Those of us who work in tech operate with a lot of privileges compared to many many other workers.
All of these options technically exist, but make a lot of assumptions that aren't true for my non techie friends who are looking for work. It's not unusual in a lot of industries for companies to not continue to interview someone who doesn't let them decide everything about the process.
> It's not unusual in a lot of industries for companies to not continue to interview someone who doesn't let them decide everything about the process.
To put this into perspective, some companies and agencies do group interviews, where there are a few dozen applicants for a role in a large room that are whittled down and told to go home if they don't fit some criteria. Then whoever is left is hired. There's no room for negotiation, literally or figuratively.
Many candidates interview with multiple companies. Then they whittle the list down, and break off negotiations with companies that don't fit some criteria. Then they accept the offer from whoever is left.
I don't know any employee that has company owners show up to their auditorium and then raise their hands, respond or leave in response to the requirements the employee starts listing. I also don't know any employer that will starve, become homeless or be unable to see a doctor if they don't hire someone at the employer's desired salary. A job is necessary to live, while a new hire is a luxury that will help you become wealthier. I wouldn't say those situations are comparable.
In your reductive view of the world do you hold the distinction that one is a person seeking meaningful employment while the other is a business seeking to fundamentally change xploit someone's labour?
If more people simply said "no", that wouldn't work for companies. Even so, I doubt that employers can afford to be that picky. If they could, everyone would be getting minimum wage. Everyone getting above minimum wage obviously has leverage.
Just say "no"? And do what? Lot's of folks are supporting others, or need to support themselves.
"Sorry my sweet daughter, no cancer treatment this week, I said no to that job."
I have 0 clue why you think picky === minimum wage. It just means suppressed wages, which is highly documented. Even the big tech companies had agreements not to "poach".
That's why they organize into political groups and manipulate wages on the nation-state policy level.
Owner vs. worker power struggle is always all about who can better coordinate collective action. Owners have an inherent and mostly dominating coordination advantage.
> Cartels try to deal with this by making compliance required by law.
That's what I'm saying.
Except you have the wrong idea about stability, because the law itself is the cartel, and very stable.
> It's not a power struggle. It's supply and demand.
It's not supply and demand because it's about which side coordinates better!
Supply and demand, the labor market, and markets generally, exist within parameters determined by political collective action. The big owners generally get their way but there is some democratic pushback.
I'm not thinking of things like non-poaching but things like tuning the level of social benefits in order to control the supply of labor.
If the workers get too powerful, they starve them one way or another.
Back in the early 20th century the socialist radicals had ideas about making one giant union of all the workers. If they could coordinate every industry they could negotiate for everything!
The Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (aka Taft-Hartley) made all such ideas quite simply illegal.
If unions get too powerful, unions will be hobbled.
If the market fails to deliver exploitable labor, the market will be fixed.
I really appreciate Wittgenstein's idea of family resemblance concepts, that things we group together may not be in fact grouped by a shared trait, but instead my consist of a bunch of different sets of overlapping traits, such that no one trait is common to all.
One of the ways racial hierarchies persist in the US in the culture are taught they are normal, natural, deserved when they are instead being perpetuated by culture and institutions and those who benefit from them. The effects of discrimination serve to justify and/or perpetuate the discrimination.
My take away from this is that there is nothing natural about one caste having an advantage in business, that success in any field has much more to do with who has financial and social capital than with what caste someone is.
Yeah, my understanding was that apple cracking down was merely the excuse Verizon, which owned tumblr at the time, used to justify banning porn, but it was about ad revenue.
Sort of, but we have to be careful not the wash the hands of people all too willing to discard responsibility. It's correct to say "it's just statistics on data" but it also provides cover to the processes that use it. "How can you be against hiring the best person for the job" the argument goes, completely ignoring that the "best" isn't scientifically defined, and includes the same sexist biases we were trying to get rid of.
I read that as specifically saying that the ethical and legal responsibility is entirely on the people. (i.e. I think you're agreeing with the comment you're replying to)
Yes, sorry for the lack of clarity. Users shouldn't blame the machine when they control every aspect of it and how it's used. It's on you as a user to understand your tools and data.
That's not why the postal service is federal though. Establishing a postal system is a power given to congress in the U.S. Constitution. "To establish Post Offices and post Roads;" Actually having a postal system run by the government was something that predates the U.S. constitution.
I think I'd rather some people be vaccinated without their consent with a safe vaccine than have some people be infected without their consent with a deadly illness.
We know mask mandates, vaccines, and other medical interventions save lives, reduce transmission, reduce hospitalizations, reduce long term symptoms and long covid rates, and reduce deaths, and they may even reduce mutation rates. So the choice to vaccinate, that you paint as one of conscience and consent don't just affect the individual making the choice, but all the people around them.
I mean... we let people smoke and die due to that... why not due to covid too?
The vaccines are too weak to actually achieve herd immunity, so pretty much everyone will get in contact with covid, sooner or later,... some will beat it by themselves and some will, sadly, die.
If people want to take the risk of covid, why force them? I got vaccinated and I don't care if some people don't want to do it.
We no longer let people smoke in places where others are affected. If COVID would only affect the unvaccinated person, I’d agree with you. But vaccination reduces the risk of catching the disease and thus the risk of passing it on to others. If unvaccinated people would all stay home and enter voluntary lockdown, this wouldn’t be a discussion. But they do not. They get infected. They pass it on. In Berlin, there’s a recommendation to not engage in dangerous activities, because there might not be an ICU bed if you have an accident. Planned surgery for cancer patients is postponed, because there’s no bed for aftercare. They’re all taken by mostly unvaccinated COVID patients. If the unvaccinated would all voluntarily stay home and suffer there, I’d agree with you. But they don’t. They’re taking the bed that I’ll need if I get run over by a car in the street.
But they are far less likely to get infected in the first place and even less likely to block an ICU bed. If you look at the statistics for Germany, the regions with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest COVID rates and are transferring patient out because all ICU beds are occupied.
I have been unable to find an official/authoritative source on vaccination rates among ICU patients with cursory search. Help for clearing this aspect up is appreciated!
Yeah, tag-alongs are always okay with other people being forced to something they themselves don't mind. Often they're even okay with other people being forced to somehting they themselves would hate. That's why they're tag-alongs.
The vaccine does not reduce transmission; heck it doesn't even prevent infection!
This is really bad since vaccinated people can be infected and shed the virus without showing symptoms! You are far more likely to be unknowingly exposed to the virus from a vaccinated person.
The rest of your assertions are rather baseless and unfounded propaganda not backed up by science in the least.
If the Omicron variant is indeed as mild as the doctors in South Africa are reporting, Omicron is the path to herd immunity. Especially since COVID is carried by animals. You going to vaccinate every animal any human could come in contact with too?
This whole "you are affecting all the people around them" is the biggest lie of all and the biggest pile of utter bull $h!t in this whole fiasco.
> I think I'd rather some people be vaccinated without their consent
Read the book "Ordinary men" (by Christopher R. Browning). Normal people, like you and me, had "very good" reason to do what they did when they did it.
Thanks for the comment, currently they're hosted on S3 but I toyed around with the idea of having a downloadable application that syncs the emails to your own device and deletes them from the server. Is that something you'd find valuable for the sake of privacy?
I will work to address the TOS soon, good thinking.
Having my own domain I tend to just make up email addresses as I need them. Not too anonymous though, given whois. Anonymity has not been a issue for me I suppose.
All of these options technically exist, but make a lot of assumptions that aren't true for my non techie friends who are looking for work. It's not unusual in a lot of industries for companies to not continue to interview someone who doesn't let them decide everything about the process.