I did it for 4 years. My conditions were that they would provide me with a room to sleep in, and a shower. There was a kitchen in the break room, so I was all set. I saved a fortune by not renting an apartment in the SF Bay Area ($2000 / month for a studio).
If a server crashed at 3am, I could get dressed and be in the machine room in 2 minutes (maybe 3 minutes if I needed to pee).
What?! He would work his full work day but if he was needed during night or weekend he would work from home and they fired him? For taking care of his dying wife?!
You are jumping to conclusions that are not supported by evidence. We was fired on his first day of work. The reasons for that are not clear, but there is almost always more to these stories than what is on the surface. You are only hearing one very biased side of it.
It also comes with an Apple logo, which is priceless if you want to hang with the cool kids. My daughter is a freshman in college, and she says that only the total dweebs use Windows on their laptops.
The guy is a mechanical engineer. What sort of "open source projects" do you want him to participate in?
An open source design for a household cleaning robot would be cool. An open source sexbot would also be nice. The real killer app would be to combine them both into one device.
Or the guy who came from poverty and held down two minimum wage jobs while studying just to survive
Most tech internships pay a lot more than minimum wage. My company pays $18/hr for first year interns, plus free shared housing. Returning sophomores and juniors make more.
ALL of our direct-from-college hires were former interns. We know they can do the work, and they already know they can fit into our corporate culture.
People who put more into their education than merely showing up for the required classes have always had an advantage.
Indeed. The guy in TFA did zero internships, participated in zero open source projects, zero side projects, and has done nothing to make himself stand out. Now he is pissed because it is "society's fault" that he isn't handed a job on a silver platter.
Except, of course, that there is no STEM shortage.
There is no shortage in Toronto, which is an old rust belt city, across Lake Erie from Detroit. They would have much better opportunities in Vancouver. Instead of whining about not getting their perceived entitlement, these people need to be proactive and take some responsibility for their own future.
Disclaimer: I have lived, worked and pursued opportunities in four states and three countries.
A fair policy would be that she only bears the cost if the meter is accurate.
Also, it is not that hard to test your own meter. Turn everything off. Make sure the meter is reading zero watts. Then turn on one device at a time, and measure the power bump. Use a Kill-o-Watt or other plug-in meter to measure what the device is using at the wall socket. If there is really a 5 fold discrepancy, that should be really easy to verify.
What is pretty clear, however, is that if they shared some of that wealth with the world's poorest, it would make a huge difference to literally billions of people.
Isn't that what Bill is doing through his foundation?
Mea culpa - I was assuming you were talking hypothetical, not actually about Mr. Gates as a specific individual...
If you can't explain how Bill's wealth is causing harm, perhaps you could explain how Warren Buffett's wealth is causing harm? Or perhaps some people being rich isn't really a problem at all. I don't see how Bill or Warren's wealth is "causing" anyone else to be poor. It is not like there is a zero-sum amount of wealth in the world. Real economies don't work that way.
but couldn't they set up _some_ amount of solar panels that pump into raised storage tanks during the day, then irrigate with that water during the night?
There is no reason to do that. Irrigation does not need to be a continuous process. Just pump the water onto the fields when the power is available, and when there is no power, you stop pumping. There is no rational reason to pump into a (costly) storage tank rather than directly onto the crops.
I blame the puzzle-question job interviews for the rich variety of clever code out there
This is not a "puzzle-question". It is a simple and clear problem with an obvious solution: A nested loop with a comparison, that can be done with either strings or mathematically digit by digit. The only question is whether you have the coding skills to turn a one sentence spec into 10 lines of code. Most programmers can. A surprising number cannot.
Would I hire someone who can solve this problem? Maybe. Maybe not. Would I hire someone who cannot solve this problem? Absolutely not.
If someone (or small enough group) has so much of the wealth that it's no longer possible for anyone else to obtain means of production, that's the problem.
I am still confused. How is Bill Gates making it "no longer possible" for me, or anyone else, to be unable to be productive?
Put another way - poverty is a result of being unable to produce something you need yourself
How is Bill Gates causing that?
