damnfinecoffee
damnfinecoffee on Hacker News
Why does everything have to be so economically driven? Clean drinking water should be totally free for everyone, we kinda need it to live
There's nothing talented at all about buying rights to a drug and then raising the price of it. Monopolies hurt consumers, why would you think that's okay? Especially in a field like pharmaceuticals where peoples lives are literally on the line?
and yet none of the original devs get any credit or compensation for the ideas that were taken by apple which is kind of sad
America is not a democracy
Have you found any good places in the south bay? I have so far been unsuccessful and would love an option that doesn't require a trip into the city
Think about it this way: Let's say you invented some brand new technology that was revolutionary and extremely useful. You're just a single person, so you don't have the resources to bring it to mass markets right away, but you start small-scale production and it quickly gains popularity. Big Company A who has massive manufacturing facilities notices the growth of your product and the value it has and decides to make a clone of it, but they already have huge production facilities and a refined supply chain, so they can produce many many more than you are capable of producing, so they flood the market with clones, which are easier for the public to get.
Is this really fair to you? Big Company A stole your invention and leveraged their market power to basically shove you into a corner and out-produce you, but if it weren't for your original idea, they would have never done any of this. It's the concept of a company stealing an idea/invention from someone else and using it to profit themselves that doesn't sit well with me.
meh, making what is essentially a complete clone of snapchat within Instagram hardly seems like "ethically out-competing them" in my opinion. They took the ideas directly from Snapchat and just stuck them in an app that already has a huge sticky userbase, relying on the convenience factor to get people to use it.
Totally made up and arbitrary example but it would be like if Starbucks started serving some widely popular menu item based on a recipe from a competing chain. They already have a huge loyal customer base that's coming into their stores all the time, so it's more convenient for these people to get this new item at Starbucks since they're going there anyway, but Starbucks didn't come up with the idea or recipe, they just saw that it was popular elsewhere and knew they could leverage the convenience factor to get people to buy it from their stores (which people were already coming to) instead of going to a second store for it. That's not really ethical competition.
Not true, f.lux released a version of their app in the App Store. Apple pulled their app and so they added another method to sideload it
https://justgetflux.com/sideload/ using xcode. Apple then revoked their development license which broke that method as well. It's always been available as a jailbreak tweak but it's also been available to the general, non-jailbroken public
I mean I suppose that's true but that's a terribly weak argument. You could say the same thing about Signal which is considered one of the most secure messaging applications on the market at the moment. It's pretty trivial to monitor network traffic to see that the unencrypted data never leaves your own device
As far as I know, security has always been one of Cisco's top priorities which is one of the reasons they have been so strong in the enterprise market. It's almost inevitable at some point that bugs like the one in the link here pop up but I haven't heard of any backdoors or nefarious practices from Cisco in the past.
Actually if you read the paper, the architecture is designed in such a way that the key management server can be implemented as an on-premise box while all the rest of your data lives in Cisco's cloud. In that situation, Cisco has access to your data but it's fully encrypted with keys that they do not have access to, making it a true end-to-end solution. It's a pretty interesting design that allows companies to be the only ones with access to the raw, unencrypted data while still letting Cisco manage everything in the cloud.
Now this does only apply for companies that choose to go with the on-premise KMS, if not, Cisco manages the KMS in their own cloud as well, which does mean it's not a true e2e solution (although like I said, I can speak with a pretty high level of confidence that security is one of the top priorities)
>On one hand, people have different skill levels even in a role. On the other, shouldn't the salary be tied to title?
I think bonuses are a great way to account for this. Give everyone with the same title the same salary and then take individual performance into consideration for bonuses so the better workers get more compensation in the end
That comment is literally a direct quote from the reuters article
Where are you living where entry level software engineer salaries are north of 200k? I'm in the bay area and base salaries for software engineering with a bachelor's degree range from 90-115k from what I've seen (generally with some stock options and bonus potential added on top but I've never met anyone who's come even close to 200k starting out)
By "low level software engineers" do you mean low level in the sense of relatively low experience or low level in the sense of working on embedded systems etc?