mamurphy

No, vagueness gets me much more upset, but there's just nothing to write about in those cases.

I think this hits on the spirit behind GP's point. Clarity, leading to an article like the one posted, gets more people upset. The equation (Upset/People x People) results in a larger number -- people, as a whole, are more upset.

But you can see the logic behind why many other big companies would just respond with an opaque message like "thank you for your report, it will be handled in the appropriate manner". Because saying the truth gets people more upset.

If a company is vague, there's nothing to write about, one person (maybe) gets more upset than they would have facing clarity.

But if the company is clear, there is something to write about, and an article like the one posted makes people, overall, more upset.

I remember reading a stat on reddit that 10% of users upvote and 1% of users comment. So if my memory is (near) accurate, that's very common behavior.

Yes; another example:

https://stevekrouse-staticwordle.web.val.run/eyJhbnN3ZXIiOiJ...

Another commenter posted the archive page. No comment on whether this "made it ok," but some of the other photos show the hooks being used in a different context, more like a nanny cam.

This one (https://web.archive.org/web/20231204210803/https://m.media-a...) shows hooks in what looks like a mudroom catching an image of a person in black clothing in a ski-mask, indicating a use case of the hook would be to surreptitiously record a thief.

On the archive, it is advertised as a "Hidden Clothes Hook Camera, Mini Spy Camera HD 1080P, Nanny Cam with Motion Detection, Wireless Security Camera for Home/Office/Pet Monitor, Video Recorder No WiFi Needed, No Audio" with no mention of it being a "bathroom spycam."

I, in turn, was reminded of the (quite fun, for 1 play-through) 2016 game about mining oil: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turmoil_(2016_video_game)

This tweet has the cartoon: https://twitter.com/Benioff/status/549339156854214656?lang=e...

I also found it at the New Yorker: https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995

I am unsure of the original source.

See also the independent company energy sage (https://www.energysage.com/). They provide what seems like a similar service, and have an active referral network in some markets.

I got several quotes through them (though decided to hold off on solar for the time being last fall).

The "That’s it!" at the end gave me a nice chuckle. Fun article, quite involved it seems.

Ironic that Manu's immediately previous blog post from 2022.04.27 is titled "Not Going Anywhere" (https://ma.nu/blog/not-going-anywhere).

The relevant reply: https://www.reddit.com/r/smallbusiness/comments/wa1zob/comme...

We sold a cheap van in the company name. I was 100% straightforward about this with Stripe. I would happily reverse the charge and reprocess it through our primary processor. The customer would also be willing. We have all the paperwork to prove the sale and a signed credit authorization. Stripe has asked us for 0 documents pertaining to the sale.

On top of being out this money, we have to remit sales tax to the state for this sale. It's not a truckload of money but it's enough to make a small business owner throw his head in his hands

If we are taking him at face value that he sold a van, should we also take him at face value that he would be happy to reverse the transaction to his customer and that Stripe is holding his funds hostage and is impossible to get a resolution from?

This is what happens when clients have the lowest bidder mentality.

Your conclusion is completely at odds with this quote from the article:

WebAgency quoted the highest rate of anyone I interviewed, but their portfolio best matched the style I wanted.

Nils's blog post[0] that I found linked here[1] from here[2]. I found that last link from the google search (Nils Maier blog post Firefox extension).

[0]https://www.downthemall.org/the-likely-end-of-downthemall/

[1]https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-dev...

[2]https://www.zdnet.com/article/mozilla-changes-firefox-apis-d...

Do you have any sources your can share or more info about this?

I Googled and the first result was "Under delta, supply chain strains, Toyota slashes production."[0] Many similar results[1][2][3].

Six months ago they were getting temporary reprieve because they monitored supply and snapped some up[4], but now, six months later, they seem to be having to slash production like everyone else.

[0]https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-technology-business-hea...

[1]https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a37364490/toyota-cutting-g... [2]https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/toyota-slashes-producti... (pbs reiterates AP report) [3]https://www.thestreet.com/phildavis/stocks-options/thursday-...

[4]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-07/how-toyot...

This comment, including the part about Europe, prompted me to research this issue a bit. I Googled 'European homelessness' and came across articles[0][1]that suggest that while there are a few cases of success in cities like Helsinki (or Salt Lake City[2]) with 'Housing First' policies, homeless is getting worse in Europe. Denmark and Finland seem to be doing well[1][3], and could serve as a model.

I'd like to learn more about if Europe overall is doing better than the United States. I couldn't find comparative numbers with solid data. Thank you for sharing your story, I am glad you found a light at the end of the tunnel.

[0]https://www.euronews.com/2019/03/22/homelessness-in-europe-a... [1]https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-46891392 [2]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-homelessness-housing/... [3]https://archive.thinkprogress.org/four-countries-the-united-...

Another comment in this thread prompted me to research a bit. While building expensive housing is probably fine, it seems that the cities with the most success have adopted a housing first[0][1][2] policy. Building cheap housing (and housing homeless there) is a major part of what is seen by many as the most effective solution.

[0]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-07-06/why-is-ho... [1]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-homelessness-housing/... [2]https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-46891392

jquery was downvoted but I recall articles like this (https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/17/21070848/eu-apple-europea...) with the EU trying to ban any "non-standard" connector.

