In a world where companies are expected to have growth every quarter, a project like GitHub is one bad quarter away from microsoft making major changes or being abandoned or being completely shutdown.
As we’ve seen with product after product, when companies are expected to have growth every quarter, they will sometimes (often?) make radical changes to the software. In the case of GitHub, if microsoft decided it needed far more profit coming in from GitHub, it is entirely reasonable to expect they may decide to shift it into a service which is only usable for their large corporate partners, or they may decide the social features need to go, or they may decide to stop allowing public repos, etc...
Microsoft has shown many many times in the past that they’re more than willing to throw out open standards and attempted to force adoption of their own proprietary standards.
It is entirely reasonable to be at least a tad skeptical given their history and their business model.
This made me chuckle. Japan is the most unproductive Asian market of current times, because instead of working to get work done (ie being productive) they work to pretend to get work done. It's somewhat ironic that their culture of faking hard work, is actually killing people from overwork. I'm struggling to believe it.
For me the better mental model is of ant societies, where some percent of the ants don’t do much while other work around the clock. People staying at their desks “for the show” are the “lazy” part, while other employees will do actual crazy hours partly compensating for the others.
More precisely, a lot of overworked people are doing part of the job of their manager who pressures them into doing it.
Also I don’t think that’s a purely japanese perspective, French people’s stereotype is laziness, yet the amount of burned out people is crazy high. And most countries will have their shares of people living a slow life, while others are overworked.
Well, they created a market driven society with low wealth inequality, that's what it looks like. I find it hilarious that people basically end up describing Japan when they list off the things they wish the U.S. or Canada were, but then they complain about the fairly obvious downsides of that.
The company I work for uses this software, only the CTO finds the overarching surveillance super duper creepy, and refused to subject us (the employees) to the screenshots.
Hubstaff should not have included that as a feature, as many others have commented, it's too invasive. I am lucky to have a CTO that considers employees peace of mind and comfort on the job. The time tracking features are great, the surveillance, not so much.
I don't like that it says 'Always meet friends of the same gender'. As a male, I want to be able to meet female friends as well. Why is it limited by gender?
At the moment, we're keeping genders separate. I know, it's very 90's. The issue is that we're just two guys and we don't want to police the platform. The reality is that the friendship apps out there are thinly-veiled dating apps, and that's ruined it for everyone else just looking for friends.
Perhaps consider having no visible gender queues. Maybe go so far as to also not show names. If the goal is truely for friends, does the gender and name matter?
It doesn't, but the problem is that people aren't usually very kind to other people on the internet. So I can see a good chunk of users rollin' the dice and seeing if they match with attractive people, and if they don't, they just move along. This would ruin the experience for the other two people that are left hanging and feeling like shit. I really want to prevent that from happening.
Bear is great for organising notes. The style of #projects/open-source/react for example makes it really easy to be as broad or direct as necessary. Makes finding notes where you're not entirely familiar with the content much easier.
And Tesla is claiming otherwise. The driver in this thread likely has nothing to gain or lose by saying that, other than maybe the resale value of his car might be hurt. Tesla has a lot of reasons to be deceptive here.
Plus, it's a pretty common complaint in Tesla forums.
On the other hand, this is effectively an admission by Tesla that there are serious problems with the autopilot system. It should never guide the car into a barrier, no matter where the driver's hands are.
