Readit NewsThat sounds incredibly complicated, and not something we could do in a <10kB library!
Imagine you're writing trading software, you have an algo go haywire and it machine guns the whole order book, and then you refuse to put a "max order size" outside of the algo to stop it from happening again because you can't figure out why it happened in the first place.
Try telling a regulator or your boss that was your reasoning.
https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/carbon-notes-5-green-hydrog...
> The members of the hydrogen coalition are all obviously incumbent fossil fuel and petrochemical interests looking for a bridge to the new era. If realized, their ambitious hydrogen projects may overload the available supply of green power, for little real benefit. By diverting badly needed clean power, green hydrogen vanity projects may even slow down the energy transition. And the subsidy regimes that are being put in place could become self-perpetuating. As Gernot Wagner and Danny Cullenward recently warned, “hydrogen could become the next corn ethanol”, a ruinously inefficient and environmentally damaging creature of subsidies that are too big to kill.
In a true software firm, more capital invested in headcount loosely means more features which is what drives sales. Here you can attribute a per employee profitability. When you hire more employees at a tech firm, the expectation is that you become more profitable.
At a non-tech company like a newspaper, technologists are a cost centre, you invest in technology in order to be more efficient, and hire as few people as possible.
Of course some technologists at the NYT will be profit centres. like those who work on advertising operations and games. But the NYT at its core is a news firm, it makes money on its influence and prestige which is driven by its journalism. Writers and content creators are the profit centres, everything else is a cost of doing business.
NYT isn't comparable to The Guardian. It's subscription based so the news isn't enough. They have to add cooking, games, The Athletic, etc, across a ton of different apps, feeds, and presentations.
Games is solely a software product sold as a separate add-on subscription. It's almost certainly a profit center at the rates they charge.
There's no data to support the idea that they have a massively bloated headcount. Just because you don't know the extent of what they do doesn't mean that they aren't doing it anyway.
Why do you think that people on 200k should have a union? How does it benefit anyone besides people looking for sinecure jobs?
Unions were needed to combat the powers of corporations where you are in some ways trapped by the relationship; like miners in appalachia who had to fight cartels of mining companies who suppressed their wages; or teachers who have one state employer.
If you're a competent tech worker, you're at the other end of the spectrum. So much so you're generally advised to switch jobs every few years in order to maximise your salary. There's nothing binding you to a particular employer, particularly in New York!
To be honest, if you're a good technologist, you should be looking at making 400k a year in at a trading firm. If you're working for the NYT you're doing it because you're weirdly attracted to the prestige of working there, or you're looking for a cushy job.
If the job is no longer as cushy as you want, have the dignity to leave and find other employment rather than trying to hold your employer hostage.
Why they have 600 people is a question for management, no?
Kafka's not exactly hard to set up, especially for simple configs for low event rates. The justification from the link you posted:
> On the other side we have a wide range of services and applications that need
> access to this published content — there are search engines, personalization
> services, feed generators, as well as all the different front-end applications,
> like the website and the native apps. Whenever an asset is published, it should
> be made available to all these systems with very low latency — this is news,
> after all — and without data loss.Being a tech worker isn't like being a steelworker where you're kinda screwed if the plant shuts down. You're fully capable of moving job if you're dissatisfied.
> Why they have 600 people is a question for management, no?
It's a question for everyone at the organisation. If you're joining a firm with a massively bloated headcount you need to think if you're going to be there in a year's time when someone in management finally gathers the political capital to slim your department down to sane levels.
It's certainly not a position to start bargaining even more concessions from the hand that's feeding you.
It’s challenging to say the least. Even when working between first-world countries speaking English, there’s a host of serious problems. Cultural differences; different expectations; time zone differences.
I'm fully aware of how jaring it is for the median HN reader to hear this, but maintenance of a news website isn't the kind of skilled labour that commands a 250k a year paycheck anymore.
When I had my import repair shop, I made a fortune repairing Jags and LRs. My business partner named his lake house 'Discovery' because of all the money we made off of those things.
The original Range Rover is an upmarket agricultural vehicle, and used the same platform from 1970 until the 2000s. When you actually use them as intended, for off road farm work you realise they’re better off road than they are on road.