When you have days like this, 2-10 billion and you want to search it, what are the cheapest options? Reindexing could be slow, be search should be reasonably quick. It would be really expensive to do this all in, say, Elastic, right? Especially if you had a bunch of columns?
Isn't the alternative less home ownership and less growth in quality of life? Didn't all of those programs increase demand which made people homeowners?
There are a number of reasons why homes are expensive today and it's not just "social programs bad".
I grew up in a 1200 sq ft house with 3 br, one bath and a 1-car garage. Built in 1940. Typical small home for a middle class ish family (us). Now, they’d want a 2200+ sq ft home with 3+ baths, a 2-car garage and parking pad. And people are surprised when much more house costs much more money. Not factoring in the entry of private equity for airbnb or rental. Same amount of land as the lot sized for the older homes were good. Kids had to play somewhere.
When people go on about the need for affordable housing, they’re not asking for the 1940 model described above nor for 200 sq ft urban rabbit warrens. They want the big house/good lot house with a good commute for little money. And probably a pony.
> When people go on about the need for affordable housing, they’re not asking for the 1940 model described above nor for 200 sq ft urban rabbit warrens. They want the big house/good lot house with a good commute for little money. And probably a pony.
You must not live in an HCOL area. In my city, a 1000sf 100 year old house, no garage, small lot, is going to run you at least 800k. I would be perfectly happy in one of those houses, but not at that price point.
That’s my point. People want affordable. The market tends to deliver (blindingly) expensive. It might not be possible to build something affordable in popular areas - there is a minimum cost of construction. This is somewhat constant methinks. There is a cost of land, which is staggeringly variable. And there is the friction of the whole process which is also quite variable.
If people really want cheaper housing, they need to provide remote work or well distributed satellite employment
This is the opposite of what you said. You implied that people’s expectations of how much house they should have are overly inflated, and that is the problem.
Your second comment implies that the costs of land, permits, inspections, etc outstrip the actual construction costs to the point that building smaller is disincentivized
Both, I think, can be true. People don't want a closet. Housing anywhere the job nexus is seems to be expensive. (Stupid) regulations seem to be a thing. What is desired might not be possible in the desired areas. I worry it's just not possible.
Home ownership becomes more accessible when homes are cheaper.
Financial instruments that aim to make home ownership more accessible tend to become subsidies to people who don't need them. If people can afford to pay more, homes become more expensive. But those who don't need a mortgage pay less for the same home. Those who can afford a shorter mortgage pay less. Those who can afford an adjustable rate pay less than those who pay a premium for a fixed rate.
Always, and sometimes I'll add authors notes as comments on the PR. This is actually one reason I dislike "all threads resolved" as a criterion for approving PRs (or specifically GitLab PRs).
Put gas in it. If there's a soft rubber thing near the gas, hit it twice to provide some fuel but no more as you risk "flooding" the engine.
Hold down any handle at the top of the mower, often the thing will require you to manually hold it down during start and all operations.
Look for the starter pull. It's often on the right, on the motor or mower handles. It's a piece of plastic attached to a cable. Give it a yank with a full follow through. It doesn't have to be maximum effort but too gentle won't work either.
It's not like the parent would have accomplished nothing in the 10 years. I think they are just talking about framing it in language palatable to the interviewer across the table.
Even in the most dysfunctional organizations you can't spend 10 years doing nothing.
GP was achieving what their bosses asked of them. It's just that it didn't align with their own professional goals of improving the product they work on.
Sorry, 20 years experience of actually doing things here. I've spent 10 of those years now doing consulting with everyone from 3-person pre-series-A startups all the way up to the Fortune 50.
Let me unequivocal: you can spend 30-40 years at a company doing absolutely nothing while getting paid for it.
Do not let anyone try to convince you otherwise. I've seen such much unethical bloodsucking in my career that at this point I wouldn't mind seeing a few companies collapse under the weight of their own karma.
“Absolutely nothing” is still doing what is asked of you by a boss. Unless you’re talking CEOs fooling the board, of course.
Not contributing meaningful things is an arbitrary metric that is often only used to put people down. One can build the whole product and there will still be some asshole claiming they did the easy part or “you didn’t work enough in it to know what’s like”.
The incompetence here lies 100% with person keeping the employee.
oh man, respectfully but this cannot be further from the truth. SWEs have successfully convinced everyone that profession “is not about just coding” (you see a sea of these statements here on HN in 100x daily posts “will LLMs replace us”) and hence tools like Jira only amplify ability to do (mostly) nothing
unfortunately I have. It is indeed a hellscape of, as the kids say, "aura farming". Microsoft really seem to want to turn it into Instagram for some reason.
I don't mind the end of remote work, as long as the "cool office" actually comes back. Here in Ann Arbor it feels like the tech scene died with remote work and all the jobs are remote.
From my perspective, wages have increased faster elsewhere, and there are far more remote jobs than local ones. The whole reason I moved to Ann Arbor for work was because UMich had created a little startup scene that I could aspire to. I expected the scene to grow, not fade. It really seemed like the beers on tap, foosball table tech job fantasy for a few years there.
That's too bad. The little tiny "hip" area of town seemed pretty neat, as did the fledgling coworking spaces attached to a neat coffeehouse in an old brick building.
Of course, in my own operation it would be very hard to justify to building out some "cool office". Our workers simply seem to prefer other things. They sure aren't interested in forced socialisation.
I'm confused. If the software didn't exist then many humans would be needed to figure out on paper (or excel) how to make these decisions, wouldn't they?
That's true. But, to the point of eliminating labor -- there's still a human in the loop here.
In fact I would argue that while people were still making capital decisions, the idea of optimizing them is only practical WITH some kind of software / calculator / computer. The tooling I write has added jobs, not eliminated them.
Subspace/Continuum also used lag in its gameplay, with players warping to recently exploded spaceships so they could continue to invade. It was an established technique and had to be defended against.
