jseban

6 ms·

1.
by jseban 4y ago
What I'm trying to say is: it's a bad idea to hire extra smart individual contributors as a solution to managing complexity, because nobody is smart enough. The cult of genius makes the workplace dysfunctional and inefficient. Tha
2.
by jseban 4y ago
Yeah, I'm speaking in general terms of the software industry, and common hiring processes, which according to your comments you seem to fit into pretty well. I don't mean to criticise you but rather suggest that the hiring process
3.
by jseban 4y ago
Highly intelligent, (technically) capable and motivated people are probably not in any way correlated with the amount of complexity you are needing to fight with. And if it is, it's most likely negative. Lack of intelligence is probabl
4.
by jseban 4y ago
> Bad news is that most people are not good developers and they don't even know about it because really good developers are so few and concentrated in relatively few places. In effect, most developers will never have a chance to wor
5.
by jseban 4y ago
Your goal is to enable your business to make more money, that requires hiring enough competent people that can do the work that needs to be done, to make that money. Sometimes that work is really not especially interesting, or challenging.
6.
by jseban 4y ago
> Women rate looks as the 4th most important attribute in dating. You can't ask women this, see instead who the men are that get the most girls, there's your answer. Actions speak louder than words, and women are infamous for t
7.
by jseban 4y ago
> So women are gaining things men don't really care for, while losing the things men do select for. On top, their higher socioeconomic status generally translates into a smaller dating pool, as they select equal or higher socioecono
8.
by jseban 4y ago
It would make sense to just not allow men to swipe first at all, it was an obvious improvement when they only let the women start conversations. I think the issue is it will lower engagement.
9.
by jseban 4y ago
Because of the biological asymmetry between the sexes. A man can have thousands of children, and women can only have a small amount. It's what drives natural selection and evolution of the species. Some part of the men are supposed to
10.
by jseban 4y ago
Dating after the online part also sucks, where you pretend to be so busy that you can only meet once a week and only on weekdays, and you can never answer a message in under 24 hours. Don't really see how two people can start to like e
11.
by jseban 4y ago
Yeah it's just the way it is. And relationships, and marriage, is an economic union more than anything else, and the main goal is to gather enough cold hard economic value to provide for children, and each other. > It's not l
12.
by jseban 4y ago
> I do think that the problem with most surveys is that there will certainly be biases in self-reported answers. Yeah and it's very typical with this question especially. You can't ask a woman what she values in a partner, beca
13.
by jseban 4y ago
Yeah it makes perfect sense for a woman to maximise their time and resources to their fertile years, and not shift that over to older age. Funny also how nobody is looking at the expense gap, if women are making the same money as men, then
14.
by jseban 4y ago
> Courage, getting out there, skill, practice, being fun to be around, are skills people value much more than looks. I don't think this is universally true, I bet it works in a lot of cases, but the opposite is often true as well. T
15.
by jseban 4y ago
> There is no gaggle of desperate women running after a succesful hot man in a suit who keeps denying their advances. This is simply not happening There are gaggles of desperate women running after celebrities. It is happening.
16.
by jseban 4y ago
> because workers produce the riches, create the value and know what it's worth. Why should the value be given to said bullshit jobs so they can do whatever they want with it including not giving workers their fair share ? Workers o
17.
by jseban 4y ago
> I don't know how you can be so condescending as to say you know everything there is to know about workers and I don't. Because I am working class. Workers are way too close to reality to ever get seduced by such ideas, they c
18.
by jseban 4y ago
> I'll bite. Who? Who has the money, power, and motivation to secretly manipulate the pliable masses to turn against the billionaires, for their own nefarious ends? Everyone who is not a billionaire, but still currently holds a priv
19.
by jseban 4y ago
> How is the platform not a total failure based on this? Doesn't everyone of the guys not in that top 20 percentile turn around and tell everyone it is garbage? Yeah it is total garbage. Even when you put in all the work to get matc
20.
by jseban 4y ago
Redistribution politics are always destructive and temporary in nature. The EU has not discovered some way to invent free stuff out of thin air. If you push redistribution politics you will cause stagnation and lower productivity. You can t
21.
by jseban 4y ago
You don't have any better alternative to capitalism, that's just crackpot preaching. Trust me when I say that the "workers" are not interested in overthrowing capitalism, you will have to recruit your cult members somewh
22.
by jseban 4y ago
Let's prioritise what makes for actually efficient transport, and which most people will use, and not prioritise inefficient transports that only a few enthusiasts are using.
23.
by jseban 4y ago
Haha the people who think that bill gates and jeff bezos is actually sitting on that money in cash, LOL Think also a bit about who is benefitting and making money from instigating this type of jealousy, being exploited as an unpaid click pu
24.
by jseban 4y ago
This is just false, people happily "exploit" themselves to make more money, and it makes perfect sense because society is based completely on exploitation, your job as well as anyone's. Middle class people want to project mis
25.
by jseban 4y ago
> they just want fair treatment There is no such thing as fair, it's impossible to even define what that would be, and that's the whole point of the free market, that it solves this problem. The more you use these outdated poli
26.
by jseban 4y ago
> I really don't understand billionaire hate. Same here, I really could not care less if some guy has 10 sports cars in a basement somewhere, so what? It seems so incredibly childish and petty to walk around and be angry about that.
27.
by jseban 4y ago
That's how I see it as well, it's low income/poor people who actually benefit the most from amazon, because they both get higher paid jobs and lower prices. I would be very very surprised if there is a majority of the people
28.
by jseban 4y ago
What exactly about unions is progressive? It was something that came out of the industrial revolution, had its breakthrough in the 1930s, its peak in the 1970s, and has been in steady decline for 40 years, and for good reasons. Promoting po
29.
by jseban 4y ago
The difference is that amazon is driving innovation which enables you to stay competitive. Unions cause stagnation which will lead to being outcompeted in the long term, even if you could argue a more peaceful existence in the short/me
30.
by jseban 4y ago
Unions are also limiting the freedom of the individual worker.

More ›