danhab99

There are many considerations where the fault lines should be. Somethings absolutely need upstream support and cannot just be buffered.. for example payment processing.

Shit happens and we DevOps people do everything we can to minimize it. That's why your apps might go down for like 2hrs a year.

That this whole war is orchestrated by the deep state which has private corporations as a branch of government just like every other war waged since WWII (the last real war)?

Literally why is anybody shocked?

Yeah the ads were always just a reddit post places on top of the page.. I guess this is for new reddit?

The article didn't say if it's rewritable

If the AI knows that a solution is available then it will think there's no reason not to use it. This is a demonstration of the morality of Nukes existing. If they exist someone will decide that they're the best solution to a problem.

They're saying they're not gonna just hand it over. Ring is still gonna have to answer subpoenas.

The whole point of side loading apps is to not need the app store. One of the most important features of an app store is to distribute and update apps. Storage and bandwidth isn't free, but it is quite cheap.

I'm sorry if it hurts apples feelings when we tell them they're not allowed to charge for every aspect of their hardware. But if they didn't want us to own our iPhones then they shouldn't have sold them.

The problem is that accounts are hosted by their fedi-instance. We need to use cryptography for platform agnostic authentication.

If that employee is producing double because of technology than that's all the employer deserves to ask for. If the employer wants the employee to double their efforts the employee will 4x their output which is an unreasonable thing to ask for, and those bosses loose people because of that. I don't give much attention to people who fail upwards.

there is a small subset of outwardly powerful humans who deeply suck

Yeah the deep shadowy cabal of suited white men pulling strings. I've heard of that and I disagree with it. I don't think it exists. Maybe there are some big people who basically own their industry, but I refuse to accept that they exist outside of the media and insurance sphere. Media has no power unless government reinforces it, and we regulate the shit out of insurance companies. Now that's not to say that we don't regulate insurance enough, there's plenty more control we the people can and need to take. Maybe there's one or two other industries that are owned by a powerful person. But I refuse to believe that my government that I pay tax to, vote on, and listen to is too weak to snuff out a company that grows to the size of a government. FAANG is 10% as powerful as the US Federal government and I refuse to accept that it's more.

We've seen our government repeatedly stomp out monopolies in the US and outside of it. There are plenty more to stomp out, but just because it hasn't been done yet doesn't discount the strength of us Americans projected by our government. We can change, and its hard.

Thank you for your perspective as a product manager. You gave me some insights that I have seen happen to me, but I never really understood why. I wish I had more visibility over my company so I can understand some of these things, it would be better than just accepting it as "boss knows best".

I'm gonna take some notes from you before I try to convince my boss of a really cool idea I have for my company.

is that a therapist should never try and convince you of anything

Ehhhh IIIII wanna defend my guy. My therapist is the greatest conversationalist I've ever had. All of my sessions revolve around me asking him to convince me of whats right in the world. If I agree that he's right I make a change and more than 80% of the time I see a clear benefit. He's not trying to convince me that he's right because I asked him too, because when I did try that he'd refuse or just wouldn't, and I'd count that as a loss from his end. He can't always win for me but when he does, its a real good win. So I guess the word "convinced" might not be as accurate as saying "we walked through this conversation until I got to a place of understanding".

Simply put, if your company operates at a 50% efficiency and you bump it up to 70% with tech and automation, be assurance you are going to see job cuts and increased targets to produce more

And there's the point. I do not disagree that technology puts people out of a job. What I want to understand is whether or not that technology is creating more value. And if so than more technology means more value which means we can eventually get to a place of so much societal surplus that we can reorchestrate soceity to enjoy the benefits of it. That's the end stage of capitalism, it will become outdated eventually. Capitalism is a growth phase, and growth hurts, I'm the last person in the world to deny that.

The reason it ends is because there are people who are poor and sick and starving and I AM NOT OK WITH THAT! If I was than capitalism can persist, but I don't want it to because I don't want my fellow Americans, my fellow people, to suffer. There's no way to acknowledge my priviledge enough when I say that yeah, people have to suffer for all of us to grow, and it hurts that some of those people won't be there with us in the end, and it's terrifying to think that I could be one of those who don't see the end.

So that's where my question is. If a company experiences a +30% efficiency boost due to technology, does soceity benefit from it?