headhuntermdk
headhuntermdk on Hacker News
If the average
target consumer didn't care, Target wouldn't have had 10 weeks of consecutive foot traffic declines. Most things sold in Target can be bought elsewhere, so people have voted with their wallets.
Executives at Target made the calculation that their sales wouldn't decline much (if at all) by publicly canceling their DEI programs.
To the question about Target and Costco's prices: Typically these retailers will have price matching policies in place to keep foot traffic.
Quick google search implies (not sure how accurate this is), that approximately 12% of Target's demographic is black [0]. Seeing close to a 10% drop in foot traffic for a low margin business like Target when a competitor is seeing almost the near opposite gains is a signal someone really screwed up.
[0] https://expertbeacon.com/targets-target-market/
They wouldn't be a very good dragon if they couldn't account for each gold piece they were hoarding
Let's look at a few things that we know about Apple:
1. The first $1 trillion, $3 trillion and (soon to be) $4 trillion company.
2. Cancels or stops production of products that don't make money (VisionPro being the latest).
3. Spent over half a trillion dollars in stock buybacks.
No company gets to the height Apple is currently without knowing every dollar coming in and going out.
I'm reminded of "if it don't make dollars, it don't make sense" chorus from DJ Quik's "Dollaz + Sense".
When I apply that to Apple (let alone any successful company for that matter), the claim that they don't know if the AppStore is profitable or not *defies belief*.
Schiller might not know exactly how much profit is generated, but to suggest that he's clueless whether or not on the WHOLE if the AppStore is profitable... If people believe that, I got a bunch of bridges up for sale.
Not sure why you are being downvoted. I purchased a Eizo CS monitor and I couldn't be happier
Because the AG works for the president and can be fired for any reason
words do matter.. if they didn't, none of us on the thread would be talking about it. You can't splain away how a person from a different group feels or why. What is nice about other SCM systems like Mercurial, Fossil, CVS, SVN.. or basically anything not Git.. is that the language is clear and not offensive to anyone. It really is that simple
I'm talking about job applications here.. not all job applicants have college degrees. And your link is to an Australian gender study. We are talking about similar but different issues
Affirmative action is here for a reason. If there wasn't systemic racism in hiring, there would be no need for it.
What affirmative action is supposed to do is to ensure that your race isn't a determining factor in not getting hired for a job that you are qualified for.
The Rooney Rule in the NFL wouldn't need to be a thing if being a black coach in the NFL meant statistically you had a greater chance of getting fired or not being hired at all
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule
Coming from Mercurial which calls its default branch.. well "default" to Git which calls its default branch "master" was very jarring for me. So yeah, I definitly noticed
The left didn't storm the capital
How is affirmative action a bad thing?
Since we are talking about branches, wouldn't a "root" branch makes more sense?
No it doesn't.. It is a room where the master of the house would sleep. Therefore it has to be the largest and more fully featured, etc
I generally agree with your statement. I am also an African American but my first reaction to the change was very positive. On a more technical and pedantic level, having a "master" branch really doesn't make any sense without slave branches. So in this context a "main" branch eliminates any negative historical connotations and has a more precise meaning. To me, this another case of "that's how its always been" and some people react very negatively towards sudden change.
Related to this conversation: years ago Nikon removed the terminology of Master and Slave in their flash units in favor of Commander and Remote.
https://petapixel.com/2020/07/08/nikon-says-it-stopped-using...
To the author: We have to start somewhere and it is a sign of progress (no matter how small) that finally there is some awareness around this issue and now something is being done about it
Good question.. you would think that this is a discussion worth having
Its called accountability
First of all, that $100 a year should cover all of what you just listed.
It costs Apple approximately $100 million to run the store. If the ~20 million developers are chipping in $100/yr, Apple is looking at $2 billion in fees just from developers. You can further take the costs of developing a secure platform just from the sales of iOS devices. (Its not like the iPhone is useful without the AppStore).
Apple is one of the most successful companies in the world worth over $2 trillion. They would be just fine dropping the fees from 30% (now 15%) to a more standard 2% for a basic transaction fee.
What lenses were you were you using? Picture profiles? I have always set the picture profile to Neutral for all of my cameras even though I shoot in RAW.
More than likely you can buy the same brand at another store such As Target, etc. If Walmart was the only outlet where one could buy the product and that product was also competing with Walmart products, that is an unfair advantage in Walmart's favor.
In the case with Apple Music vs Spotify, Spotify is not only at a disadvantage of API availability, but also how the rules are not applied for Apple's own apps (marketing push notifications come to mind). On top of that, it is more difficult to complete on price as you are coughing up 30% for any IAP (which you have to use Apple's IAP APIs to begin with). So spotify either charges an extra 30% to cover the fees or eats the 30% to remain price competitive.
But isn't that the point? That Google uses the Java infrastructure, but when it comes down to licensing, it isn't Java anymore? Google made a business decision to not buy a license and time will tell if that was a good decision or not.
Enforcing the law like not committing perjury during his confirmation process?
People aren't robots so meritocracy is a pipe dream. Everyone has biases (just different ones). And if that's how the world works, then why the criticism of "whitey" being shaken down?
Your post smacks of "don't hate the player, hate the game" kind of reasoning. Another word for this is "Supremacy" or "Entitlement". A black candidate doesn't get the job so maybe he or she isn't qualified, but as soon as the tables are turned for a white candidate, then all hell breaks loose.
In an ideal setting, the best candidate gets the job. But who is the best candidate? The black guy who doesn't live in the bay area, with no formal education but had to self teach himself programming because he couldn't afford to go to school?
Or the recent Stanford grad that is more likely a culture fit (looks and sounds like the interviewer) with the grades but not the real world experience (yet)?
Right. Fucking. There. Let me guess, you are a white male tired of people bringing up diversity? Or maybe you have forgotten about the special status given to minorities that brings us to todays topic? If enough was done, we wouldn't be having this conversation. As if "whitey" hasn't been shaking down different groups over the years.
That reminds me of when I was in bootcamp. Our DIs would constantly ask us "Are you a mouse or a man?"
It's your company.. If your CTO is approaching you like that, send him packing with a pink slip. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
There is a hell of lot more to building a company than just code and if he can talk to you any way he wants to without any consequences, then you have truly lost.
As others have said, you are supposed to hire people better than you, but that doesn't mean you have to take shit from them either.
Bottom line is don't be a doormat and be prepared to put "boot to ass" if necessary.
Good luck