Elon?

>Buy all your engineers an arduino kit with sensors and blinkylights and motors.

I would love this.

I mean, it's basically what my job is (write code to make hw do blinky stuff - gross simplification, but yeah...) anyway, but I would find getting that to be really cool. Of course, my SO would just see it as yet more HW taking up residence here (I'm remote and my company sends me all sorts of HW that I need).

You can build our DIY air quality sensor based on the Arduino SDK (fully open source / open hardware) [1].

Something that many people find useful (especially monitoring CO2 levels at home) and it comes with a nice 3d printable enclosure to pass SO approval ...

[1] https://www.airgradient.com/diy/

Maybe that depends on if the rightful owner deducted the stolen items from their taxes.

> Why does anyone think it's OK to pay less on money you made with money you have?

The venn diagram of people who make the rules overlaps with those who benefit.

> "As the company grew, the founders wanted everyone to experience different parts of the product so we could get closer to all our audiences and understand how the product works," a DoorDash spokesperson said

Does that mean delivery persons get to be an engineer or a CEO for a day?

Even if they had the skills / training to do it the goals of those mid/high level positions are munch longer term than a discreet 30min pickup/delivery transaction. You’d have to be an engineer for a month at least to see a full release cycle or a CxO for a year to see an annual plan go from concept to execution to review.

This is not a good thing. I have an old phone I put my sim in when I go fishing, boating, beach, etc.

Apple keeps making it very difficult for me to want to keep purchasing their products.

"Sorry Fred, you meet, even exceed, all of our expectations for the position, however you prefer to stay too long, so fuck right off."

Seriously? This is absurd.

I think it depends on whether Fred continued to find opportunities for growth during his long stay.

If he can describe how he was meeting his career goals while also staying in the same position for nine years, then there's no reason to avoid him.

But if he spent the last six years stagnating, it might be worth giving extra scrutiny to how up-to-date his skillset is.

Replace “career goals” with “value to the business” and I would agree.

I don’t care about personal development to the same degree as making money. That’s what the business is about after all.

I dunno, if I make a list of leaders I've worked with that I'd want to hire if I started my own thing... I'm sure keeping the machine alive and the paychecks flowing was near the top of their priority list, but most of their decisions seemed motivated by other things.

Improve safety for the users. Preserve the sanity of the ops team. Start actually competing for our business instead of relying on relationships with politicians. That sort of thing.

Most often these hireworthy behaviors correlate with bringing value to the business, but sometimes the business's values need correcting.

Right, but these are value adds to the business, rather than personal career goals, which is what I’m getting at (a business will assess your worth not on your career goals but what you are worth to the business, and personal career goals aren’t a great measure of that, unless you can craft such goals very carefully).

I guess I'm trying to saying that you should craft your goals that way. And if accomplishing your goals doesn't also count as adding value to the business, you should go find a company where it does.

I realize this is an abnormal perspective, but I think it's important.

I spent seven years at a company whose main talent was finding ways to sell software that nobody would use (fewer bugs that way). We would build relationships with politicians who needed to spend their budget in order to have it renewed next year at the same size, and sell them something that claimed to do whatever made them look good.

It took us lowly engineers a long time to find out what was going on, but one day somebody actually tried to use it and you could tell from the bugs that nobody before them had ever managed to make it work.

Corrupting politicians is profitable. It adds value to the business. Creating an R&D group to actually drive the industry forward? That's risky, and in the end, less profitable. But I respect the hell out of the people who managed to do it, business value be damned, and would hire them to smack me around from time to time if I were a CEO.

Also I don't think anyone will outright reject you for staying too long at one company.

What they'll do is see it as a red flag and dig into it and find out what the circumstances were. If they feel those circumstances are ok, then you're fine. If they feel they were not ok, then you'll get dinged.

Versus back when I started my career, it would have been a universally positive indicator, that would score you points over a "job hopper". Nowadays it seems the job hopper is in a better position.

Everyone can tear down a straw man.

It's more along the lines of "Fred, you exceed all our expectations but we're worried that you haven't been keeping up with the trade skills in your area due to being in only one company and likely been way too cozy there to evolve your skills".

That means your interviews suck.

Agreed. It's too biased to jump to such conclusions early in the process.

> Look at nearly every 12v car or boat battery. You don't see those being replaced every 3-5 years.

Yes, yes you do. All the time.

Home Depot can rent you a truck for 4 hours with a CC, DL and a handshake. In/out in less than 10 min.

Renting a car can be this easy. It just isn't.

This also involves driving an orange and white Home Depot billboard/truck and a decent probability that you just spent money buying things at Home Depot for which you now need a short term rental.

A traditional rental car has neither of those corporate advantages and therefore has the situation described above about cancellations.

Their point is that the process can be smooth and fast. Not necessarily that people should rent from Home Depot.

And their point is that the process is smooth and fast because of the constraints that don't exist in the market at large.

The process is just about the same for Uhaul and that has none of the "enable people to do more business with you" motive that the home depot rental truck does.

That's exactly how easy a traditional rental is. They require a credit card and driver license, and takes about 10 minutes to process. The rest of it-- waiting in line, long walk to the lot, is only because the car rental company has much higher quantities (of cars and customers) to manage. And Home Depot is far more likely to have all trucks occupied than a car rental company.

A van from U-Haul is a fraction of the price of car rental companies. You can rent a van for 7 days from U-Haul for only $139.65 and $.69/mile. For that price I don't care what the hell it looks like.

Which shuttle stand does the courtesy bus to U-Haul leave from outside the arrivals terminal?

Well none but at the same time I find the level of obvious exploitation people will accept for momentary convenience strange but that's just me. Personally I just don't get it.

And get 10mpg driving it.

Last time I rented a van from hertz I selected the location to collect from (self storage place), the time to pick up, and drop off (2 hours later), and then picked it up.

No. I'm not going to put one of those on my fucking head just to use a computer. I'm NOT. I already dislike wearing glasses (and contacts, etc).

To think people are going to do this in mass, it's just stupid thinking.

Edit: Okay drive-by downvoter(s), I get it, The above didn't "add" anything to the discussion. But you know what, this has been discussed and THE MASSES AREN'T GOING TO WEAR THAT SHIT.

So, you dislike wearing glasses, but use them anyway because they provide a value to you. Did I get that correctly? What if a head-mounted display would provide some value to you that you would not get in any other way?

Value? No, they're a medical device that I have to wear.

Isn't "seeing clearly" a value? Point being – even if you don't like the form factor it might give you an ability that you can't have any other way.

Or it might just be some nerdy tech that a very small percent of people in the tech community feel the need to try and convince others that it is the future. It is not.

And no, seeing clearly is not a value. It is a necessity.

Absolutely agree that VR is not mainstream and it is currently positioned as mostly nerdy thing. However, I am not in the business of convincing anybody. If something happens and you will be forced to use it, I am sorry in advance.