My grandparents got iPhones (during COVID) because they were supposed to be easy.

Wow, that's just the marketing.

The jargon was outside their understanding, and unless we were physically looking at the phone, we couldn't guess what word in the Appstore meant Download.

And it got worse, the requests/requirement to login with Apple ID on various occasions were frustrating.

And from a tech geek, I had a work IPhone where I struggled to change settings and found annoyances with bugs.

> I struggled to change settings

Apple's posture is that the defaults are good for most people. Their settings management is second class in all of their products compared to Windows and (especially) Linux and Android.

The implication of there being some kind of cohesive "settings management" in Linux is amusing.

I didn't say cohesive.

I don't have any trouble getting Linux to behave the way I want.

I think the most important reason to reduce consumption is due to everything being carefully curated.

Actual issues from a particular fruit company like the butterfly keyboard was cause of getting flagged, you weren't allowed to talk about it. Similar problems happen to this day.

Mac fans being rabid Mac apologists isn't something leaving HN is going to change.

It's literally statistics applied to data.

If your data is good and you can fit it to a model it will work.

The problem is that data is often poor and the idealized models don't fit real world conditions so you can have problems like overfitting.

As an fdroid user, this is laughable.

Any contributors here? Thank you for making the world a better place. It's inspiring!

My biggest annoyance is with the company General Motors who requires your entire social security number to be interviewed contract.

This means giving your SSN to a random person calling. Every GM recruiting house has to do this.

Not even worth it, the other auto companies pay just as good(minus Tesla)

Tons of organizations require your SSN to "put you in the system", including most higher ed institutions. And if you're hired, they'll need it legitimately anyways.

So while not ideal, this doesn't feel particularly egregrious to me. Of course, like any time you give out your SSN, you need to verify you're entering it on a legitimate site, or that you're dealing with a legitimate recruiter.

Pretty much every recruiting process at any large company has dumb policies, sadly. If something this small makes it "not worth it", I doubt any of the other companies would be "worth it" for you either.

I never give out my SSN to anybody who isn’t a bank, current employer, or government agency, except in really special circumstances.

Doctors tend to be major offenders here - their forms always ask for SSN. I never fill it in and they often don’t even ask a follow-up. But when they do, I’ve almost always been able to still get out of it by telling them that I don’t give it out to anyone ever. Or I don’t remember it.

Unless I am legally required to give my correct SSN, I just fill it in with one digit off. If they catch it, then they obviously were able to learn my SSN by another method. Otherwise, I'm doing my part to salt my public records with disinformation.

So what do you do when your background check comes back empty and you can't rent an apartment because the landlord won't offer you a lease without it?

That "background check" service would be a joke, and out of business almost immediately. Let's say it was a lease application. I certainly am giving my real name, previous addresses, real phone number, real email address, real age, etc. So I enter my SSN with an off by one digit (human typing error, oh my) and this "service" doesn't know my real SSN, a list of every other SSN I ever entered, and 300 other data points about me, in a few milliseconds? That is a rather naive view of the personal data industry, at least in the US. Just the targetable list of items Facebook knows about you (whether you have an account or not, shadow accounts and all that) is rather impressive. The shadow data aggregation industry knows tons more, because all the websites and Visa and everybody is sharing behind the scenes. I'm trying to imagine any adult in the US today coming back with an "empty" background check. Maybe the Unabomber, living in a cabin. Normal people, not so much.

Apply for an apartment that isn't running a background check on its applicants.

Is that actually a thing in America?

Of course. Landlords select tenants who are more likely to pay their bills and not run a meth lab -- with a better credit score, less debt, no criminal record, that sort of thing.

When it can take many months to evict a tenant who stops paying their bills, all of which is lost income plus then the cost of finding a new tenant, minimizing the probability of that is a landlord's top priority. Frankly, they'd be insane not to.

It's pretty standard to require a year or two of the first couple pages of your tax returns, and 2-3 months of bank statements, to prove your income as well, since standard background/credit checks don't have that.

