acituan

57 ms·

481.
by acituan 6y ago
> It does not matter if the "secret sauce infra" is better than equivalents. That is what the OP suggested. > What matters is that the code you have is based on it It is the nature of infra structure is to be independent fr
482.
by acituan 6y ago
> the labor of each employee is unique and you cannot sensibly price it wholesale thus there are salary negotiations for both sides to come to an agreement Yes, that is exactly what I am claiming to be a myth. That unique price point is
483.
by acituan 6y ago
Well the point is there is no “secret sauce infra”, let alone Google specific infra as the OP speculates. If we were to claim timing as a factor, AWS was available since 2006.
484.
by acituan 6y ago
> Google can't spin off tools successfully because their internal codebases are deeply reliant on assumptions about Google's infrastructure and Google internal libraries, etc. (for example: Google Reader could not be spun off T
485.
by acituan 6y ago
> The employer is buying labor and "price discrimination" is a seller's strategy This doesn't matter at all, information asymmetry based extraction is still there. The employer is buying labor in large quantities from
486.
by acituan 6y ago
> It doesn't benefit top earners to share salary information Maybe one of the biggest myths is that we can appraise performance objectively and that pay is nothing but a function of that performance. In reality, this is nothing but
487.
by acituan 6y ago
> what is with this gross authoritarianism? most of these people using these bright LEDs dont realize how bright it is for the other drivers There are wishes for gross authoritarianism because US has problems with lesser, appropriate reg
488.
by acituan 6y ago
> These are not meaningful distinctions: the consumer has a choice not to shop at Walmart, not to buy a Nintendo product, and not to use a Visa card. Similarly, the consumer has a choice not to buy an Apple product. A better analogy woul
489.
by acituan 6y ago
> The way you have defined the word monopoly does not make legal or practical sense... if Apple only ever made 100 smartphones ... That is precisely the point. iPhone has a market share of 45% in the US. Therefore Apple has absolute cont
490.
by acituan 6y ago
I'm sure there is an odd piece here and there. But certainly not covered as frequently and as prominently as tech. To give context, US has almost exactly the same number of software engineers and nurses (~4 million).
491.
by acituan 6y ago
The difference is for some sectors this topic appears frequently on the mainstream media while what you suggest requires checking dedicated specialists publications or active intention of search. That is precisely the problem, what determin
492.
by acituan 6y ago
> And when developers are forced to support all 5 big ones? That is a big assumption. Who is the forcing agent here you are positing? The whole point of making app stores a multiagent game is to reduce the leverage of one to force thin
493.
by acituan 6y ago
I totally sympathize with the frustration, and experience that as a user too. But I would like to suggest that digital product design is usually a moving target, based on constantly changing consumer engagement, competition and other market
494.
by acituan 6y ago
Do you think you would lose any of those benefits if Google had an iOS app store too? What if you also had the option of Microsoft iOS app store? Would the competition likely to increase pro-consumer benefits or decrease them? Pro-consumer
495.
by acituan 6y ago
Please familiarize yourself with hackernews guidelines https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
496.
by acituan 6y ago
> Fine, but why are they so bad at weighing it against long term trust? I want to remind the loss aversion and status quo bias. We tend to evaluate losses more important than they are, which is why for example it is hard to throw seldom
497.
by acituan 6y ago
> Try getting Amazon Prime, or Spotify out of the App Store and there will be a riot. Some smaller app few care about? Not so much... Which was my point. Their power doesn’t come from their money but the fact that their products are foun
498.
by acituan 6y ago
> In a system where money is power, and the economy encourages its concentration, you always end up with such unbalances. Is money really the only power? For all I know these companies depend on consumers’ attention and consumption. Not
499.
by acituan 6y ago
> There is a psychoactive effect but it’s pretty small The research I cited claims otherwise. If you have citations to back your claim, I'm happy to revise my position. And sure, it will be OK for a good majority of the population b
500.
by acituan 6y ago
> You said that tradition doesn't stand scrutiny over time No, that is not what I said. I said knowledge transmission through tradition is lossy and as such it is not systematic, it doesn't carry context and it doesn't cov
501.
by acituan 6y ago
You could indeed end debating with the strawman. Contrasting merits of scientific processes with traditional knowledge is not scientism. If anything claiming tradition is an infinitely robust source of knowledge is some sort of dogmatism.
502.
by acituan 6y ago
That assumes adverse reactions will have a gradual, reversible onset. By that token you could keep taking acetaminophen as long as you don’t feel like your liver is failing.
503.
by acituan 6y ago
You don't go through your medicine cabinet and try everything there because "changing nothing" can backfire. You read/learn about the complications, side-effects, adverse reactions and make an informed decision based on
504.
by acituan 6y ago
> - "cycling is dangerous", "hiking is dangerous", "swimming is dangerous", "running is dangerous" The difference is all of those are physical activities, and a reasonable person can easily infer t
505.
by acituan 6y ago
You're fighting several strawman arguments but I am still going to assume good faith. > If you suffer from PTSD and get an episode at the grocery store, do you want to regulate grocery store visits also? I am not talking about trig
506.
by acituan 6y ago
Just because it is simple in your experience doesn't mean that is universally true for everyone. Certainly not for anxiety disordered or PTSD suffering people for example. See my reply to comment below which cites studies when these so
507.
by acituan 6y ago
A good meta study is: Lindahl et al (2017). The varieties of contemplative experience: A mixed-methods study of meditation-related challenges in Western Buddhists. This vice article recaps it: https://www.vice.com/en_us&#x2F
508.
by acituan 6y ago
> With a lot of these things I would highly recommend to just try it. If it works for you, good. If not, don't do it. It doesn't cost anything and you won't harm yourself. I strongly disagree with this line of thinking. If
509.
by acituan 6y ago
> ...promoting its own products. Classic monopoly How is promoting equivalent to classic monopoly ? They are not removing competitors from search results. They are ranking based on relevance and apparently users are happy with their o
510.
by acituan 6y ago
> Of course, no, they aren’t down, it’s just that people that absolutely should be going to the hospital aren’t and they’re endangering their lives trying to avoid COVID-19. Do we have any clear data for this link of causality ? Isn&#x2

More ›