On the other hand, we just went through a once per lifetime pandemic and a once per lifetime consumer stimulus package. Supply chains are wrecked and we're in a period during which international trading patterns could massively change. Meanwhile,
* China is still purusing zero COVID.
* There's a land war in Europe with Russia effectively cut off from the Western world.
* German manufacturing, once a workhorse, is being crushed by energy costs
* much of the developing world is swimming hard against the current just to stay alive.
I don't think we are in a situation analogous to 1947, of course, and I do think we are in or at least heading into a more-than-technical recession. But "irrelevant because that only happens after once in a lifetime extremely disruptive events" is a pretty... odd... take in 2022.
> On the other hand, we just went through a once per lifetime pandemic and a once per lifetime consumer stimulus package
And—relatedly—a once-in-ever declaration of a recession of less than one quarter, because of how uniquely sharp the decline in output, employment, and all the recession-relevant measures was, even though it quickly reversed direction due to stimulus and other policy responses.
So it's kind of weird people today pretending that the 2-consecutive-doen-quarter thing has always been an ironclad definition of a recession.
> German manufacturing, once a workhorse, is being crushed by energy costs
Hmm, maybe Germany can solve this the same way they "solved" ballooning Berliner rents: just pass a law saying how much energy should cost. Simple. They do love regulations over there.
Or just ask Gerhard Schröder and the rest of their former chancellors who were in bed with Russia, to blow their hot air through the pipes this winter. They have enough of it.
> I was concerned about rampant outsourcing for some reason.
Because this concern was pervasive in pop culture / career advice columns during post dot-com. Fear-mongering about outsourcing is probably one of the primary causes for the huge run-up in software development salaries in the 2010s.
Hah! An Accounting prof told me that I should double in Accounting because CS would be outsourced. I said something like "well, maybe, but CS is going to automate a ton of Accounting jobs either way, and the accessible Accounting jobs that continue to exist will require some programming. So I will choose my job maybe being outsourced over my job definitely being automated."
I'm now on a few committees at the college and mentioned this conversation to him. He remembered it, even though it was may years ago. He laughed and told me that's basically what happened -- for a few years they had very low in-field placement rates because there are not enough personal tax prep jobs to go around and the larger accounting firms demanded programming skills for entry positions. The Accounting major now requires multiple CS courses and he encourages his students to double-major in CS.
On that note, I'm bearish on SWE compensation and bullish on CS research compensation over the next 10 years. For basically the same reason. We've been massively under-producing (good) CS PhDs because industry pays so well and the standard advice is "only idiots get PhDs when industry starting pay for folks who can get into good phd programs is 150K+".
Basically, "zig when everyone else is zagging" is pretty good early career advice.
well, how many years does that take though? That's a lot of time to not be earning. Then there's kind of a question of making sure the focus is something people are going to really need in the future. Feels risky.
I always enjoyed programming (like, from 3rd grade onwards). Basically, from my first line of BASIC, I was hooked.
I realized I was built for computer science during my first industry internship. The job was in probably one of the most interesting corners of the industry, but I still found the day-to-day slog of software development was boring and tedious. The only part of the job I enjoyed was interacting with the researchers, who were working on really interesting and difficult problems that I had no idea how to solve.
I figured I would die of boredom within 5 years if I became a software developer, or have to switch domains every few years and get my stimulation from the domain details. But I really enjoyed the computing part, not the applications. So I became a computer scientist instead of a software engineer.
Just means the restaurant wasn't very good to begin with. Chipotle, McD's, etc. have all raised prices nationally, and they operate in what has to be the most price sensitive market possible. I know the good restaurants in my area have doubled prices and people keep coming because they're the best.
Rising prices differentiate the good businesses from the bad.
You are talking about a fundamentally different situation than the article, and than a lot of areas face. “The good restaurants in my area.” That implies a much larger selection than the typical small town, where there’s likely a McD’s but not a chipotle.
And as was already stated, the buying power in these towns tends to also be lower, maybe fluctuating due to tourists but nowhere near a city’s average. Your “people keep coming” and “doubled prices”comment suggests a much higher level of disposable income.
And throwing out corporate chains as part of this? The franchises are just tiny pieces of the whole. There’s a whole massive machine watching each limb, supplying it, and sometimes amputating it. Which, yet again, compare that to a mom and pop, it is nowhere near the same.
If you haven’t been to a small town, you should visit a few. Your disposable income would be welcome in a lot of great restaurants that are still struggling. A lot of not so great ones as well.
