>If there is one rule, then it had to be the ‘safety net’ rule. It just means that everyone is safe to speak their minds during the retreat. There will be many sessions on feedback about product, company, people etc. If team members are worried about repercussions, then retreats wouldn’t work at all.
Sounds great in theory, but what do you do when someone starts sharing sexist or biased opinions. Or starts to personally degrade another employee or team?
For a responsible company, there are always repercussions, it is disingenuous to lead employees to believe otherwise.
What identity confirmation exists currently for phone companies? You can use a pay phone, pay cash for a prepaid wireless phone, phone in a motel room booked under a fake name, etc.
So ban all types of internet-based or IP-based calls? That's an extreme solution for a limited problem.
The problem is the lack of threat validation by police. There are many options now to validate threats, we have tech that can see through walls, robotics, drones. The fact is you have a very real chance of being shot by police without a trial and based on a phone-call.. and we are considering that a problem with the phone company?
When issuing the EV cert, they don't actually validate any of that so it is of questionable utility.
I was surprised how easy it was to get an EV cert. The validators work from an offshore call-center and use sites like whitepages.com to lookup the business. They then call the number listed (you could have updated the listing just before). When they call you simply have to say "I am ... and my position is X at Y company. Then hand the phone to someone else who says something similar". There was no individual identity verification.
How do you decide which one needs to change its name? There's no objective measure for which is 'larger'.
The vast majority of consumers are not going to lookup an FDIC number, and even if they did, it is still not optimal since banks regularly merge which would cause confusion.
This is similar to what I'd like to see. Sharing cookies is somewhat dangerous since they could have login/user data, but it would totally work to avoid browser fingerprinting. With all the fingerprinting methods (screen resolution, GPU, HW, font-list, etc.) it's a losing proposition to attempt to remove all traces of a unique fingerprint.
Instead I'd like to see a browser that generates such a noisy fingerprint that it is useless: Each time I start an 'anonymous' session, grab a fingerprint from a pool that is sufficiently similar to mine that things render properly (matching resolution for example) but that has also been used by thousands/millions of others.
If you are concerned about timing it right, or macro-economic swings, simply purchase a corresponding long position in an index fund / S&P 500. Options do cost premiums, but shorts typically do not. You can however even recover the option premium with a similar strategy by selling a matching option on the index.
You can construct a trade that will make you money assuming your assumption is correct (that that company will underperform the market).
The entire purpose of a company is to return value to shareholders. Due to our current tax law, buybacks are a much better way to do that than dividends.
Are you saying that a company should invest 100% back into itself? There are a few very successful companies that do that, but the vast majority do not. Most companies return value to shareholders regularly in the form of dividends (or buybacks).
If you are confident in this scenario, then rollover your 401k into an IRA, enable options trading, and buy puts or short the companies that you believe took on too much debt.
Amazon's delivery drivers are more similar to Uber/Lyft drivers. They get minimal to no training and simply follow instructions via the app. Some of them have documented the experience on youtube and it's worth a watch. They often have to accept the route with minimal information.
I'd be interested to know how much of those costs are due to driver incentives and other costs related to expansion into new geographic regions vs. costs for established regions.
It could be that cutting costs is as simple as slowing down or pausing the expansion.
Thanks for the explanation, your argument makes sense.
I'd just look at it in a slightly different, perhaps more optimistic way. The fact that this investment has the highest ROI means that society as a whole would benefit from injecting additional capital into that investment.
In that sense, you're right that other investors have a less desirable price. However in theory at least, everyone is better off since that investment now has more capital, and is able to produce more output, positively contributing to the overall economy and increasing the size of the overall pie.
I've seen this as well, in my experience much of it comes from other orgs that see the engineering team come in late, or walk around the office tossing a ball into the air.
They start putting pressure on engineering managers to make sure their team is "working". Their team clearly needs more discipline and those 'slackers' need to be cut.
What they don't see is that the engineer tossing the ball figured out that the solution they were about to spend 2 weeks coding can be achieved by leveraging an existing library requiring only a couple days effort.
How do you avoid creating a slum with dense low-income housing?
Seems like highly distributed low-cost, low-unit housing might work decently.