Sutter hadn't notified them, the letter they got didn't mention Sutter prominently (even on the envelope) and people initially thought it was spam. Further Googling showed that Sutter posted a notice on their site on Nov 3 [2].
I find it extremely surprising that Sutter Health didn't notify patients directly. How would people have seen the notice given that most people go to a Health Provider's website ONLY when they have a medical issue. The notice from Welltok also seems to minimize the potential impacts of the breached data. Welltok is offering free credit monitoring for 12 months. What about personal medical records that have been breached (diagnosis, treatment, date of birth, etc)? Even the credit monitoring requires a sign-up with a credit card. Why couldn't they have reached a deal with the credit agencies to allow for a signup without a card?
Welltok or Sutter Health also don't say how many years of your personal/medical record was affected.
1. https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/17q10j6/psa_patien...
2. https://vitals.sutterhealth.org/sutter-health-vendor-reports...
You're saying that Trump
a) who was advised that firing the FBI director would have a political cost to him but still decided to go ahead with it
b) and essentially bragged about doing it
c) was suddenly under pressure after the firing and decided to appoint someone he didn't like/want?
> The Democrats launched FBI investigations against their political opponents without sufficient legal backing.
If you're referring to the Trump investigation (during his first run), then your claim is false. No court or legal investigation including that of the special counsel or general inspector's report, has reached such a conclusion.
The special counsel report did determine there was enough grounds to start an investigation but it said it should have been a preliminary investigation and not a full-blown investigation.
Also, the FBI was led by a Republican (James Comey) appointed by a Democrat (Obama) specifically because he was supposed to be independent-minded (as the Deputy AG under Bush, Comey refused to sign an extension of a warantless spying program because he felt it was illegal and the program lapsed; Comey then rushed to the hospital to make sure the AG who wasn't sick wasn't tricked into signing it)
You can't necessarily reach that conclusion.
Big tech employs more people than startups, which means it's more likely for someone to get a job at big tech than a startup. It's just a law of numbers and has nothing to do with whether they're suited for startup life or big tech life.
In addition, in the US, foreign students who just graduated are more likely to get a job at big tech than startup because more big tech sponsor H1B/Green card than startups. And the fear/circumstances around losing your immigration status means more of them might opt for big-tech than startup
> because they actually are from (e.g.)Nigeria and really do have poor English.
This isn't true. English is Nigeria's official language (all Education is in English) and people generally speak English well. Secondly, folks from Nigeria actually use the gist of the article as a flag for filtering out scam i.e. once they open an email with bad grammar, they automatically assume it's scam and ignore it.
Can confirm this. I was given this information the first time I signed up and have been getting the difference every year when I go to renew
My apologies if I misunderstood your statement but I interpret it to mean that you're skeptical that Biden received a large number of votes compared to Obama.
If my interpretation is correct, then I think you're missing the big factor that conservatives and registered Republicans actively campaigned for Biden. They didn't just reject Trump, they explicitly said they were voting Biden, Campaigned for him, asked their fellow GOP members to vote Biden over Trump.
At the end of the day, you had Democrats + Independents + Conservatives voting Biden. That coalition didn't exist during Obama's time. In fact, the people who most likely voted for Romney were the people who were now voting for Biden
> Twitter's ad targeting depends on knowing what a user looks at
But they can track which tweets are being clicked, the IP of the person and a whole bunch of things even when you're not logged in.
> and how their network of connections/follows
But that's the problem right there. If you force people to create an account to read tweets, they might do so but they won't follow anybody or follow very few people and tweet quite infrequently. I just don't think it's feasible to expect a significant number of people (like say # of users on Facebook) to be tweeting regularly. But it's possible that I'm wrong.
While it's all well and good to launch new features, I think Twitter should improve their existing service and I'm referring to low hanging fruits.
I don't understand the rationale behind cutting me off while I'm scrolling through Twitter simply because I'm not logged in. Twitter can still display Ads to me irrespective of whether I'm logged in or not. In fact cutting me off means I leave Twitter which means I don't see the Ads they're selling which in turn means less Ad money for them.
Even when logged in, Twitter will display the new message/note icon. When I click on it to read the notification, it turns out to be Twitter telling me to turn on notifications. Now normally, once you have read the message, the 'new' message/note icon is cleared. Instead Twitter displays it again almost immediately and this then goes on for the next few hours before they stop.
If they can't fix these simple things, why would someone want to read longer content on Twitter. They would still get cut off again as Twitter is doing for existing tweets
ahh, you're right. I went back and compared the specs [1] and the battery is the biggest difference. Somehow, the marketing I always came across was for iPhone 13 and the Pro. Don't believe I saw marketing for the mini. Cellphone providers I checked (when I thought about upgrading) didn't have the mini (12 or 13) upfront and center on their home page.
1. https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/?modelList=iphone13mini...