Who in their sane mind sends juniors bug hunting? Especially fresh hires, they're busy enough trying to get to terms with the SVN setup and most likely they are new to the toolchain or at least part of it, too. How the FUCK should these people be qualified to find bugs? They don't even know whether the problem is related to code or the environment.
I was pretty much thinking of that code. I once has a coworker like that. I remember that one time he got called in during his days off, he looked like he just came from some kind of drug party (and probably did), staggered to his seat, dumped half the coffee all over his shirt, fixed the problem, was told that he can go home now and replied "Sounds too elaborate" before simply sleeping at the desk.
And yes, he was sleeping. And snoring.
Such people exist. I have met a few that are like that, not THAT extreme but some rather odd fellows with odd quirks do exist. Funny enough, you can't motivate them with money. But they are easily motivated by allowing them to live out their particular brand of insanity.
Well, it does make sense to load the pictures simultaneously because they may come from different source and what if one of them stalls? The whole page would sit there and wait.
What gets my piss to a boil is that browsers still cannot load text first and ignore pictures until the rest of the page is done. Gimme something to read while your slow ass server eventually, maybe, finally manages to send the picture I don't give a shit about.
Let's say you need 800 bucks to survive. Any job you take will have to provide those 800 bucks now or else you're better off not taking it. So employers pretty much have to pay more than 800 to make people work for them.
If there's now a UBI of 800 bucks, people of course don't have to work to get by. But that 800 bucks don't cover anything above sustenance. If your TV or fridge breaks, you're out a TV or fridge. You now have to earn that money for a new fridge or TV.
Employers, though, can now get away with paying WAY less than before. 200 bucks is already a pretty good deal for a month of work, because that's already on top of your sustenance level, the equivalent of making 1000 now. It's already 200 bucks "more than you need".
And that in turn IS already more than most people have left when the month is over today.
Essentially, what UBI means is that you can go work for only 200 bucks and still get out ahead, while your employer gets away with paying only 200 instead of 1000 bucks for you.
And before anyone comes in and claims the sky is falling in certain industries if it's no longer possible to essentially turn people into indentured servants who can be pressed into working 60+ hours a week for 2 bucks an hours, an UBI actually means that you can hire approximately twice or thrice the workforce for the same money. And they will come. UBI only means "existence", but anything that breaks down and needs to be replaced means that people will have to go and get a job, if only temporary.
Those 200 were an example. C'mon, you can't be that dense.
Of course the difference in pay cannot be more than the UBI offers itself without having a negative impact on your income. If you have an UBI of 800 bucks and you now earn 1000, having a wage of 200 bucks would mean that you get equal pay. If you earn 5000 bucks a month, this of course means that you'd still have to be paid 4200 to come out equal.
In the end, yes, low paying jobs would get a LOT cheaper for employers. Paying 200 instead of 1000 is cutting the price tag of that employee to a fifth, essentially meaning that he could hire 5 people for the same price as one today. Of course that does not scale to high paying jobs, but we sure have no problem with unemployment in that area. Actually, we're currently looking desperately for senior consultants that are... let's say not looking at minimum wage.
What every country does have a problem with, though, is keeping its lowly skilled (and hence lowly paid) population occupied. UBI could easily take care of that problem.
That's my approach to that problem at least. And so far I've been doing great with it.
90% of code is trivial bullshit. Anyone can do it, hell, even cargo-cult programming cannot fuck it up. Sitting a senior programmer down to do that is a waste of resources.
10% of code is insanely difficult to figure out, arcane mystical bullshit. Hard to write, hard to maintain, hard to understand and even harder to get right.
You could now either spend time and resources trying to identify those 10%... or you could simply hand the whole jobs of "coloring in your code" to the juniors, watch where they struggle and then set your cracks onto those problems. That serves many purposes.
You eliminate the need to identify those cases. Your juniors feel valued because they get to work on nontrivial tasks. It's a very good indicator which of your juniors are really GOOD at their job (hint: The ones that don't ask for help AND still deliver in those 10% cases), You can keep the amount of high value (and wage) programmers relatively low. You don't bore your crack programmers with trivial tasks you misidentified as nontrivial. There is an implicit knowledge transfer from senior to junior
And so on.
That does NOT eliminate the need for good code design, actually, having a good design phase is absolutely crucial to this approach, since else your juniors have to design. That would be... let's say sub-optimal. You have to give them the outline picture and have them connect the dot and color it in, so to speak.