Why, where do you live? Do landlords not require all this there?

Both Australia and the UK ,the most I've needed is a proof of having a job (first page of a work contract).

Yes it takes a while to evict people and agents have a shared blacklist of tenants who didn't pay their bills but it is expected that the house owner has insurance to cover damages and loss of income, just a part of being a landlord.

Australia has a specific magistrates court for dealing with those issues and unscrupulous landlords or tenants for example

Very interesting, thanks!

I'm actually quite curious then -- if a landlord has, say, 5 different prospective tenants then how do choose?

Because in NYC the landlord will take offers from those 5 tenants, run checks, and then pick the one who seems least likely to default.

In Australia and the UK is it the same, but they just go with more of their gut feeling or something, rather than hard data? Or is it primarily income listed on the work contract but they can't find out about debts?

In Australia you may also be asked to provide a copy of your rent payment history.

Edit:

>It's pretty standard to require a year or two of the first couple pages of your tax returns, and 2-3 months of bank statements, to prove your income as well, since standard background/credit checks don't have that.

That sounds insane to me.

In Seattle hand-picking like this is explicitly illegal; selection criteria have to be published beforehand and the first qualifying applicant accepted.

They ask questions about your income in applications to make sure you can afford the rent.

I obviously can't speak for how they pick, but I think it's usually a case of first application that meets the affordability criteria and has rental history or reference s.

They take offers on higher rent in a hot market.

Or maybe Ive just been very lucky and had kind agents

In Canada, I’ve never once had to give over a ssn or do a credit check. The American landlords are being abusive and invasive

It has to be done because of anti-discrimination laws.

Refuse to rent to someone who you met in person and is an obvious meth head who will totally trash the apartment they second they acquire it; who obviously has no job and will never pay rent? Well you "must" have learned of some protected characteristic too and therefore you just discriminated against them.

Refuse to rent to someone because "computer says no"? You're fine.

That's fair enough with small doctor's offices.

I'm just saying, if you're dealing with recruiting at a large corporation and they need an SSN to start the process, that seems like one of those special circumstances it makes sense to make an exception for.

>My biggest annoyance is with the company General Motors who requires your entire social security number to be interviewed contract.

When did you experience this? Was it recent? I've interviewed for multiple jobs at GM over the years (multiple locations, not just Detroit) and I've never been asked for my SSN. The last one was in 2016, and I even got an offer (that I turned down) - they never asked for my SSN but did say it was needed for the background check if I had accepted the offer.

At a previous job I worked for a GM vendor. So I interacted with a lot of GM folks and did some of their required virtual training associated with the ignition switch scandal and being able to communicate those types of violations up the chain. It really seemed to me that GM is very careful about any type of situation that could result in lawsuit.

If they are asking for SSN's now as part of the recruiting process, that strikes me as really strange.

It was 2019

Not just for interviewing.

When I bought my first Car, a fraternity brother of mine was able to get me a GM Friends and Family Discount. He wound up having to get my SSN to give to his Father so that his father could get it put 'in the system'. Which at the time (2006) may or may not have involved others handling that info in the process.

Not gonna lie, if it wasn't for how long I'd known him etc, I would not have believed that GM would use such a thing.

2006 was back when GMAC (now Ally) was the company's biggest profit center. I'm sure they checked credit and made an effort to finance your purchase.

Also, those programs have limits on how many times and how frequently an individual can take advantage of them. They may have used your SSN as the unique identifier to ensure you aren't exceeding the program limits. Not ideal obviously but really not all that unusual.

The only way I can see that being possible is if you got a stock option and survived long enough for it to vest.

But that's extremely high risk to take a 30-50k pay cut and move from highly affordable Michigan to Cali. All to bet it on stocks.

Source- 2017 recruiter was offering 80k, I was making 120k(40hr/week). Bonus points for the recruiter harassing me multiple times about "not changing the world" until I finally told him that I need to hang up.