Standing meetings are also used to force procrastinators to report in frequently enough that they stop relying on "secret" all-nighters at the end of the week to get their work done
i am both the driver of my team moving to 15-minute stand ups, and the dude “secretly” pulling the occasional heroic all nighters. peak cognitive dissonance rn
We do, in a team of 10. We have a very strict rule of being prepared before standup and going through the standup list quickly (< 1 min each). We also make sure to keep our list of tasks focused. Any sidebar discussions are taken until the ending of the meeting and all stakeholders who care can be part of it.
I think for us at least, just having the team all aligned on wanting to finish the meeting as fast as possible helps keep it running quickly and smoothly.
Necessary to what end? It could be necessary to maximize survival for the species, but that doesnt make it necessary to maximize survival for an individual.
It's perfectly possible our heuristics are muddied beyond necessity in order to generate variety in action, so as to reduce risk to the unknown for the species - even though it would cause a minority of individuals to consistently make sub-optimal choices. From a speculative standpoint, it's easy to find examples of people doing things that we consider 'stupid' but it pays off because of some unlikely event occurring in coincidence.
Reality has a lot of unknowns. There is no perfect model that could account for that. It's possible being hyper-intelligent (beyond our current ability) is (or was) a disadvantage for the species
Take depression and nihilism for example. Great intelligence can overcome the very drives that makes us want to keep living - which is an arbitrary cause, and an extremely tedious activity.
This is a perfectly concise articulation of my thoughts as well. I will add that it is still good to keep in mind that owners of the models are indeed self-serving, but it does not need to be a cynical thing. Most of the time, the self serving motivation is to simply provide the best service possible
Yeah, this is why I have been working as a data analyst. I've taken on as many vendor management responsibilities as I can and help out with COGS and revenue attribution analysis for finance. I have been collecting ideas while making steady wage, and eventually I'll pull the trigger on something
I have a backlog of like 200+ viable new product / feature ideas that help solve some business problem or improve the efficiency of activities people do with financial transactions involved. Many are too small to be stand alone for sure, but I do not believe million dollar ideas are grown in a silo
Willing to discuss any of your ideas? I feel like everyone has hoarded ideas (including myself) that are never acted upon because we keep telling ourselves "eventually I'll pull the trigger" (including myself)
Not the good ones ;) Most will not make sense without context of private company work anyway
But as an example I also get a lot of fluff ideas for video game mechanics. For multiplayer games, the ability to tag another player for tracking. So you can pull up a menu and see players you've tagged and their recent performance and such or create your own 'achievements' and see what players have accomplished them (with necessary privacy options included of course). The primary use-cases being clan recruitment and pro-player analysis.
Random product idea example: A renting service for size-adjustable tables. So you can test out what table size fits best in your space. counter-height vs standard, square vs skinny, size A in room 1 or size B in room 2, etc. probably too small a market on this idea though since itd only be worth it before expensive table purchases
considering every transaction gets taxed, and it's a zero-sum market.. there is no damage done overall. The opposite, actually. Money is raised for the government thanks to the activity.
It's possibly a foreign relations issue if the winners or losers are heavily biased towards one country or another. Like if all the winners were Russian and the losers were American
Is it zero sum? It seems net loss to me. Just consider the lifetime of a single share. Company IPOs and someone buys the share for $100. The share may pass through thousands of hands, some at a profit and some at a loss, but eventually that share value goes to zero and the net loss over the lifetime of the share is its IPO price. It's only possible to have a net gain if there's dividends paid out. Is there some other mechanism I'm missing?
I like where you're going with this but I think you're taking a big leap at "the net loss over the lifetime of the share is its IPO price". And not because of the "not every stock eventually goes to $0".
I also don't have a definitive answer however some things that play into the equation must be:
I think VWAP (Volume-weighted average price) also plays into how much money was made by people and how much was lost in aggregate. This specific share we are tracking along its lifetime might have exchanged hands a lot while it is going up and traded rarely during periods of decline.
Also the share could have been first purchased as a part of the options given to investors, employees, etc.
>Probably doesn't work in some urban sprawl American suburb
yep, hi. It's also the same kind of area where road maintenance is the highest problem. Lot's of road wear and tear, and not enough funding to maintain properly
Light rail has a lot more destinations, and most rail systems are designed to complement bus systems.
I live in Utah, and our "urban" area (SLC) is similar to many "suburban" areas in terms of population density. We have a commuter line that intersects with light rail, which intersects with the bus system. Rail hits most of the important business areas, and buses hit most of the residential areas, and each runs every 15-20 minutes. If you know the system, you can get around fairly well without a car. It was expensive to build, but it is used quite a bit so it is absolutely worth it.
Depends on the average traffic speed. Subways go over 60mph and are generally the fastest vehicles in a large city besides helicopters and airplanes, and lane splitting motorcycles.
The suburbs will maintain their own roads before the bottom falls out. low income suburbs probably will not survive, but there's no law that says they cant have shitty roads that require a jeep to drive on
when the roads require a jeep to drive on, it's no longer a suburb - it's the country. the promise of the suburbs is that it's all the luxuries of city living, with all the space of rural living. Losing the amenities of the city is exactly how i would interpret "the bottom falling out"
Middle- to upper-middle-class suburbs will still exist, they'll just be a municipality a few miles over, where all the houses and roads are 25 years newer, and the long tail of opex costs hasn't quite hit as bad yet. It will, eventually.
If a suburb can attract some retail or office space or manufacturing, they can be like Irvine or Tysons or Bloomington -- the suburbs that have made it. Those that cannot will accumulate the same problems with fiscal sustainability that inner cities once did.
High income suburbs will struggle, too. Gotta pay for the roads somehow if federal subsidies stop trickling in. People on HN talk about moving to texas on taxes alone all the time.
but you were able to lead the group into a chant in the first place so how would that have happened if you would have instead favored being in the background from the beginning?
Maybe your sentiment can be enhanced by not gatekeeping participation - but by promoing a handover of leadership to more symbolic choices once the work of buuilding momentum is done. This is a rule that could be applied to any demographic-based leadership that needs to organize its aesthetic as it grows
When and how to speak out is something that every ally is going to wrestle with, so everyone will have experience with it. Sometimes you have to stand up and be counted. If it hadn't been that night it would have been another.
But there is no substitute for the underrepresented assuming actual positions of real power and leadership — breaking through ceilings, becoming role models, making mistakes and overcoming them... and eventually becoming ordinary and routine.
This point here I think is incredibly useful in general. When accessing your full to-do list feels like its own todo, you're gonna have a bad time