Disclaimer: I worked on this feature.

If you walk in to the restaurant, you don't need to install the app. The app will let you view your live place in line, but you can leave the line/get notified when your table is ready vis SMS.

If you want to get in line before you show up the restaurant, you can do that via the app, or the www site, or the mobile site.

Did you work on it as NoWait or at Yelp (formerly NoWait).

If you worked on it as the original NoWait, have you seen any changes, positive or negative, now that the feature is under Yelp's umbrella?

I worked on it from the Yelp side during the intitial partnership/integration. So, I can't comment on the NoWait perspective, but I will say that almost all of the NoWait software team is still working at Yelp 2+ years post-aquisition.

What's the general Yelp employee vibe like when news like this comes out about features they've worked on?

Is it a feeling of "meh, we're growing revenue" or more of a "they completely misunderstood the value we're delivering based on what our users asked for" scenario?

Some of both; people do care, but not everyone loves every feature.

I feel that small business owners tend to be less tech savvy and more open to conspiratorial thinking, which leads to a lot of attention to anything Yelp does. If you read the comments even here on hn, many are not about the actual thing in question and many make accusations of unfair practises which have neve been accompanied by evidence.

In this particular case, we redirect calls about delivery just for restaurants who have signed a contract with GrubHub (which presumably included language allowing GrubHub to do this), so that GrubHub can attribute orders as coming "from Yelp" and charge for them the same way as they do online orders. I think there's some interesting things to discuss there, but it's not an obvious "this is wrong" feature to me.

(and the delivery market as a whole is a little messy -- see the Doordash tipping controversy for an example of something that I do feel is wrong and I would not be happy working on)

Thanks for the insight and for wading into the firestorm here.

From the screenshots in the article, it appears there is zero indication to the user that this will be going through Grubhub when they tap that button. Was that discussed? How do you feel about that in terms of it being sufficient notification?

Would you agree that in addition to the limited tech savvyness of restaurant owns, there may also be limited business savvy such that they would have been aware of a term that would allow Grubhub and Yelp to do this? In this case, the restaurant owner seemed to have no clue it was occurring. So presumably if the user and restaurant owner are clueless, and Yelp and Grubhub are taking a cut they may not have otherwise received, I'm a bit unclear as to how that could be viewed as any sort of positive.

Do restaurants receive any reporting of "Grubhub via Yelp" orders/calls?

Disclaimer: I worked on this feature.

Yelp has a texting option; the app is required to view your 'live' place in line. The app (or website, or mobile site) also allows you to get in line without having to physically arrive at the restaurant and talk to the host.

Reminder about Cinemark: - they sued Aurora victims for legal costs - their founder is a donor to Roy Moore's campaign

Because the winning side in a civil lawsuit is allowed to recover its legal costs from the losing side. If the victims wouldn't have brought their insane suit first, Cinemark wouldn't have had costs to recover.

If you bite off more than you can chew don't blame anyone but yourself when you choke.

It's not this way everywhere! At my (mid-sized, public, SF-based) workplace, I work 8 hours/day, good postmortems, and understanding at all levels of the importance of work-life balance and how oncall (a sad inevitability) should work.

If your employer doesn't do this, move on - that's how things change.

That sounds pretty sweet. I'd love to know where that is, if you don't mind sharing.

The problem about the "moving on" from bad workplaces is that it's hard to tell if your next workplace is going to be the same, even looking at reviews, like Glassdoor. Plus you're taking a fairly big risk to move to a new job. There's a lot of bait-and-switch type things going on, both in terms of role and culture.

For example, in one job I worked at, I hired on as an embedded engineer, but then I ended up writing a big data solution (and did nothing embedded).

In terms of culture it's very unlikely you'll meet the toxic members of the group, or be exposed to any of the politics during the interview. People will be on their best behavior, not their normal behavior. I have found that asking straightforward questions and trying to use my Bene Gesserit powers of truthsaying to see if they're putting me on has a pretty good S/N ratio. Also looking for that tired/sad/dejected/depressed look of random people in the hallways.

Now that I'm somewhat established in my career, I don't think I'd ever accept a job offer without a personal referral-- someone I know well who works at the company and can vouch for its culture. I don't think you can judge a company's culture from an interview; as you say, it's easy for them to be on their best behavior during an interview.

I'm sorry your experience has been so bad-- it's really not that bad everywhere!

https://www.yelp.com/careers/home (let me know if you want to chat)

And yeah, especially as you gain more experience/skills/system knowledge, moving on gets hard. Culture especially is interesting, as often there's tradeoffs between culture and role and interesting problems to solve.

Thanks - that's a good datapoint.

> Culture especially is interesting, as often there's tradeoffs between culture and role and interesting problems to solve.

100% true in my experience. For interesting problems, there's always an endless list of applicants, which almost allows for those companies to abuse their employees. Same for the game industry.

Seriously? This is analogous to writing information of the plates used to print currency/every bill in the country, not scribbling a note onto a twenty. You're either a troll or you haven't read the post.

Yes, because between 1970 and 2001 we were all blindly following the waterfall model of software development until Agile came down from the heavens and showed us the error of our ways. (Disclaimer: I like Agile; it's just not a panacea)

Also, $60 billion is not much in the grand scheme of things.

Exactly the second point.

Bugs persist for the same reason 'bad' code/coders persist: even flawed software is generally worth far, far more money than no software and very few projects have an ROI that doesn't taper off very quickly after a "good enough" effort.

Stop arguing with everyone, long-term marketable securities doesn't mean what you think it means.

You're right in that it's not cash, and in some cases it's illiquid. However, you seem to think the 'long-term' in 'long-term marketable securities' means 'will take a long time to sell for fair value'. This is wrong; long-term just refers to the maturity of the instruments. Again, these long-term instruments are more likely to be illiquid, but they're not illiquid by definition. 10-year Treasury notes are 'long-term' but highly liquid.

So, in conclusion, it depends on what these "long-term marketable securities" are, which is what most of the other replies are trying to say. If you want to argue, argue that Apple owns a bunch of RIMM stock or something, don't accuse others of misunderstanding the term.

I thought the point of these bundles was to support indie game studios? Still, money goes to charity, decent set of games.. it just feels a bit incongruous.

I have the feeling it's a last ditch effort from THQ to gain some goodwill. They are doing pretty bad financially and they probably hope this might help them going forward.

The Humble Indie Bundle is, which is why it has indie in the name. There are multiple Humble Bundles, not all of them indie, and not all of them games. See the Humble eBook Bundle and the Humble Music Bundle.

He never mentions money when talking about their pre-seperation life. The post you're replying to is clearly a discussion of time, not money, and you've somehow twisted it into "The amount of chores one does is inversely proportional to the amount of money brought home?". Stop trolling.

Agree. s/girlfriend/roommate/ and it doesn't sound "unreasonable" at all

s/girlfriend/mother/g and is it still unreasonable? Your widowed mother lives with you, and doesn't have job or enough income to live on her own - do you kick her out if she doesn't make you meals three times a day?

This. Making trolling/writing offensive comments on other people's walls a crime is arguable (I disagree, but I understand the rationale. Writing things on your own wall, however, with no intention to offend or troll, and then getting arrested is ridiculous. The same logic applies to wearing an offensive shirt as opposed to shouting abuse.

The worst part about this is the media coverage almost universally treating this as normal and expected -- which, in a sense, is even worse than explicitly arguing for it -- and neglecting to go into specifics about whether someone posted something on their own wall or not, which is really relevant.