an anticompetitive measure to keep other taxi companies from coming into existence and competing against them.
Judging by the number of taxi companies, that has got to be the worst effort to be anticompetitive EVER. Complete fail there. Not to mention the fact that they are bound to be present in certain spots where people need them, give access to physically disabled, install expensive safety equipment and hold expensive insurance; all of which vastly raises the cost of operating in their business. By your measure the taxi industry must have the worst business strategists ever.
I asked this question in a previous article and I was told that an Uber car would not only sense the vomit and drive to a car wash immediately to be cleaned in and out, but that the offender would be on video and sent the bill.
No, what needs to be fixed then is how humans get the means to afford goods and services, once no one is required to do something in exchange for money.
I think you hit the nail on the head. In recent history, there were new machines, but humans were still needed. In this modern age, we are reaching the critical point where machines can now do most things that humans were needed for. They can satisfy most of our needs as society sits today. It is an important distinction to make.
It's totally different when humans give that kind of service though. Because we like connections to other humans. What is special about that kind of service is that someone remembers you and values your business enough to go the extra effort. This in turn makes me feel special. If a facial recogbot does the same thing, big whoop, it is just doing what it is programmed to do and it's doing everyone in the same way.
The problem is that the people that run this world right now almost all think that they 'did something' that was valuable in the current system to deserve the wealth that they have. At some point for the 'universal support' model to arise you have to convince the people with the wealth that the things they did were not really that valuable. Now people are valuable just for existing. You're not likely to do that without some sort of violent intervention.
I might add, production might be restarted in a much more efficient and fair way than it was before. More cooperatives where the producers have a part of the take and less private organizations sending money to people who have nothing to do with production.
I guess it comes down to this.. I'm not going to feel sorry for myself in the way I won't do what I can to mitigate it.. for I am entirely capable. It doesn't mean I have to like the fact that the world is changing and making me less valuable than I would be if there weren't people capable of changing the rules in their favor. If someone steals my car, I'm going to do what I need to do to get a new car but I don't have to like the fact that I have been placed in that position.
I've been doing it for around that long myself. I didn't see what the big deal was, but in the last few months everything around me started to get outsourced. I have basically been told that I can only continue on for anther year or two. I've been looking for something else, but so far the salaries I have been offered will set me back 10 years in my career. I'm sure that there are some that are lucky to work for companies or at least live in areas with companies that resist this movement, but it is a real thing.
Being realistic about how the game is changing in a way that will make things more difficult for me is way different than feeling sorry for myself; that was actually a bit of a dickish thing to say. I've fortunately seen this coming and I have been able to prepare myself with a few alternative plans to fall back on, but they are nothing like the traditional job that most people have and they involve quite a bit more risk.
Well to be fair, people thought that kind of counted on corporations not getting a free pass on immigration laws. Or at the very least the spirit of H1-B would be enforced; that is, a company could not import employees unless there were none available domestically. The 'free market' means something very much different when corps have such easy ways into a market that is based in an entirely different economy.
Yes, by all means capitalize it for a month or two, and also learn the skill of teaching foreigners to do your job. In fact, I'm not sure why most employers don't just make 'transitioning to a foreigner' a job requirement in the first place.
Except having family commitments is an integral part of humanity, and is an important part of our primal needs. Working for a startup is.... working for a starup. Sorry, maybe I am putting my needs ahead of others here but raising kids properly is a far greater calling than working for anyone, anywhere.
Hey, I'm just saying both make about as much sense to me. Was hoping someone could explain it, but I guess not. People do what they do, let's leave it at that then.
Slashdot Mirror
an anticompetitive measure to keep other taxi companies from coming into existence and competing against them.
Judging by the number of taxi companies, that has got to be the worst effort to be anticompetitive EVER. Complete fail there. Not to mention the fact that they are bound to be present in certain spots where people need them, give access to physically disabled, install expensive safety equipment and hold expensive insurance; all of which vastly raises the cost of operating in their business. By your measure the taxi industry must have the worst business strategists ever.
