> It was nice that they gave dedicated keys to volume control/toggling muting.
I know it's not an option for certain keyboards (and laptop keyboards) but I appreciated not having to use Fn keys and use physical volume dials like Das Keyboard 4. https://www.daskeyboard.com/daskeyboard-4-professional
I like this analogy; raising children well like delivering products well pays dividends. They’re less likely to cause problems and if they do, they tend to be smaller in scope.
Yeah, I think the author strays a bit away from the title.
The author says, "The collaboration industry has spent a fortune obscuring a dirty truth: most complex, high-quality work is done by individuals or very small groups operating with clear authority and sharp accountability" which means collaboration can work... in the right environment and with the right people. I work in R&D and I could not imagine not working in a collaborative environment. It's not reasonable to have expertise at everything and it's understood that things have to get done no matter whose name is on the ticket/story.
I also agree on you calling out Men against Fire example as well. That's not a collaboration issue, that's a training issue (amongst other things). And that problem went away as you said.
> By 1946, the US Army had accepted Marshall’s conclusions, and the Human Resources Research Office of the US Army subsequently pioneered a revolution in combat training which eventually replaced firing at ‘bulls eye’ targets with deeply ingrained ‘conditioning’ using realistic, man-shaped ‘pop-up’ targets that fall when hit. Psychologists know that this kind of powerful ‘operant conditioning’ is the only technique which will reliably influence the primitive, mid-brain processing of a frightened human being. Fire drills condition terrified school children to respond properly during a fire. Conditioning in flight simulators enables frightened pilots to respond reflexively to emergency situations. And similar application and perfection of basic conditioning techniques increased the rate of fire to approximately 55 percent in Korea and around 95 percent in Vietnam.
I am saying that. Salary + taxes + insurance + retirement + other benefits + support cost is around 670k. Salary eats up like 160k of that budget, though.
I work at a lab associated with R1 university that has Nobel laureate output so I feel like I have some knowledge in this area:
1. They exist. However, writing a piece of software is not the same thing as supporting them, especially when it comes to dealing with core HR system. This is where SaaSs and similar platform offers lot of appeal.
2. Also difficult because everyone has different needs and at some point certain features get prioritized over others. I support a platform that was built in house before I was born. The guy who wrote it is no longer with us and it is cludgy. Any product decisions evolve years of committee meetings before any decision gets made (by which the it may be incorrect or not relevant.)
Every single time I worked for a company that said let’s hiring an engineering team to build a software that is already solved by a market offering, it has never gone well. The in house product never had the same capabilities or had the same sheen.
3. Can’t answer this one other than digitization efforts.
For transparency, a single software engineer budget is $670K+.
>your vision will eventually settle when you hit late 30’s
This statement reminds me of the surgeon who did my PRK few months ago. He mentioned preferring not doing procedure on candidates who are at least in their mid-20's. I think the person you're replying to probably meant specifically myopia whereas you're referring to presbyopia?
> you can just choose to use Apple's app store then, without imposing your Stockholm syndrome on the rest of us and defending antitrust behavior from a 3 trillion dollar monopoly.
I have chosen to use Apple's app store without imposing anything. You have your choice of using Apple or something else.
> That’s why iPhones cost so much. I don’t see why they can’t just sell phones and let people decide on software if they want.
Three things come to mind:
1. Supporting a diverse ecosystem is hard and expensive.
2. It's easier to build a seamless platform when you have control over hardware and software. Look at Mac trackpad as an example; it's pretty much beats any PC trackpads.
3. Software sales is where the money is at. I used to work for a dell subsidiary and it was a common knowledge that Dell (and other vendors too) sold servers at a loss and made it up on software and support contracts. Apple has like ~80% profit margins on app store sales which is insane.
I like the walled garden. I like the curated experience. As far as I am aware, me liking these things for my phone and subsequently voting with my wallet doesn't prevent someone else enjoying another ecosystem that doesn't have these things (i.e. Android).
> What most systemd critics consider "bloat", I consider necessary complexity to solve a complex problem generically.