takenpilot

I'm an ex-google employee laid off as part of the 12000.

To answer your question, basically not at all. Half a year before the layoffs, they explicitly consolidated power towards your direct managers around the assignment of work and especially quarterly and yearly assessment.

Not just toward managers in general -- before that point there was a consolidation of power towards managers in general over the years, but luckily a group of manager's peers would balance out or question any extreme examples, which moderated a lot of what can sometimes go wrong.

But right before the layoffs the system was changed to have an explicit emphasis on your direct manager.

Perfect. Then maybe the managers would be working with their teams instead of just setting up goalposts.

And then what?

These shit-tests reveal things. When one side has power over the other, some things aren't meant to the tested unless you want to consistently discover how little people care about the folk that have very little impact over their lives.

Who is that person?

https://jsonip.com/about

Neat!

"can't stop me"

You mean imprison or kidnap. Large companies can stop you from using their ecosystems or entering their property for almost any reason they like.

This is reinforcing the idea that all ICs eventually become managers, or that managers are just more advanced versions of ICs. Egocentric.

But it's the direction the industry is moving in.

And you have to scroll quite a few pages in that.

Is anyone else sick of long-winded prefaces? If they don't get the point in the first paragraph, I just skip it and go to the comments. The top comment gives me the jist anyway.

This is true, actually. A good friend of mine disappeared for a while because of this. The story he told me about the experience afterward was wild.

Is this why they put first-class in the front, even though they're exposed to all the poor people walking past them?

The laws get _weird_ if you have "resident" status in more than one country.

Just to make the rules easier to enforce, it's sometimes easier to show you have resident status somewhere else. I had much bigger issues with the fact that land ownership / house ownership / bank account laws care a lot about non-resident-ownership.

Same. Am Canadian, already south. This is not the place.

I'm looking at Northern Europe (good privacy laws) or Singapore (the rules are draconian, but very clear).

And a sub-question: doesn't that make this ideal for checking for copyright infringement instead?

Just a question: if they turn these images into hashes, does that mean it only finds very specific images?

That is, if someone has some well-known image on their phone, then it can find it, but anything taken themselves is safe?

Doesn't that make this a bit pointless since I don't know anyone that saves images from the internet to their phone. That's weird, right?

Supposedly they have to do that for safety deposit boxes too, but as recent events have shown in LA, that doesn't stop them from seizing everything including those boxes and then opening them up to take inventory. A judge objects, but it's too late. Now people are having to prove that they own whatever was in those boxes to get back their stuff back, and if they can't -- everything is gone.

It's not ironic at all. All protection is traded with freedom.

Useful. Bookmarking to watch.

I've heard this from multiple people explaining stuff to me -- they were all Americans.

In a lot of ways, the transfer of cryptocurrency is the same as the transfer of generic messages.

It's only when you're transferring them back to dollars/yuan/yen/etc. that it's suddenly currency from a government.

What about private industry acting as a government, with similar power.

This is insane and I love it.

I got one really good one, a couple years ago. Since then, yeah, all very low quality. You could hear the recruiters filling in checklists for the body shops they were hiring for.

I like the idea from this article that basic income is a form of simplifying the government's social programs, leading to a smaller government overall. Slowly building up the basic income as those social programs are deconstructed is a wise way to do it.