hailvectron
> So, when I hear you saying that you are motivated by pure moral reasons, but not stating those reasons, I can't help but think "this guy is lying to himself", sorry.
I didn't say more about these things because I felt my comment was long enough already on a tangent to the HN submission itself, and that I'd made the intended point.
Not that I owe you or anyone else any convincing that I'm not delusional, but since you appear to be asking, this will both try to answer you and also illustrate why I didn't bloat my previous comment.
I am striving to keep to an acceptable minimum the harm I cause to other sentient creatures. My moral framework includes the following:
1. I reject speciesism^.
2. I take as axiomatic there is no "elimination" of harm to other creatures - no existence as a human has zero external harm.
3. I observe that accounting within any sufficiently complicated system, whether economic, physical, or moral, admits no entirely black and white disposition.
4. I discard as a largely useless question whether or not it is "natural" for humans to consume animal products.
5. I don't think "what our ancestors did" justifies what we should or shouldn't do today in our presently-evolved state.
Consistent with these ideas, I conclude veganism minimizes the harm I cause to other sentient creatures subject to the constraints that I do not make it impossible for myself to live among other people in a western society, and I do not degrade my health. #2 implies one can always strive further toward an asymptote of zero. At some point, one has to decide for themselves if they've done "enough". #3 implies reasonable people will not always agree as to whether a specific action or choice is reducing harm. For example, you speak of going somewhere else and not asking for "a vegetarian alternative" because "it doesn't matter." I contend that it very well could matter. If restaurants offer more vegan options because people ask for them, patrons potentially reduce the amount of animal products they consume, or potentially convince fellow diners that not consuming animal products doesn't preclude the convenience and pleasure of shared meals eaten at restaurants.
A choice of veganism is analogous to a choice of voting in a democracy. Your single vote is probably not going to make the difference in an election, but everybody thinking their votes matter is how we achieve collective action that unequivocally matters.
I don't really respect the choice of vegetarianism being observed wholly out religious obligations, but I appreciate that there are so many vegetarians who, regardless of their motivations, reduce their harm and make it more economically viable for me to live more comfortably in a manner consistent with my principles.
Many people who don't answer "why" when asked about their vegetarianism do so because they don't want to invite mockery or debate. I know people like this, and having experienced this kind of mockery, I understand it. Avoiding mockery or challenges to justify one's postions doesn't equate to a lack of convictions. Sure, someone could be doing it because it "sets them apart" and then they don't answer because they don't want to get called out on this stupidity. But why is that the correct default assumption in the absence of a fulsome answer? As for me, if you sincerely ask me "why" to my face, I'll certainly tell you and not play coy.
^ [1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-animal/ [2] https://www.jstor.org/stable/26165687
Also I don't know what GP is talking about when it comes to "it just couldn't last." Being vegan can still be a pain in the ass, but it's vastly easier to find "plant-based" options than it was 20 years ago. There seem to be more options every year.
I am now a partner in a consultancy. Despite my prior comments, we have still not yet gotten off Gusto. Pasted from a July 2024 e-mail Gusto sent me:
We are making updates to our Payroll Terms of Service to address relevant laws and regulations and include information about new products and features, including our new employment and income verification feature. The updated terms will go into effect for current customers on July 31, 2024.
You can review the full updated terms here.
The new employment and income verification feature
When your employees apply for loans, credit cards, or public aid they may be required to provide proof of employment and income and, as the employer, you often need to manually provide verifications during the approval process. With this update, you can save time and help your employees get faster access by automating employment and income verifications through our new partnership with The Work Number®.
No action is needed from you. This benefit is included in your current Gusto payroll subscription and there are no additional fees. As the employer, you can choose to turn off this new feature in the Settings tab at any time. The feature will be available on July 31, 2024. Learn more >
Thank you for choosing Gusto!
I (angrily) opted my company out, but I'm probably the only partner in the company who would have gone out of their way to do that.
- AMD processor options
- Keyboards with a trackpoint - decades of ThinkPaddery have conditioned me; I regularly use a Dell touchpad-equipped laptop & contemporary Mac laptop and still pine for a trackpoint. Very personal preference, I know, but hopefully the Framework Marketplace comes to provide this.
- Proper 14" HiDPI screen
- Long battery life under Linux
I'm impressed with what they've been able to do and really hope they become sustainably successful!
Based on HN comments, we tried Rippling, Zenefits, and Gusto. Of the three, Gusto was the best in our assessments (most matched our desired workflows and policies). We use them for payroll & benefits, and do time tracking outside Gusto.
Sad to say, even with this, Gusto leaves a ton to be desired and the other critical comments ring true. With all these startups trying to be the unified HR/Payroll/Benefits/Timekeeping platforms, it's surprising how bad they all still are.
- Plenty of bugs in their benefits system and terrible communications about upcoming benefits deadlines, etc. For this year, our benefits options were all missing their Statements of Benefits and Coverage ("Coming soon" placeholders or somesuch) at the time open enrollment was set to end. We had to call and have them push it back multiple times. At benefits enrollment time, they generate a bunch of inapplicable forms they want employees to sign - this bugginess has been there at least two years and their answer is basically, "Yeah, that's our system. Don't worry, we won't submit inapplicable forms to the carrier, but you still need to sign them to complete enrollment."
- Poor responsiveness for e-mail help requests, and they don't do much to help you if there are problems communicating with the insurance providers for whom Gusto are the brokers.
- Tax filing issues for one of our out-of-state employees.
- Non-customizable e-mail communications. You can't stop them from blasting notifications to your employees about whatever Gusto thinks appropriate. Even if the employee wants it to stop. Also, I'm not a millennial and find their overly casual, cutesy e-mail tone with emojis and all to be quite cloying.
- Limited integrations with other 401(k) providers. Guideline is OK for a completely bare-bones, limited flexibility offering. If you want more flexibility as an employer, most other major providers are not well-integrated with Gusto.
- Their time-tracking is heavily oriented toward low-skill labor, with clocking in, clocking out, etc. It's really ill-suited for high-skilled consulting types. We have to use an outside timekeeping system.
When I have been able to get them on the phone, I am usually able to get things fixed, done, or worked-around. Pretty disappointing, but it seems like many of the companies in this space are. I can't imagine using Gusto at 15+ people. We are basically kicking the can of getting off them, but know they are not a good long-term fit.