Agreed. ProtoBufs slows code iteration velocity tremendously. Saving 100 milliseconds on page load while reducing developer efficiency by 30% = a net worse product for end users.
"No longer can management kick the can down the road on things that many of us wanted to directly address."
so you choose to prioritize your desires over customer needs? what if end users preferred to keep their cash instead of pay for your code refactor of a feature nobody uses?
Does that not apply to management? What if the end users preferred a cheaper product rather than paying out exec bonuses? What if end users preferred a well made product rather than cutting corners to keep costs down?
The higher up the hierarchy, the more accountable they are to the customer. If management doesn't increase sales by providing an offering at a competitive price, sales will slump and someone will get fired. This is the opposite of union shops where the manager to employee ratio is much higher because nobody gets fired for being a burden on the customer's wallet.
By your logic an unqualified person could attain the CEO job. The CEO is picked by the shareholders to maximize shareholder value. The top boss is extremely well vetted to make sure they make good decisions to protect shareholders' money. The CEO's #1 job is to hire & fire managers that let him keep his job by increasing sales. And so on down the chain.
How could people at the bottom be more "accountable for customer disgruntlement"? They have less skin in the game than people up the hierarchy.
> By your logic an unqualified person could attain the CEO job.
That’s kind of less my logic and more my lived experience, unless you count being politically connected as the only qualification for CEO’s.
> How could people at the bottom be more "accountable for customer disgruntlement?”
Have you never seen execs grand schemes fail and make up for their mistakes by firing scapegoats or laying off workers and saddling the rest with more work to make the numbers look good?
> They have less skin in the game than people up the hierarchy.
Do they? In my experience workers typically have their entire income stream at risk while execs get golden parachutes and another executive position at a different company despite failing massively. If skin in the game is just “get higher compensation” then why aren’t the richest people on the planet the most environmentally conscious since they have more “skin in the game” than everyone else?
Yes, only highly qualified people attain CEO jobs. You never see any baffling CEO hires who flame out spectacularly taking shareholders and employees down with them.
I've found HN to be a mixed bag. Mostly liberal, but not always.
Biggest thing is to keep your argument well written and reasoned.
Unlike reddit where people are in a cult mindset. Anything remotely against the grain will get dozens of downvotes in seconds. Outright lies by the left get thousands of upvotes. Want 5,000 points? Just bash Trump in world news.
It depends entirely on who shows up first, because top posts tend to dominate a thread regardless of their quality. I've seen plenty of 'liberal' topics get burned to the ground here because the other side is triggered or wants to brigade or do damage control for someone.
>Want 5,000 points? Just bash Trump in world news.
I bash Trump all the time - and i just get downvoted and flagged. I've seen plenty of what you would probably consider 'lies from the left' treated the same way. It's all relative.
Awesome. You we're just making a joke, but for some reason that one simple statement had my brain looking at the dollar from a whole different perspective for a few seconds. "What is money, anyway????" Nice. It's like when you start to grapple with relativity... "What is time???"
There is a decent circular economy growing around bitcoin, at the very least you can purchase gift cards with them which hold dollar amounts to get whichever services you'd like!
Is there though? Where can I use Bitcoin to buy gift cards redeemable for: milk, underwear, dentist, train tickets, a visit to the barber? ( These being the five everyday purchases I last made.)
Don't think my dentist or barber want to be paid in GameStop gift cards and I feel giving some company with an intentionally obfuscated corporate structure non-refundable tokens in the hope they'll purchase a voucher which according to them may or may not pass Amazon's fraud detection Algo the same as "purchasing a gift card".
Ignoring that, it's still about the farthest thing from a "circular economy" imaginable...
I can't really imagine any motivation for buying milk in this fashion unless I'm seriously into tax evasion. So good luck buying day to day shit with gift cards once you've had to move to El Salvador to evade the IRS... Which is incidentally one of the jurisdictions bitrefill.com is incorporated in.
Can you expand on "Lightning seems like a joke compared to the types of efforts happening on Ethereum" ? I was just in El Salvador and Lightning was a faster and more convenient experience than credit cards...
To answer your question, what I've read about Lightning it sounded convoluted. The need to have a watcher keeping a channel open, invoices, just seems overly complex. I have tried receiving sats from online Lightning faucets and that part was impressive.
Ethereum's L1 growth and improvements seem more logical to me.
Is there a good place to go to track the adoption of Lightning?
Kind of strange to call Lightning convoluted and then cite Ethereum as a foil. Lightning is much simpler than what Ethereum is trying to do, and evidently so when you compare progress on each so far.
When doing a home remodel and the contractor breaks something they either return the money or fix it. Blame the CDC for not vetting the work and enforcing contracts.
Hubble was funded in the 1970s with a proposed launch in 1983, but the project was beset by technical delays, budget problems, and the 1986 Challenger disaster. It was finally launched by Space Shuttle Discovery in 1990, but its main mirror had been ground incorrectly, resulting in spherical aberration that compromised the telescope's capabilities. The optics were corrected to their intended quality by a servicing mission in 1993.
Can you be more creative than having one single entity make the decision for every single person? How about we leverage multiple brains from many walks of life come up with ideas, you know, like in this forum
I'd be more than worried if the CDC was operating on just one brain. I'm confused about the uproar(should've known we have prop owners here), when the virus landed here, we all expected some Hollwood treatment from the CDC, having everything in working order, taking charge/leadership. Well these guys wake up with a deicision, now let's bash them because we are NOT being allowed to evict possible disease carriers/spreaders onto rest of society.
The CDC is OUR Center for Disease control, what does that mean to you? Shouldn't we listen to the guys specialising in disease control while trying to control the disease from spreading?
Clearly Twitter and reddit should be consulted for the armchair experts to tell them how much money they're going to lose and how some extra people dying is worth it.
CDC isn't a single entity. CDC is made up by the world's best scientists who have an understanding of past pandemics and how homelessness significantly increased the deaths and infectivity. Someone commented with links about this as well.