I asked this question in a previous article and I was told that an Uber car would not only sense the vomit and drive to a car wash immediately to be cleaned in and out, but that the offender would be on video and sent the bill.
No, the government was supposed to be the entity with the responsibilities.
I'm glad you brought that up. It is really very scary how on target the concept is.
No, what needs to be fixed then is how humans get the means to afford goods and services, once no one is required to do something in exchange for money.
I think you hit the nail on the head. In recent history, there were new machines, but humans were still needed. In this modern age, we are reaching the critical point where machines can now do most things that humans were needed for. They can satisfy most of our needs as society sits today. It is an important distinction to make.
If it is a choice between drudgery and watching my family dying of starvation before finally dying myself, I take drudgery any day.
+1 because I just said the same thing before I got to this.
It's totally different when humans give that kind of service though. Because we like connections to other humans. What is special about that kind of service is that someone remembers you and values your business enough to go the extra effort. This in turn makes me feel special. If a facial recogbot does the same thing, big whoop, it is just doing what it is programmed to do and it's doing everyone in the same way.
The problem is that the people that run this world right now almost all think that they 'did something' that was valuable in the current system to deserve the wealth that they have. At some point for the 'universal support' model to arise you have to convince the people with the wealth that the things they did were not really that valuable. Now people are valuable just for existing. You're not likely to do that without some sort of violent intervention.
I might add, production might be restarted in a much more efficient and fair way than it was before. More cooperatives where the producers have a part of the take and less private organizations sending money to people who have nothing to do with production.
I guess it comes down to this.. I'm not going to feel sorry for myself in the way I won't do what I can to mitigate it.. for I am entirely capable. It doesn't mean I have to like the fact that the world is changing and making me less valuable than I would be if there weren't people capable of changing the rules in their favor. If someone steals my car, I'm going to do what I need to do to get a new car but I don't have to like the fact that I have been placed in that position.
I've been doing it for around that long myself. I didn't see what the big deal was, but in the last few months everything around me started to get outsourced. I have basically been told that I can only continue on for anther year or two. I've been looking for something else, but so far the salaries I have been offered will set me back 10 years in my career. I'm sure that there are some that are lucky to work for companies or at least live in areas with companies that resist this movement, but it is a real thing.
Being realistic about how the game is changing in a way that will make things more difficult for me is way different than feeling sorry for myself; that was actually a bit of a dickish thing to say. I've fortunately seen this coming and I have been able to prepare myself with a few alternative plans to fall back on, but they are nothing like the traditional job that most people have and they involve quite a bit more risk.
Ok well I hope so, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Well to be fair, people thought that kind of counted on corporations not getting a free pass on immigration laws. Or at the very least the spirit of H1-B would be enforced; that is, a company could not import employees unless there were none available domestically. The 'free market' means something very much different when corps have such easy ways into a market that is based in an entirely different economy.
Not to mention, you're required to act like you enjoy the company of a lot of dickheads.
Yes, what a mistake it is to think 'fair market' means being able to ask more money for a skill that is high in demand with no one to do it.
Yes, by all means capitalize it for a month or two, and also learn the skill of teaching foreigners to do your job. In fact, I'm not sure why most employers don't just make 'transitioning to a foreigner' a job requirement in the first place.
Uh, the large corporations of the IT industry have already found a way around that bubble. It's called H1-B.
Too many people think taking an old tired idea and adding an app to the mix will somehow make it fabulous.
Except having family commitments is an integral part of humanity, and is an important part of our primal needs. Working for a startup is.... working for a starup. Sorry, maybe I am putting my needs ahead of others here but raising kids properly is a far greater calling than working for anyone, anywhere.
I've been prohibited from working OT for around five years now. Large company.
Hey, I'm just saying both make about as much sense to me. Was hoping someone could explain it, but I guess not. People do what they do, let's leave it at that then.
That's a sad way to live. I've known people that participate in that game and they are rarely happy.
My hobby is an internet startup I work on that I started with primarily open source software.