You could register it with a voip number. This doesn't entirely mitigate the problem, but at least you'd have more digital control over what happens to that number (and can pretty much be sure you won't lose it unless you want to).
If you already have it registered to a "real" number on your cell phone, there are processes for porting that number to google voice.
It's really not. This decision is a very personal one unique to each employee. Internal activism can be very effective especially if done in a way that gets more attention among existing employees. On the other hand, this is extremely risky to their employment (and in America that means their housing and healthcare) and on top of that it's a ton of work.
It's great when someone who quits has the resources to also try to bring some attention to the reasons why.
yeah I think what people are getting at here is that there's often a large investment to figure out how to use Angular2+ correctly (and even a lot of the concepts from Angular2 have been improved upon with new features in versions 6-8). A lot of times it's not "bugs" but if you're not in a place where you can spend 8 hours a day learning the framework in addition to building your app, you're going to have to choose one or the other -- and that's where frustrations set in. I'm gonna choose "build my app" every time.
I don't think Angular is a bad choice across the board, but you need to weigh this heavily when deciding to use it.
The article asserts that if you upload video from Ring devices, it will be seen by amazon employees. This has been shown to be true. Amazon employees are almost all strangers to me. What's the issue with the statement?
"Do you want a few amazon employees being able to learn your routines by watching you leave and return to your house every day?" might be more technically expressive but no more accurate and certainly not any more reassuring or comfortable to me.
The part about cops and hackers are separate issues (and lead to more convincing arguments against cops and cloud services more generally) but this seems like an entirely fair assessment.
>Do you want strangers to learn all of your important personal information by reading the emails you send and receive?
You mean to say this doesn't concern you? That enough PII is being archived in multiple places indefinitely and could be used to build a find grained profile on you?
Imagine how much you can infer just from location data. Sexual orientation. Political affiliation. Religious affiliation. Now imagine what happens when authoritarian regime gains control of such databases. The largest nation on Earth has such a system already - it isn't far fetched.
Yes, that is problematic, which is why I use an encrypted email service that encrypts and decrypts on the client. The only people reading my emails should be the intended recipients.
Likewise for videos of and around my house. The only people capable of watching those feeds are me and those I explicitly choose to share it with. Ring should be E2E encrypted, with any video processing being done before upload or after download. Sharing with the police shouldn't be possible without the police coming to my home asking me for video of a given time period, preferably with a warrant.
I have no problem with storing encrypted video in the cloud, assuming that it's reasonably hard to decrypt and my keys aren't stored anywhere nearby (they should strictly be on the client, out of reach of the cloud service). If I want to send a video to someone, the service should download it, decrypt it locally, and then send it over my encrypted channel of choice.
I really don't understand why we put up with anything less. It's incredibly cheap to do get a chip these days that can do video processing on the client, so why is the cloud used for anything other than encrypted video storage and retrieval?
Unless you put a ring camera in your house, the video is of the street and your front porch. In my neighborhood, everyone has the doorbell and not much more.
Even that is a huge issue to me. If an attacker can compromise one camera system, they can track movement of anyone the camera can see, so they can figure out when people are likely to be away. If the service is unencrypted, this can be done by compromising the server or even a single WiFi hotspot, which makes this product a huge liability for everyone that the camera can see.
Why should we go through the risk? Just encrypting everything on the client makes the system way more robust, and features can be rolled out to a device that does local processing. I don't own any big home automation systems because I don't trust them, so as soon as a company builds something privacy centric, they will get my money.
I’ve been in most of my neighbor’s houses, or talked to them about their systems. One of my neighbors has an additional camera, on the outside. Most people have a doorbell cam and some window/door sensors.
I know you're getting a ton of responses, but if you do see this, look up Food Wishes on youtube. Would not be an exaggeration to say it has changed my life. 5-10m videos focused on one dish, usually including quite a bit of context and instruction aimed at beginners.
Cook with stuff you like! That way even if you screw it up you're left with stuff you mostly don't mind. Can't count the number of times I've screwed up meat sauce, and ended up eating a pound of meaty-tomato slop that tasted just fine albeit wasn't recognizable as any type of dish.
Also go easy on yourself. Recognize that this is a whole skill set that people spend their whole lives cultivating (just like software). You'll start to develop an intuition.
Make sure you have the right equipment you need too. I probably spent two years thinking I couldn't make eggs, turns out my pan was warped.
+1 to foodwishes. Most of my cooking knowledge comes from those videos. One thing that's hard to get from recipes is the actual cooking techniques, e.g. how loud onions should sizzle when you saute them. Foodwishes is great for learning and entertaining as well.
In being empathetic to their needs, make sure you're also being "empathetic" to your own needs. This means recognizing that their "need" to get their development work done without spending too much money on you is directly opposed to your need to have healthcare and money for rent, food, etc.
Obviously neither of these needs can be successfully ignored, but thinking of it this way helps me mitigate the guilt that comes with asking for more, without engaging the "winning" rhetoric even subconsciously.
I'm sure this is true, but most companies don't want this either. They lose money and waste time when this happens -- if they waited until the end to discuss salary (like they should be).
Some companies will try to feel you out for salary right off the bat in order to "weed out" anyone who would ask for too much money, and you need to always resist this.
Your bargaining position is much better once they've already decided they want to hire you. Talking about salary first lets the company cheap out and only spend that effort on people they are reasonably sure won't ask for what they're worth.
This is why so many places have a "Salary Expectations" box or something similar on their interest form. Some will even try to brow beat you into saying a number. Never do this until they've named a number first. This puts pressure on them to offer something reasonable right off the bat, instead of having the pressure on you to not ask too high.
The strategy is meant to introduce more sunk costs in the hiring process. They spent forever buttering up the candidate, and now they hear a number that is more than they were hoping for.
The less they need you, the less this is likely to matter. But if they really need you then of course your price is high!
I'm not sure I have the knowledge base to fully answer your question but one thing to consider is that no matter where you work, if you dig deep enough you'll probably find something unethical (and some might say if you don't find anything, you're not really looking). I mean under capitalism we're all working for just enough to survive and maybe retire on while our bosses take home the fruits of our labor, so we can start from there and conclude there's really no fully ethical job.
What's most important is finding out the core business models your company is aligned with, and who they work for. For example, if you thought Google was a fundamentally evil company (I'm not saying you or I think that, just an example) then by working on Angular you'd be helping to legitimize Google as a business that does a lot of good things. This will ultimately make it much harder to build a popular movement around stopping the evil Google.
You can see this play out in real time right now as Palantir and ICE try to rebrand as companies/agencies that sell/use tools which combat child trafficking. This may be true, but they also terrorize immigrant communities and must be stopped.
If you already have it registered to a "real" number on your cell phone, there are processes for porting that number to google voice.