Don't confuse him with the guy that you call at 3am who staggers in drunk and baked, sits down at the terminal and just before passing out and throwing up on the carpet at 3:15am returns your system to a running state despite the problem being in an area he has never worked in nor has any connection to.
Turning have-nots into haves is by no means the goal of UBI. Cannot even sensibly be achieved by a program that aims at providing a basic general income because that basic income can by its very definition not be higher than what is absolutely necessary to enable someone to survive. That's the fundamental flaw in your train of thought. You think about accumulation of wealth when essentially, all that will enable is consumption.
Your assumption seems to be that everyone just gets, say, 1000 bucks and that everything else will stay the same. This is most likely not going to be the case, and it would not make sense if it did. Instead, what will most likely happen, is that companies will get away with offering WAY less money as compensation for work. Work would probably be for the lower income bracket something they do if they plan to make some kind of purchase, a new TV, a bed, a fridge. Today, they can maybe put 50 or 100 bucks aside for this per month. So if an employer offered 200 for a month of work, this would be enough. It's more than they can put aside now, and it's way, way less than the employer would have to pay a worker now.
People will probably also have a very different attitude towards working. It will for some probably be something they do when they want to afford something special, and only for the time necessary to get that.
As for the argument for "finite material goods": Please. Our current main problem is certainly not a shortage of goods or services. Our problem is that nobody has the money to buy that shit. If anything, UBI would solve that problem rather than compound it.
If I read the article right then those 500k is just part of the whole project and there's actually other funding as well. Which makes me wonder why those 500k are apparently the story hook instead of the project itself.
Slashdot Mirror
And why should there be any "will"? What's in it for them?
Pay them to do it and you'll see them do it. Welcome to capitalism.
No, it won't.
Instead people will ask on board and will be pointed to the backdoor.
The internet treats such things as damage and simply routes around them.
Run.
Who in their sane mind sends juniors bug hunting? Especially fresh hires, they're busy enough trying to get to terms with the SVN setup and most likely they are new to the toolchain or at least part of it, too. How the FUCK should these people be qualified to find bugs? They don't even know whether the problem is related to code or the environment.
Run, run far away from jobs like that.
...thinking of the comic...
Guess I should get some sleep... someone find me a comfy keyboard, could you?
I was pretty much thinking of that code. I once has a coworker like that. I remember that one time he got called in during his days off, he looked like he just came from some kind of drug party (and probably did), staggered to his seat, dumped half the coffee all over his shirt, fixed the problem, was told that he can go home now and replied "Sounds too elaborate" before simply sleeping at the desk.
And yes, he was sleeping. And snoring.
Such people exist. I have met a few that are like that, not THAT extreme but some rather odd fellows with odd quirks do exist. Funny enough, you can't motivate them with money. But they are easily motivated by allowing them to live out their particular brand of insanity.
How? He hasn't murdered management.
Well, it does make sense to load the pictures simultaneously because they may come from different source and what if one of them stalls? The whole page would sit there and wait.
What gets my piss to a boil is that browsers still cannot load text first and ignore pictures until the rest of the page is done. Gimme something to read while your slow ass server eventually, maybe, finally manages to send the picture I don't give a shit about.
Dammit, I must have watched too many videos, it starts to rub off.
Let's say you need 800 bucks to survive. Any job you take will have to provide those 800 bucks now or else you're better off not taking it. So employers pretty much have to pay more than 800 to make people work for them.
If there's now a UBI of 800 bucks, people of course don't have to work to get by. But that 800 bucks don't cover anything above sustenance. If your TV or fridge breaks, you're out a TV or fridge. You now have to earn that money for a new fridge or TV.
Employers, though, can now get away with paying WAY less than before. 200 bucks is already a pretty good deal for a month of work, because that's already on top of your sustenance level, the equivalent of making 1000 now. It's already 200 bucks "more than you need".
And that in turn IS already more than most people have left when the month is over today.
Essentially, what UBI means is that you can go work for only 200 bucks and still get out ahead, while your employer gets away with paying only 200 instead of 1000 bucks for you.
Exactly.
And before anyone comes in and claims the sky is falling in certain industries if it's no longer possible to essentially turn people into indentured servants who can be pressed into working 60+ hours a week for 2 bucks an hours, an UBI actually means that you can hire approximately twice or thrice the workforce for the same money. And they will come. UBI only means "existence", but anything that breaks down and needs to be replaced means that people will have to go and get a job, if only temporary.
Those 200 were an example. C'mon, you can't be that dense.
