HN user

supjeff

414 karma
Posts9
Comments65
View on HN

I agree with you, in spirit, but I think the true issue lies elsewhere.

Rich people can spend money to influence elections, yes, but how can they do it? through political donations, super-pacs and bribes. Bribes are already illegal. political donations and super-pacs can give politicians the juice they need to get their messaging out, but getting the message across isn't enough to win an election. The people need to vote. Billionaires can spend as much money as they want to support candidates, but a billionaire still only has one vote to cast.

My point is, billionaires can pay for all the political campaigns in the world, but the electorate gets the final say. It's up to us to A) run for office and B) vote for the best candidate (but tell that to the 64% turnout in the 2024 presidential election)

How much do we believe the current administration values "intelligence"? For the most part, the truth is trump's enemy. as far as he can control it, it's better for his to be the only authoritative voice. If he says Australia is full of muslims and bad hombres, he doesn't need the CIA contradicting him.

If a good leader is somebody who consistently sets a good example, and is willing to sacrifice personally for their team, I don't think there are very many out there. The problem is that companies still need "leaders" the same way TV stations need programming.

If an company decides to invest some money in the pursuit of an opportunity, some managers might get hired or promoted, and the company isn't going to scour the earth for genuinely good leaders. They'll post a job, take a few interviews then promote the person who was going to get it anyway, or hire somebody who looks the part. Generally, one shouldn't take middle-managers seriously.

Product Hunt is dead 10 months ago

I don't know if it's fair to call this a dead-internet thing. Most comments on social media are nothing or misdirection. You might say "well that's easy if you're paying for fake activity from bots" but I've seen plenty of real people have transactional, nothing-exchanges in real life. I mean, the internet isn't the only place where people are fake/lazy.

Product Hunt is dead 10 months ago

The author assumes that he's talking to legitimate vote-riggers, and not just people who will screenshot successful posts, say it was their doing, pocket his money and block him.

It looks like you copy/pasted this from the post you made in last month's thread. You're still hiring for the same positions? Are you actually hiring? Why haven't you filled any of these roles? Why are you posting if you're not actually hiring?

Obvious and dead horse beaten issue. I’m working on solving this and will report here when I’ve got a prototype. Surprising insights arise from pondering the philosophy of show and tell-specifically how listening is involved in order to “earn” your turn to speak.

Do you ever look at what you've written and ask yourself: "Would somebody else understand this"? Could you say it again, but using enough words this time?

Aside from the fact that wales' software is supposed to be free and open source and thus will not require its users to trust the founder as much as they are forced to with fb, how is Wales not more trustworthy than Zuck? One guy has a string of abuses and apologies spanning almost two decades as the founder, CEO and majority shareholder of a company that helped the Russian gov't steal the 2016 election and helped bring back eradicated diseases, and the other created a non-profit encyclopedia and gave away the source code?

I think sometimes strict deadlines are sometimes about coordinated efforts, as in the case of a Superbowl ad. If you're the company responsible for producing the ad, then submitting it a week after the game is unacceptable. I feel like where software is concerned, it's most often like you've said.

I think this is when a manager is supposed to add resources. I don't accept the idea that it should be normal for everyone to have to work ridiculous hours until the crunch is over.

It's the manager's job to make sure there is slack in production; that there are resources available for emergency situations, and that there is enough redundancy built into the production team that if somebody gets sick or somehow can't work a normal workload, somebody else can pick it up. If a crunch situation is unavoidable, as a manager, I would be deeply apologetic and appreciative of my employees' sacrifice, while frantically searching for a solution to ease the burden. If I can't bring in help, I need to adjust the scope or push back on the deadline. Plain and simple.

If you're not the leader, you're waiting quietly for the leader to take action, but more often than not, the leader is enthralled by the exhilarating debate taking place before them. A non-technical leader takes it as an opportunity to learn, which is a great attitude to have, but the rest of us are dying.

Other times they know they need to get things back on track, but they don't know how to stop the runaway train that is a developer ruminating on something that gets more convoluted with each syllable.