If all the wealth - that is, means of production and tradable goods - is owned by a small group
The world is estimated to have about $240 Trillion in economic wealth. The top 10 richest have about $500B, or 0.2%. That is not "all".
You are missing the point. With human labor, companies pay tax on their profit. The ALSO pay payroll tax, social security tax, medicare tax, unemployment tax, medical benefits, and pensions. With robot labor, companies pay tax on their profit, and DO NOT PAY any of those other taxes and benefits.
So, yes, automated companies will still pay tax, but they will pay a lot less.
Companies cannot just "jack up prices". If they could make more profit at a higher price THEY WOULD ALREADY BE DOING THAT. If prices are already set to maximize profit, which is what any sane company does, then raising the price decreases demand, and diminishes profit.
The wealth distribution in this world is completely out of whack.
The implied assumption in this statement is that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world, so clearly if some people become richer others must become poorer. Many economists, and even more entrepreneurs, would disagree with that. Wealth is not zero-sum, and can be created (and destroyed) as well as merely redistributed.
Yeah, silly, they're the ones who will own the robots.
People also predicted that only "the rich" would own cars and computers. It didn't turn out that way. Most people, at least in the first world, already own robots. By any reasonable definition of "robot" your clothes washing machine qualifies. So does the dishwashing machine in your kitchen. Millions of people own Roombas and 3D printers.
Should these devices be taxed to compensate all the laundresses and scullery maids who no longer have jobs?
Slashdot Mirror
I had such a job for 2 years.
I did it for 4 years. My conditions were that they would provide me with a room to sleep in, and a shower. There was a kitchen in the break room, so I was all set. I saved a fortune by not renting an apartment in the SF Bay Area ($2000 / month for a studio).
If a server crashed at 3am, I could get dressed and be in the machine room in 2 minutes (maybe 3 minutes if I needed to pee).
What?! He would work his full work day but if he was needed during night or weekend he would work from home and they fired him? For taking care of his dying wife?!
You are jumping to conclusions that are not supported by evidence. We was fired on his first day of work. The reasons for that are not clear, but there is almost always more to these stories than what is on the surface. You are only hearing one very biased side of it.
The price of a Mac includes an Xcode license.
It also comes with an Apple logo, which is priceless if you want to hang with the cool kids. My daughter is a freshman in college, and she says that only the total dweebs use Windows on their laptops.
The guy is a mechanical engineer. What sort of "open source projects" do you want him to participate in?
An open source design for a household cleaning robot would be cool. An open source sexbot would also be nice. The real killer app would be to combine them both into one device.
I must ask...
Where the hell do you find the time or energy to do these things?
He is unemployed. Time is one thing he has plenty of.
Or the guy who came from poverty and held down two minimum wage jobs while studying just to survive
Most tech internships pay a lot more than minimum wage. My company pays $18/hr for first year interns, plus free shared housing. Returning sophomores and juniors make more.
ALL of our direct-from-college hires were former interns. We know they can do the work, and they already know they can fit into our corporate culture.
People who put more into their education than merely showing up for the required classes have always had an advantage.
Indeed. The guy in TFA did zero internships, participated in zero open source projects, zero side projects, and has done nothing to make himself stand out. Now he is pissed because it is "society's fault" that he isn't handed a job on a silver platter.
Except, of course, that there is no STEM shortage.
There is no shortage in Toronto, which is an old rust belt city, across Lake Erie from Detroit. They would have much better opportunities in Vancouver. Instead of whining about not getting their perceived entitlement, these people need to be proactive and take some responsibility for their own future.
Disclaimer: I have lived, worked and pursued opportunities in four states and three countries.
she would have to bear the cost of around €900
A fair policy would be that she only bears the cost if the meter is accurate.
Also, it is not that hard to test your own meter. Turn everything off. Make sure the meter is reading zero watts. Then turn on one device at a time, and measure the power bump. Use a Kill-o-Watt or other plug-in meter to measure what the device is using at the wall socket. If there is really a 5 fold discrepancy, that should be really easy to verify.
What is pretty clear, however, is that if they shared some of that wealth with the world's poorest, it would make a huge difference to literally billions of people.
Isn't that what Bill is doing through his foundation?