Of course the difference in pay cannot be more than the UBI offers itself without having a negative impact on your income. If you have an UBI of 800 bucks and you now earn 1000, having a wage of 200 bucks would mean that you get equal pay. If you earn 5000 bucks a month, this of course means that you'd still have to be paid 4200 to come out equal.
In the end, yes, low paying jobs would get a LOT cheaper for employers. Paying 200 instead of 1000 is cutting the price tag of that employee to a fifth, essentially meaning that he could hire 5 people for the same price as one today. Of course that does not scale to high paying jobs, but we sure have no problem with unemployment in that area. Actually, we're currently looking desperately for senior consultants that are ... let's say not looking at minimum wage.
What every country does have a problem with, though, is keeping its lowly skilled (and hence lowly paid) population occupied. UBI could easily take care of that problem.
No idea how your connection speed adds anything to this.
Juniors write code, seniors fix bugs.
That's my approach to that problem at least. And so far I've been doing great with it.
90% of code is trivial bullshit. Anyone can do it, hell, even cargo-cult programming cannot fuck it up. Sitting a senior programmer down to do that is a waste of resources.
10% of code is insanely difficult to figure out, arcane mystical bullshit. Hard to write, hard to maintain, hard to understand and even harder to get right.
You could now either spend time and resources trying to identify those 10%... or you could simply hand the whole jobs of "coloring in your code" to the juniors, watch where they struggle and then set your cracks onto those problems. That serves many purposes.
You eliminate the need to identify those cases.
Your juniors feel valued because they get to work on nontrivial tasks.
It's a very good indicator which of your juniors are really GOOD at their job (hint: The ones that don't ask for help AND still deliver in those 10% cases),
You can keep the amount of high value (and wage) programmers relatively low.
You don't bore your crack programmers with trivial tasks you misidentified as nontrivial.
There is an implicit knowledge transfer from senior to junior
And so on.
That does NOT eliminate the need for good code design, actually, having a good design phase is absolutely crucial to this approach, since else your juniors have to design. That would be ... let's say sub-optimal. You have to give them the outline picture and have them connect the dot and color it in, so to speak.
Don't confuse him with the guy that you call at 3am who staggers in drunk and baked, sits down at the terminal and just before passing out and throwing up on the carpet at 3:15am returns your system to a running state despite the problem being in an area he has never worked in nor has any connection to.
That guy you should keep.
...he's not, because he has shown he cannot identify things that lower his productivity.
Nobody said that it has to improve anyone's life, only that we have to feel good about ourselves.
Turning have-nots into haves is by no means the goal of UBI. Cannot even sensibly be achieved by a program that aims at providing a basic general income because that basic income can by its very definition not be higher than what is absolutely necessary to enable someone to survive. That's the fundamental flaw in your train of thought. You think about accumulation of wealth when essentially, all that will enable is consumption.
Your assumption seems to be that everyone just gets, say, 1000 bucks and that everything else will stay the same. This is most likely not going to be the case, and it would not make sense if it did. Instead, what will most likely happen, is that companies will get away with offering WAY less money as compensation for work. Work would probably be for the lower income bracket something they do if they plan to make some kind of purchase, a new TV, a bed, a fridge. Today, they can maybe put 50 or 100 bucks aside for this per month. So if an employer offered 200 for a month of work, this would be enough. It's more than they can put aside now, and it's way, way less than the employer would have to pay a worker now.
People will probably also have a very different attitude towards working. It will for some probably be something they do when they want to afford something special, and only for the time necessary to get that.
As for the argument for "finite material goods": Please. Our current main problem is certainly not a shortage of goods or services. Our problem is that nobody has the money to buy that shit. If anything, UBI would solve that problem rather than compound it.
I'd suggest we simply sit and wait how it plays out.
I watched a lot of SJWs videos lately. I ran out of Christian bozos spouting bullshit and thought "why not, cult is cult".
Sorry, but that argument "So many accessories need it" doesn't mean jack shit with Apple. Phone jack, anyone?
If I read the article right then those 500k is just part of the whole project and there's actually other funding as well. Which makes me wonder why those 500k are apparently the story hook instead of the project itself.
They learned nothing, that's #1 in any crook's book.
So yes, I believe when Nixon says "I'm not a crook". Because he failed badly at this.
No, they're probably exchanging cookie recipes...
Oh for fuck's sake! No, she's not, Satan has WAY more fashion sense!
It's pretty much both. The basic idea of a UBI is that you can somehow survive on it. You want more than survival? Go get some work.