Maybe non-standard connectors are actually a feature, not a bug, because everything having the same connector but not the same functionality will lead to confusion as described above.

I was bored so I clicked on the key proof in your profile and it says it's been revoked.

what spiked the graph in November 2012?

My armchair thought: what if the CEO said "wow, Yegge is right, we've gotten really off trail here. you need to show leadership in maintaining a 3+ year old system at Google for promotions?" Could that happen and would it work?

are you suggesting they had any alternative if they wanted to pursue iPhone customers?

Is there any special evidence to suggest this service will exist a year from now?

I'm 33 and still in academia, I'm allergic to competition, scores, rewards, prestige

I had been under the impression that academia was mostly very competitive to be able to get career (tenure track) positions. Are you not aiming for that, is it less competitive in your field, or am I missing something else?

I can't seem to read anything at all about pricing without signing up. I don't want to share my Google/Github account with you before seeing pricing information.

The "see Brick in action" video also doesn't play for me on Firefox.

This reminds me of the recently-posted Trail Router[0] for jogging mapping.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23802317

That reminded me of the https://autonomousweapons.org short horror film, Slaugherbots[0].

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA

Do companies enforce every single time? No. Can they try to enforce, and win, if your manager is upset, dislikes you, or is just a bad manager? Yes. Do they ever enforce? Sure do[0]. Do you have any data about this or could you find any article indicating it's safe to not worry about non-competes (if they are enforceable in your state)? I looked, and I couldn't find any such thing.

Most times the employee is just going to give up, and pursue other opportunities that the employer can't or won't enforce a non-compete against. There isn't always going to be a lawsuit.

Have you gone over the detailed career trajectory of all these engineers you know? Do you think they would volunteer, without prompting, that they couldn't take XZY job due to a non-compete?

Even if you have had detailed conversations with, say, two dozen people, if big companies enforce on 5% of people, it's not unheard of that you personally might not know someone it happened to. That's especially true if you happen to live in CA, where non-competes are unenforceable.

[0]https://www.geekwire.com/2017/business-personal-amazon-web-s...

as far as your comment goes: nope. Amazon cannot afford a legal battle for each and every one of their employees. Also Amazon knows they’re going to look really stupid if they do go the route of suing you. Only case where I have seen NCAs trying to be enforced is in case of high profile executives where they are actually trying to send a message more than enforce the NCA.

Do you have any source whatsoever for this? Companies enforce non-competes all the time. Wall Street Journal thinks it is rising 60% over the last decade (2013)[0]. I think your experience of what you "have seen" is wildly out of touch with reality.

I tried to find a source supporting your position, that companies don't enforce non-competes, but couldn't. The best I found was this[1] article about one lawyer willing to take on NCA cases for employees on extreme-contingency arrangements, since he apparently practices in a state where fee agreements must be reciprocal (i.e., if there is a fee agreement in your NCA, you get your fees paid if you win). If you live in such a state and can get that man to represent you, great. Otherwise, as he describes:

There have been several cases where we have invested $100,000 worth of attorney time and $10,000+ of hard, out-of-pocket costs to defend a poor or working class person against a bogus non-compete agreement. And there have been a couple cases where it’s gone far past that: $200,000+ in attorney time, $20,000+ worth of case expenses. I’m sorry, but no other lawyer in America does that. I’m the only one.

In many of these cases, you will need to execute perfectly or you will lose. You have to make 100 perfect moves and the other side only has to get 1 thing right. It’s absurd. It’s messed up. But that’s how it is.

Now, in reply to you saying: "It’s a stupid posturing game that rarely works."

This individual does agree that in many cases the companies are posturing and will lose. But unless you can afford the $XX,XXX-$XXX,XXX to pay a lawyer to get there (or find a unicorn, like him, who will work on contingency), you lose by default. Whether you think it's a "stupid" move to posture or not, the companies do it, routinely, and at an increasing pace.

[0]https://www.wsj.com/articles/litigation-over-noncompete-clau...

[1]https://www.pollardllc.com/poor-people-non-compete-cases/

easily make the argument

A lawyer near you just had a delighted vision of profits. Amazon can afford a $XX,XXX-$XXX,XXX legal battle over your non-compete, can you?

There are no "close-call mistakes" in the situations which have caused outrage

I agree with you on that! As I said, "the clear cut ones pull at our heartstrings because they are so egregious."

The problem as I see it is that it's hard to tailor a bright-line policy that creates increased personal liability for police for their clear abuses of power and brutality, that doesn't also create increased personal liability for their close-call, reasonable mistakes. Some of the "5 demands" I have been seeing seem like reasonable starts [0]; none that I have seen focus on increased personal liability.

If changing that causes some people to "avoid taking a job", good.

I would guess that you and I have drastically different estimations of how large an exodus from policing the wrong kind of policy change could cause. We need police reform, but we also need police.[1]

[0]For example, https://i.redd.it/e5ka53eb5k251.png

[1]See, for example, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23410144 "Montreal once had a 16 hour police strike, creating a natural experiment in what happens without police..."

Any person of conscience wants 0 (or at least less, moving towards 0) police brutality. I also think most people would avoid taking a job where they could be judged and imprisoned for a close-call mistake (that the jury believes was) made months or years earlier in a tense, dangerous situation, with no support to defend themselves. Many incidents aren't clear cut - the clear cut ones pull at our heartstrings because they are so egregious.