johbjo
Those (cars, housing, renovations, education) are things financed by debt and can continue rising. But I suspect they are conveniently down-weighted from the CPI.
For example, if they let the CPI-entry be monthly car payments instead of cash price, then CPI inflation is flat as long as rates are falling.
It is true that there is exploding inflation in asset prices brought by central bank credit, but it won't affect the price of milk and bread.
Visibility is not a meaningful "reward" for established European newspapers (they are not unknown hobby bloggers.) The issue is who is capturing revenue from the work. The newspapers make money from people browsing their site (long ad exposure) or paying for subscriptions.
The news model: journalists discover "news facts" which they make into "news stories" that can hold reader attention.
If Google collects all "news facts" in one place with their own ads, they are benefiting from journalists while undercutting the newspapers.
One basic idea; a) recognition of level based on observed impact, as opposed to b) promotion to power as reward for effort/loyalty. With a), management is not a "final destination" of engineering careers. Old/sloppy organizations seem to devolve into b).
The instructions here seem to be written with this in mind, and directed to everyone in the org.
In the beginning everyone was searching for information, reading articles, and sharing experiences and listening to stories. It was the main topic of conversation for months. In places where the first wave hit hard, personal experiences were a much more credible source of information, and motivator of behaviour, than random edicts from officials.
And the reason "hard" government policies are so problematic is that they shift responsibility for both actions and consequences from individuals to some faceless authority. What does a restaurant owner think after six months of lost livelihood, when they finally catch it and it feels like a cold? That's more responsibility than any random government official can bear, and why voluntary measures first is so important.
The number of outcomes in branching_factor^t (very large) makes the action-values at t=0 (where the agent chooses between two/three actions) almost uniform random.
When high IFR:s are presented to the public, most people (both old and young) believe it applies to them, it is misguided in both directions.
Not sure about this at all. I'm more attracted to the model where the "manager" is a hands-off character that finds and communicates information/resources on behalf of the team. Parallel to that, there might be another "coach" character tasked with helping the team be more effective. Both of these have limited influence on the careers of team members.
What must be avoided is to trigger managers' narcissism such that they start to believe that the output of the team is their work, and the members of the team are "appendices" of them. Separating roles/responsibilities, changing job titles, and so on might help with this.
Avoid using promotion-to-power as a reward, because it attracts the wrong people. Rather, find ways to reward people that influence positively without power.
Add Xn+1: create new views without column. When no Xn clients remain: drop column from tables and drop schema Xn.
The point as I see it is to not break live client connections which expect the column to exist.
So views don't add complexity relative to giving the query explicitly. It might even help since the incoming queries can be smaller, thus less parsing/processing.
The point is not to let old clients work indefinitely.
In other versions of this idea, all views/procedures are prefixed with some revision-number but that looks messy.
We are left with US survivors in these particular cases.
Electronic voting is tangential.
Encrypted storage for random cloud services should be at least decades away.
This reads to me as "tactics for those in winning positions". The test is, what if everyone followed these rules?
In businesses like in the article, acknowledging that software development is now the main value creating activity means rebalancing the rank hierarchy and revoking old career ladders and promises. To avoid this, they need to treat software and developers as peripherals, like copy-machines and technicians.
The hope/belief behind this is that the current pain of software is temporary, and eventually good cheap enterprise software will be available to everyone, similar to things like gmail and salesforce.
One would need the appropriate transaction isolation, but shouldn't it work?
Moderna evaluated in adults 18-55 (N=15)
AZ evaluated in adults 18-55 (N=41) and 56+ (N=62).
So yeah. Ok.
If they separated app/cdn/web with different SSL certificates, something like this wouldn't be possible even when developers eff up.
For people who have seen this, no citations are needed. It's like stating "water flows downhill."
The problem is that other productive things are priced out before "mining".
The environmental cost will be born either way, but mining is by definition not productive. It has been profitable to some people, but it is destructive to civilisation altogether.
Does reading your documents really create value for others, or do you want them to validate and give your "more impact"?
You have to first make people curious about your ideas, or they will simply not care.
Now, what about Apple dictating payment policy on apps in the app store?
Google premiering their own services in the results? Forcing their own apps onto all Android devices, impossible to remove?
These platforms turn themselves into natural monopolies, and therefore they can not be treated as "private companies". Decentralisation would be a technical solution, but meanwhile I think regulation is what will happen.
And here is an article arguing that jobs are legitimate as long as people "feel useful". Well, this is precisely the problem. They fill offices with workers because it feels good to have subordinates. Responsibility is part of the career reward system, and people derive their identities from jobs and careers.
(I see Graeber used a different definition ...)
Maybe the purpose of many workplaces, from the perspective of some managers and workers, is not only related to the output of the company. I have come to the belief that part of the purpose of "work" for some people is "live role playing" careers, and thus they want to fill the roles for the other co-players.
From this perspective, it's not surprising that people want to return to the office.