It sounds like the restaurant was a side project that was barely solvent to begin with. They could try raising prices, but if the customers leave then people simply aren't willing to pay what it costs to keep that place open and the demand to support that restaurant in that place just isn't there.
> It sounds like the restaurant was a side project that was barely solvent to begin with
This is an incredibly bad take.
Restaurants are a grueling business and many have low margins — 80% fail within 5 years. Since the beginning of the pandemic many incredible and beloved restaurants in my city have been forced to close due to lock downs, landlords raising rents, rising costs, etc.
> They could try raising prices, but if the customers leave then people simply aren't willing to pay what it costs to keep that place open and the demand to support that restaurant in that place just isn't there.
If customers are sensitive to higher prices, it's probably because of record inflation and economic downturn limiting their disposable income.
Nowadays the only establishments with stability are chains: McDonalds, Starbucks, Burger King... places that for the most part only care about profit and neither pay or treat their employees well, or have good quality food. A city without diverse locally-owned restaurants is a bleak prospect.
> Throughout most of R-BBQ’s existence, Rodriguez has worked other jobs as well, first at the health clinic in town, then at the school district. His heart was in the restaurant, but he was cognizant of his father’s railroad pension and the stability it provided.
It says right in TFA article that the owner works other jobs to support himself. No doubt restaurants are a tough business. Lots of businesses fail. Should we subsidize every business in existence that can't make the economics work on its own merits?
I'm sorry people will lose the restaurant they love so much, but apparently not enough to pay the higher prices it would take to keep it open. Times change, economic conditions change, businesses come and go. That's a natural part of the economy and life. Things don't last forever, especially if you're unwilling to face reality and do the things that are necessary to make them last.
> Since the beginning of the pandemic many incredible and beloved restaurants in my city have been forced to close due to lock downs, landlords raising rents, rising costs, etc.
Yes, I've heard of many of these. It's always a person who went to the place once 2 years ago and is sad now that it's closing. Guess what you can do to keep local restaurants open? Go to them and buy food!
> It says right in TFA article that the owner works other jobs to support himself.
Both bee_rider and InefficientRed's comments were clearly about the general effect and not the specific restaurant mentioned in the article.
Regardless, the fact that Rodriguez has to work another job to support himself doesn't make it a 'side project'.
> Yes, I've heard of many of these. It's always a person who went to the place once 2 years ago and is sad now that it's closing. Guess what you can do to keep local restaurants open? Go to them and buy food
Are you really disregarding the content of my post because of a made up scenario that you're attributing to me?
In 2020 a beloved Syrian cheese and dessert shop, owned by a refugee, was forcibly evicted because their land lord tripled their rent. The lot remains vacant to this day. Was this personally my fault for not buying enough cheese?
> In 2020 a beloved Syrian cheese and dessert shop, owned by a refugee, was forcibly evicted because their land lord tripled their rent. The lot remains vacant to this day. Was this personally my fault for not buying enough cheese?
Obviously every single instance of a restaurant closing is not going to be the same. Maybe the landlord hates Syrians. Maybe they're negotiating a deal where Starbucks will pay triple the rent for a 10 year NNN lease that will make more money even with the vacancy, maybe it's a money laundering front for the Russian mob, who knows?
I'm sorry your favorite cheese shop closed and it was probably not personally your fault for not buying enough cheese. Maybe you just live in a town that does not have enough cheese loving people to support a cheese shop, or there are uniquely evil landlords who have a vendetta against immigrant hard-luck stories. Sometimes businesses we like close. It happens.
Anyway, my point is that only focusing on the 'logic' and numbers misses the point. The myopic focus on short-term profits hurts the average person and their communities.
You asked in an earlier comment if we should "subsidize every business in existence that can't make the economics work on its own merits?" I am not necessarily saying that we should, but we ought to acknowledge that the economy is not a system based on merit. In addition to blatantly profiteering, many large companies have taken trillions from programs like PPP loans that were meant to protect jobs, and proceeded with layoffs or stock buybacks instead. That money not only comes from you and I, but it also affects our communities — people lose their jobs, and the record profit are shuffled away into tax havens.
Does the world _need_ a specialty cheese shop? No. But the larger collapse of small, locally owned businesses since 2020 is a worrying trend.
I mean I don't know if you'be been out eating any time in the previous 6 months, but fast food is no discount. Most mom-pop places comparable or cheaper than fast food.