Mea culpa - I was assuming you were talking hypothetical, not actually about Mr. Gates as a specific individual...
If you can't explain how Bill's wealth is causing harm, perhaps you could explain how Warren Buffett's wealth is causing harm? Or perhaps some people being rich isn't really a problem at all. I don't see how Bill or Warren's wealth is "causing" anyone else to be poor. It is not like there is a zero-sum amount of wealth in the world. Real economies don't work that way.
Tell that to the idiot farmers growing fucking SUGAR CANE in South Australia, the driest state in a famously dry country
1. Queensland is in NORTHERN Australia.
2. It is the WETTEST state.
If you're pumping water, why not use wind, rather than solar in the first place?
Because Queensland is not very windy. It is located in the horse latitudes, known for becalming ships. However, it has plenty of sunshine.
but couldn't they set up _some_ amount of solar panels that pump into raised storage tanks during the day, then irrigate with that water during the night?
There is no reason to do that. Irrigation does not need to be a continuous process. Just pump the water onto the fields when the power is available, and when there is no power, you stop pumping. There is no rational reason to pump into a (costly) storage tank rather than directly onto the crops.
I'd like to see the average 14 year using tricks to solve geometric progressions
In California, exponents and geometric progressions are taught in 6th grade. So I don't know why you think a 9th grader wouldn't know about them.
which was clearly something that was necessary on the first random problem I looked at.
Which problem was that?
I blame the puzzle-question job interviews for the rich variety of clever code out there
This is not a "puzzle-question". It is a simple and clear problem with an obvious solution: A nested loop with a comparison, that can be done with either strings or mathematically digit by digit. The only question is whether you have the coding skills to turn a one sentence spec into 10 lines of code. Most programmers can. A surprising number cannot.
Would I hire someone who can solve this problem? Maybe. Maybe not.
Would I hire someone who cannot solve this problem? Absolutely not.
OK, so efficiency should be taxed too because it puts people out of 'work.'
Maybe we should have a government program to pay these unemployed people to read about economic fallacies.
If someone (or small enough group) has so much of the wealth that it's no longer possible for anyone else to obtain means of production, that's the problem.
I am still confused. How is Bill Gates making it "no longer possible" for me, or anyone else, to be unable to be productive?
Put another way - poverty is a result of being unable to produce something you need yourself
How is Bill Gates causing that?
If all the wealth - that is, means of production and tradable goods - is owned by a small group
The world is estimated to have about $240 Trillion in economic wealth. The top 10 richest have about $500B, or 0.2%. That is not "all".
That's why we outsourced that to areas where people can't simply pick up pitchforks and kill us,
Do you mean China, where worker incomes have quadrupled over the last 15 years?
the core problem is the accumulation of wealth within a very small number of people.
Why is that the "core problem"? How is Bill's wealth harming me?
The obvious solution is to make sure we have a robotic police force in place before we fire all the workers.
You are missing the point. With human labor, companies pay tax on their profit. The ALSO pay payroll tax, social security tax, medicare tax, unemployment tax, medical benefits, and pensions. With robot labor, companies pay tax on their profit, and DO NOT PAY any of those other taxes and benefits.
So, yes, automated companies will still pay tax, but they will pay a lot less.
Companies cannot just "jack up prices". If they could make more profit at a higher price THEY WOULD ALREADY BE DOING THAT. If prices are already set to maximize profit, which is what any sane company does, then raising the price decreases demand, and diminishes profit.
The wealth distribution in this world is completely out of whack.
The implied assumption in this statement is that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world, so clearly if some people become richer others must become poorer. Many economists, and even more entrepreneurs, would disagree with that. Wealth is not zero-sum, and can be created (and destroyed) as well as merely redistributed.
Yeah, silly, they're the ones who will own the robots.
People also predicted that only "the rich" would own cars and computers. It didn't turn out that way. Most people, at least in the first world, already own robots. By any reasonable definition of "robot" your clothes washing machine qualifies. So does the dishwashing machine in your kitchen. Millions of people own Roombas and 3D printers.
Should these devices be taxed to compensate all the laundresses and scullery maids who no longer have jobs?