We hire if there is 10x-impact on tumblr's growth AND revenue.
It seems they only hire people that can increase there revenue from 65 million to 650 million dollar.
That is not hiring or worth a blogpost.
Readit Newsmeldyr commented on Automattic open to hiring ex-Twitter individuals or even entire teams automattic.com/work-with-... · Posted by u/kif
Seems like a great tool to link reddit usernames to IP-addresses.
It reads like a standard horoscope.
Have to admit. I've been an idiot and fell for this data-gathering trap
This article doesn't seem to be grounded in reality.
I see self-checkouts, electronic toll collection, vending machines, automation of assembly lines, robots doing order picking in warehouses, self-driving trains in airports and many others replacing hourly workers today.
However, I am not aware of any AI-system replacing a middle manager.
I know it is popular to hate on middle-managers. But good middle manager culture is probably one of the best predictors of company performance.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danpontefract/2019/04/24/it-tur...
meldyr commented on What’s going on with Google and Facebook hiring freezes? blog.interviewing.io/what... · Posted by u/leeny
I'm not sure I buy that they're actually on a hiring freeze, but I may be wrong. The day before it was announced I got a text from a google recruiter literally saying feel free to contact me on 8/8 (after the freeze is supposedly finished). I feel like this was definitely a show for the shareholders, and a way to drop your dead weight. Everyone seems worried about employee productivity and profitably all of a sudden, or at least they're pretending to.
My advice is only if you know what you're doing, there's always a job for you.
Be careful with young and ambitious recruiters these days.
When large companies can do hiring freezes they do not immediately fire a large proportion of their recruiters immediately.
Recruiters will spent the same time interviewing for less vacancies to fill. Be careful not to waste your time on this.
I've yet to encounter a non-smelly k8s deployment that was started before everyone knew how it works or why it works.
On the other hand, once everyone on the team has experience building such a system from scratch, then deploying k8s and using it somehow becomes straightforward.
It's almost as if we need to learn how a tool works before being able to use it effectively.
Anyways, what we (actually didn't) replace it with:
- Don't let your devs learn about k8s on the job.
- Let them run side-projects on your internal cluster.
- Give them a small allowance to run their stuff on your network and learn how to do that safely.
- Give your devs time to code review each other's internally-hosted side-projects-that-use-k8s.
- Reap the benefits of a team that has learnt the ins and out of k8s without messing up your products.What do you mean with side projects? Are they paid?
If you want your Devs to learn kubernetes you should pay them for doing it.
If you can't, hire a contractor with the expertise you need.
A similar case happened in the Netherlands.
Many people living on government allowances had been paid too much. Instead of admitting their mistake government officials decided to retrieve the money and sue for fraud.
The result is that many people struggling with poverty had to repay a lot of money, pay for their legal defense and pay fines. Because they had been labeled fraudulent they could often not reapply to any government allowance. Children were taken away from their ‘criminal parents’ and many of them burnt out, relapsed into previous psychological illness or had to live in poverty for years.
It is lazy to blame this on the software. Nobody bothered to check their story or owned up for there mistake.
As a fellow SWE who's been in the RPA space for a few years now, I'll offer an alternative perspective.
Traditional RPA is here to stay, and only getting bigger. By "traditional" I mean screen-scraping and click bots. It's not only for legacy apps. It also addresses two development pain points that will never go away: (1) complexity and (2) missing features.
On (1), I've worked with companies whose APIs are so convoluted and poorly supported, and distributing your client in their ecosystem is so complex, that I've thrown up my hands and gone, "Forget it, I'll implement this with a service account." An RPA process logs into the front end, clicks around, scrapes some data, outputs it to the next process in my pipeline, and it's done. I've written processes like this that have been running for years with basically no maintenance due to stable-enough UIs. UI changes are still a risk, but if you have a mature UI, it's a great, simple alternative to a more complex process.
Regarding (2), APIs don't always expose all the features of the UI, and sometimes vendors won't, or can't, add them in a given budget or time frame. I worked with a partner whose API had essentially one read-only endpoint. Their product was fantastic and they had other integration methods; they just hadn't prioritized API development, which they could afford to do because they delivered so well in their niche otherwise. We had to get creative in how we would pull the data.
And (3) external parties.
An example is a SME which wants to download the billing information of 100 employee from ATNT’s customer port
3M is gifting sales to it's competition to avoid future liabilities. Chinese companies are ready to pick up the slack.
3M is certainly developing safer alternatives, but until they are as good and as cheap, companies will buy their toxins elsewhere.
The market signal on that using PFAS is imposes serious liabilities on a company is crystal clear. Even a giant like 3M is in rough waters because it cannot bear the liabilities.
It is common that large public companies deinvest some part of their business that cause bad PR. They usually sell a part of their business to a smaller/more anonymous/non-public company that is prepared to take the liabilities. In this case there is no indication of a possible sale of the 3M plants and a complete closure is the most likely scenario.
A second aspect is that many 3m-customers will be forced to reevaluate the decision to use PFAS. A good example is the usage in firefighting foam. Any producer of firefighting-foam is now fully aware that selling foam which is guaranteed to be released into the environment is a major liability.
There are even proposals to ban end-products that contain PFAS at the EU-level. Lobbying is not fully transparent, but I suspect 3M was one of the last strongholds that lobbied against such regulation.
Today, in many emerging markets environment law is weak or the enforcement is absent today. However, we see that all emerging markets are catching-up. In 5 to 10 years PFAS-producers will face a similar regulatory risk in some emerging markets.
The last element is that the market-share of 3M was huge. It is unlikely that competitors in emerging markets can fill that gap in 3 years.
In the short term, we will see some PFAS-producing companies in emerging markets making record profits because of this decision. However, I think it is unlikely that growth in emerging markets will come even close to filling this gap.