I completely agree: in my neck of the woods, a breakfast combo at McDonalds now costs more than the incredible mom & pop places nearby. The problem is convenience and access.
Fast food chains are ubiquitous and designed to be a quick and predictable choice for people. Mom & pop places don't tend to have large parking lots, or drive-thrus that people can line up around the block for. They also can't afford the margins that UberEats or Doordash take — and food delivery has exploded in the past few years.
Lastly, many people are creatures of habit and few are probably looking to shake things up right now. The unfortunate truth is that the best value or quality seldom wins these days.
mcdonalds in particular seems to have deliberate price discrimination. if you go in and buy one of the prominently featured combos, you could end up spending over $10. on the other hand, ordering from the dollar menu and using discounts through the app, you can get a lot of food for not much money. today I got two mcdoubles, large fries, and a soda for $3.50. I dunno where you would find a cheaper ~1200 calorie hot meal.
There are no capitalists in foxholes. Stop voting for neoliberal vampires (i.e., Democrats) and small business tyrants (i.e., Republicans). If people want price controls, vote for social democrats and communists. If none are running where they live, run for office on monopoly busting and price controls.
>It sounds like the restaurant was a side project that was barely solvent to begin with.
It's actually hilarious how downvoted this comment is, considering how close it is to another sentiment that's actually popular (ie. make the same point, but make it about labor costs rather than evil corporations raising prices. Both are based on the claim that if a business isn't profitable enough, it shouldn't exist in the first place.
> Both are based on the claim that if a business isn't profitable enough, it shouldn't exist in the first place.
I think a little bit of empathy goes a long way. The past few years have wreaked havoc; many people and businesses are struggling to stay afloat. Coldly repeating the mantra that small businesses failing (many for reasons outside their control) is just 'the economy' is rubbing salt in the wound.
Even in the best of times, many great businesses weren't profitable for several years.
> a box of a hundred and eighty eggs, which had cost around eight dollars when he opened the restaurant, in 2001, was nearly fifty.
I don't think I've seen wholesale eggs even close to that high at any point. I think the only place I've seen unit prices that high is at a Whole Foods (which is organic, not wholesale, and has a "premium brand"/convenience markup). Are eggs just outrageously expensive in the Texas market at the moment?
Signs of avian influenza include: birds dying without clinical signs; lack of energy; decreased egg production; soft-shelled or misshapen eggs; swelling or purple discoloration of the head, eyelids, comb, and hocks; nasal discharge; coughing; sneezing; incoordination; and diarrhea. The USDA has a resource with images to help identify discoloration and other clinical signs.
Eggs can be hyperlocal - we were as low as $.25 a dozen just a few years ago, now we hit about $2 a dozen. The eggs from further away are more - the latest price increases have made the "grown local by cage free hens" eggs competitive again.
About the same price over in Massachusetts. Note that in the US if you want what's considered free range in most of the world you need to buy "pasture raised". "free range" is an awkward middle step.
Normal eggs are about half price, and MA has some regulations in place the limit the abuse of chickens more than other states.
Because they have no idea how to hire and manage teams that build software. It's a lot harder than it sounds if you have no personal experience delivering software (read: most legacy corp CTOs).
I've found myself wondering recently how much impact I could have at one of these large companies if given a modest budget and a mandate to build a high performing engineering org.
I've spent my career at startups and growth companies building and scaling engineering orgs. So I take it as a given that I could get a highly capable team but wonder how much it would matter. Would we still be weighed down by internal bureaucracy to the point of failure?
I suspect that might be the case.
If so it's hard to fault a CTO for outsourcing. If your company isn't built to support having a tech org then you might see these kinds of failures no matter what you do.
This is why these large companies often form "innovation" units that are spun out as separate entities or at lest setup as separate orgs sheltered from internal politics by the C suite.
It's possible. But it's really hard work, very politically expensive, and extremely high risk. So, yeah, not surprising.
I have seen a company spin up and after 2 years spin out a seperate innovation unit, and when it was a proper seperate entity outsource their core IT to the unit... Which was then branded a big success! It was liberating to see such systemic incompetence; The people were all highly educated but as a group just can't seem to organize effectively.
This Sounds like financial engineering. It is possible the people involved were incompetent, either individually or as a group. But this sounds like an incentive problem. Competence, misdirected.
> Branded as a success
I fear you aren't cyncical enough.
