coolaliasbro

Your statement about "detailed firsthand knowledge" hit home and reminded me of a topic related to job/task automation--single points of knowledge.

There is a big push at my employer to eliminate single points of knowledge and this push typically takes the form of voluminous amounts of documentation that is 1) never proofed, validated, maintained, or updated, and which 2) no one ever reads. Makes more sense to have a solid continuity plan and create a work environment that doesn't cause employees to pull a Jerry McGuire. Probably also worth recognizing the value of observing the practice in action vs reading someone's opinions on it.

Humans aren't fungible.

I come away from from this article with two thoughts.

1) Regarding the example of qualitative data via drunk students attending eye-licking parties. The author doesn't explain how this is qualitative. To my mind it's a gap in the model. The modelers could have included parameters to account for students behaving impulsively or irrationally, but they didn't.

2) Considering the nebulous nature of terms like consciousness and comprehension and the ensuing challenges of measurement, can it be proven that the structures that can potentially underpin behavior, etc., that would generally be recognized as conscious or comprehending do not exist as an emergent but undetected property of the Internet? Is it reasonable to suppose that if such a structure existed and if it possessed or embodied consciousness or comprehension that it might work toward remaining unknown?

In my experience, reasons like "spontaneity" and "dynamism" are used to cast lack of vision, poor planning and management, and amateurish execution in a positive light. YMMV.

Agreed. When my wife was looking to replace her 2013ish Air and comparing M1 Air vs Pro, I told her I'd pay $300 not to have the touch bar.

> Nothing else allows the non-tech user to feel empowered like spreadsheets do.

I'd say it allows the same for technical users as well since it helps bridge communication/knowledge gaps and move things along. It's typically not the solution but often plays a critical supporting role.

I'm not familiar enough with the technology to understand the privacy implications--are operators able to identify/snoop on specific users? I'm wondering how easily a building owner or landlord could collect and leverage their residents' data for any number of nefarious reasons.

I often wonder whether the solution is setting the expectation with companies that if they act in bad faith, their leadership will be om nom nommed? Apologies for the metaphor, it's the best I could come up with on short notice.

I dream about one day opening a non-profit/co-op grocery chain called "Tarable Grocery". The capital outlay would be considerable of course, but ultimately and optimally, the chain would lease containers to members who would fill them with bulk products, returning to refill them or return them as appropriate. My vision here would be to make available quantities of essentially any bulk food option that would be consumed by the local market before spoiling. The stocking system would be a hoot and there would definitely have to be some sort of central purchasing apparatus, but I think it's doable.

I was about to say the same thing. I put $33k down and financed $208k at around 3.5% (in the Upper Midwest). Three years on my payments are about $1280, after increased taxes YOY.

Just want to take a moment to go give a tip of the hat to all down voters and those assuming I haven't spent any time researching/thinking about/discussing this topic. Alternatively, thanks for letting me know how I'd probably have a different opinion if I only read xyz...

It is extremely unlikely in this case that the employee was also the proprietor, so there is no "their". It was an individual decision, not a business decision.

Output should never be stable in theory as people will not always need the same amounts of the same things. Optimally, output of consumer goods would dwindle if they were made to last as long as possible and convincing people to buy shit they don't need or really even want wasn't a key component of the economy. Also, the notion of "ways to use people" seaks directly to the alienation of labor central to capitalist systems.

These considerations are requisite only in a capitalist system. In other economic models it is not a given that ”[i]nvestors...need to decide which businesses are viable... Workers need to consider career changes." In fact, the division between investors on the one hand and workers in the other is a large part of this problem. If we socialized gains and privatized losses (in the sense of never bailing out those agents that got themselves into bad situations), these cycles would at worst be much less severe and frequent.

It's not mean to express boundaries. Strangers offering unsolicited advice, regardless of intent, crosses a boundary for many people. And since the employee making the comment would never be personally liable in the case of a lawsuit, such advice boils down to misplaced concern or simple nosiness/bossiness. People should mind their own business unless their is a clear and present danger to thselves or the public. A kid horsing around on a hauling cart does not match that description IMO.

Pretty sure the cure is moving away from the capitalist mode of production.

Thanks, great info and references!

Exactly. Like using lines of code as a proxy for progress or success.

"...it's why the accelerator ring diameter has to grow to achieve higher particle energies. The LHC has a circumference of 27 kilometers."

Please humor me. Does this mean that if the LHC had x diameter, it would perform the same if it was 1km in circumference?

Completely agree. And unless one is sufficiently privileged to have the space to leave setups as is, one needs to factor in cleanup/storage.

I was attempting to say this above, more or less.

I agree with the drift of this but would not describe myself as being exhausted for those 2 hours. More like just unwilling to anything not personally regenerative.

And even more if on is committed to more meaningful interactions with their child(ren),and, like, walking the dog and whatnot.

They didn't fall for anything. They intentionally laid alongside Foxconn.

All good points. I wonder if instead of a voting mechanism, a site could crunch things like number of posts, type of posts, length of posts, frequency of posts, replies to posts, and so forth to calculate something like participation/activity/clout scores, assuming this could be used to add value for the community of users. Essentially, mask any gamification of the system so the focus is textual/graphical interaction among users, instead of engaging directly in a ranking/award system.

IME, communities in the analog world engage in ranking, albeit largely unconsciously, and perhaps mimicking this pattern in a digital environment would be beneficial compared to current systems.

"gnar" FTFY

"I whole heartedly agree with this. The naive approach to domain modelling is to classify the primitives of a domain into classes and stop there. In actuality, the processor of those primitives is likely what your class should be, and those primitives ought to be methodless data structures."

This is what I did not have the ability to articulate as well in an earlier comment. As far as I understand parent, the takeaway is that often OOP goes astray when the developer is unable to identify that a given need can be handled by generics/a parent class and instead instantiates their own class.

Exactly! So long as the developer approaches the solution with the expectation of scaling and extensibility from the get, this should not be a problem.

This is coming from a business consultant (BA/PM and configuration primarily), but in my experience, it seems like the OOP paradigm is fine in most cases and is leveraged in a functional/compositional fashion typically, so I fail to see the issue with OOP a paradigm. Generics and polymorphism can be used to basically create a functional system that only uses domain specific classes to handle edge cases.

In short, OOP as currently used, in my experience working on numerous RIA/municipal/county government enterprise document management systems, seems perfectly adequate to the tasks at hand and can be used in an effectively functional way.

But also, honest people.

What I've learned is, apply if it sounds cool. Worst case, you hear nothing. A relatively close second, you get an interview, and that's the meat.

So much mustard. Like the best games of Clue.