It sucks that she had to be fired rather than moved to a different role, but getting rid of her role as a QA proxy led to a HUGE improvement of AMAs. During her tenure there, they were nothing but an incredibly low effort part of normal celeb PR campaigns for new movies and similar things. And she/reddit were not very transparent about the fact that the "celebrity" responses were her paraphrasing rather than them responding.
I've been WFH since around 2017 or so. After a while, it starts to feel like I ship code into the void. Like I'm a freelancer who happens to be working for a company rather than an employee. This gets even worse after a round or two of layoffs and/or reorgs and being on teams with people I've never met.
I had to visit our office (first time since Jan 2020) to do some emergency heads down work with my teammates and it's incredible how I had forgotten what it feels like to be part of a company.
With that combined with the fact that people are increasingly bad at hiding the fact that they're often just taking off mid-afternoon (always fun to need a set of eyes for a critical hotfix pull request and get radio silence on Teams!), the difficulty of focusing at home, and the expense of trying to live somewhere with an extra bedroom or area as a dedicated home office, and I really wish I could go back to the office. Unfortunately I don't live in the same state as the office anymore, so I am stuck like this for now.
>"After a while, it starts to feel like I ship code into the void"
It depends on what's your role. I am responsible for product design and development. I definitely do not feel like my part of code is shipped "into the void". I see it working and serving customers
The failure isn't on you nor the need for an office. It's on the company for not creating the culture. Online communities e.g. in gaming have always been vibrant. It didn't always require in-person meetups to make it work.
Company culture is set after it grows beyond a certain size. And it is very hard to change it. So why should company change it if it can continue in the same old way?
And if you think companies should change their cultures to find good talent, let me assure you - companies know that and track attrition carefully. If they didn't think they had an upper hand in forcing RTO, they wouldn't have done that. It is much easier to find workers who can come to the office than what HN seem to believe.
>Facepalm in the form of $100Ms in service credits.
Part of me wonders how much they're actually going to pay out, given that their own status page has only indicated five services with moderate ("Increased API Error Rates") disruptions in service.
That public status page has no bearing on service credits, it's a statically hosted page updated when there's significant public impact. A lot of issues never make it there.
Every AWS customer has a personal health dashboard that links the issues to their services which is updated much faster, and links issues to your affected resources. Additionally requests for credits are done by the customer service team who have even more information.
This point is repeated often, and the incentives for Amazon to downplay the actual downtime are definitely there.
Wouldn't affected companies be incentivized to make a lawsuit about AMZ lying about status? It would be easy to prove and costly to defend from AWS standpoint.
It's definitely a face detection thing for some of them. My spouse had to deal with all of her black students being hectored nonstop by the software because it had a hard time reading dark skin faces and was constantly interrupting them to accuse them of not looking in the correct direction.
You can pay for Discord. Admittedly, I do. It's not that Discord is perfect, I have a lot of personal gripes with it. But it's still significantly better than where I came from (Skype) and I use it a lot so it seems fair enough. Discord Nitro also thankfully pivoted from being a games service and the features it does provide are nice to have. (Larger file uploads, better stream quality, cross-server emoji.)
Is it? $15-30/head sounds like a lot, but these are employees you're paying 30k+ to in salary alone, if the addition of slack makes them 1% more efficient per month, that blows past the $15/head. Forget the tech companies with employees that easily crest 200-300k in costs after insurance and other benefits.
There's a lot of audits and regulation, in addition to tighter security, that Slack needs to prove to its enterprise customers that they can trust their employees blasting confidential information on it every day of every year.
You are comparing efficiency like in "with Slack" and "without Slack", but in fact it is a "with Slack" vs "with another messenger". On a previous job we used Telegram for work communication. It has bots and stuff, and it's blazing fast. And it's free.
Nitro is for individual accounts and provides features for you as a user, boost is for the server and provides features for every user of the server.
Maxing out a server takes 30 boosts but the level 3 perks seem pretty… thin on the ground:
- +100 emoji (from 150 to 200)
- 384Kbps audio (from 256)
- 100MB uploads (from 50)
- custom URLs
Only the third one is somewhat useful, but 15 boosts for that doesn't really seems worth it.
As to price, a boost is $5 so a level 3 server is indeed $150 (level 2 is half), however Nitro ($10) provides 2 boosts and 30% off all boost purchases, meaning you can max out a server for $108, or 55.5 for a level 2. Nitro classic is only $5 and also provides 30% off of boosts, but doesn't include the free boosts, so it comes out at $110 to get a level 3 server on your own.