Was it a filure? Did the company's balance sheet improve? Did the company's stock price increase? Did the spinout attract a load of investment for its (pre-destined) success and turn that into a rich revenue stream?
Markets -- for both debt and equity -- are mostly idiotic machines on short timeframes. Your ability to generate free cash flow puts a floor on your price. Others' imagination and available liquidity are the only ceilings.
Additionally, these types of spin outs can behave like generational wealth. They may be incompetent idiots, but who cares? Daddy's money is more than you can raise and mommy's rolodex is richer than you could possibly imagine.
The problem isn't just the experience or capabilities it's the internal politics.
You have dozens of people with competing interests some of who are actively working against you and the C suite doesn't know what is really going on our what to do because all the information they are receiving is intentionally being distorted by people trying to spin it so they can keep creeping up the ladder.
The biggest enemy of a large organization is almost always itself.
> Because they have no idea how to hire and manage teams that build software. It's a lot harder than it sounds if you have no personal experience delivering software (read: most legacy corp CTOs).
I just want to point out that this isn't just legacy corps - I previously worked for a manager who went straight from a theory heavy CS degree to a theory heavy PhD to consultancy to management.
You still get companies like this where some middle manager with 0 years of SWE experience has to hire Software Engineers with 5+.
I'd say this is rather distribution at work. To build software competitively you need fairly good people and not a lot them would want to end up at Hertz. Places like Hertz are not tech companies which also often makes them very low margine, capital deprived and of limited scalability. Therefore, they cannot offer the compensation like top 20% of the players. The difference of compensation between top 20% and rest of the players is just amazing and reflects market forces operating in talent distribution that has sharp peak than other professions.
Software development requires placing millions of bytes exactly at right places to make billions of transitors sing and dance in precise sequence about billion times a second, every second. This is of complexity unlike anything humanity has ever encountered before.
No. Suspects are often arrested on a subset of the criminal charges with which they will ultimately be indicted. Even in more serious crimes like mass shootings, prosecutors will press charges on only a few of the homicide counts at first. This is common practice for prosecutors.
This isn't about the SEC at all. Arresting on a subset of eventual charges is something that nearly all prosecutors do, and for a large set of very good strategic reasons.
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find many examples of high-profile cases where the original arrest was based on all possible charges.
Yeah, I'm not arguing they don't do that. This is one of those cases where arguing the negative without clearly stating your argument makes things easy but not particularly useful.
What argument are you presenting instead? Because he was charged for 7 instances of security fraud we should assume that all 25 are securities fraud? Regardless of whether the SEC eventually charges all 25, they've clearly decided to differentiate them all on some metric (otherwise, they would've charged them all at the same time).
The solution to the issues you identify, which are real, is to improve the equitabiliy of the US justice system and strengthen laws against insider trading.
> The least careful ones will just keep getting caught while the most careful reap the rewards and get away with it.
The clearance rate for homicide in the USA hovers somewhere between 50% and 70% most years, and the clearance rate for rape in the US is much lower at 32% in 2018.
> What insider trading really means is a middle class person profiting in a way the ruling class don't like. Apparently it's legal for Congress to insider trade. It's legal for CEOs to insider trade.
Wealth is probably also helpful if you want to get away with rape or murder.
The property assessors are either elected or appointed by elected officials. I have yet to see a single property where the tax assessment is remotely close to the asking price. Can you give some zillow/redfin links?
> This perhaps says also something about the CS (versus software eng) background that most people engaging in DL publishing have.
Are those things enjoyable? Or is hacking and playing with ideas enjoyable?
Huge portions of PhD students spent time as software engineers prior to starting their programs. It's not about know-how. It's about not being paid to engineer systems in addition to doing research.
Fewer than 1 in 100 labs have dedicated software engineers, and PhD students are paid $30K/yr. There's no way in hell most of them are going to spend their time doing dependency management or setting up CI/CD pipelines for that salary. If they wanted to spend their time doing software engineering, then can (and would) move to an industry SWE job at 10x the total comp.
* China is still purusing zero COVID.
* There's a land war in Europe with Russia effectively cut off from the Western world.
* German manufacturing, once a workhorse, is being crushed by energy costs
* much of the developing world is swimming hard against the current just to stay alive.
I don't think we are in a situation analogous to 1947, of course, and I do think we are in or at least heading into a more-than-technical recession. But "irrelevant because that only happens after once in a lifetime extremely disruptive events" is a pretty... odd... take in 2022.