As a user, Airbnb is hostile. The price you see is never the price you pay. It's impossible to tell which listings are actually the cheaper or more expensive than others. The only reason to use them is selection, they have properties that VRBO & others don't. So focusing on improvements for their hosts is smart, but feels like it will still bite them in the long run. I already avoid Airbnb when possible.
Just did a quick test. The US version has the nightly price as the first number with the total under it, and the AU site has the total price listed instead.
Interestingly, the AU price was a couple dollars more than the US price. Threw together a quick side-by-side: https://imgur.com/a/DJwG5z9
You linked a screenshot after you already selected a property. If you are back on the property search page, it shows a nightly price and a total price on hover, but when you click the total price goes up by the cleaning fee and the service fee. And those seem to be completely random so it's not like you can just add $100 in your head to every price. Anywhere they show a price, it should be the total price.
Same goes for hotels + resort fees, though. It seems like the only place I can really see the actual price is on airline websites?
EDIT: I just tried to repro and now the total is always matching. I swear I was just raging about this 4 days ago when I booked a trip... gah.
Also US and I see the nightly and total. That’s good enough for me. Lets me understand what an additional day will cost. Basically they give you the full y=m*x+b instead of just y.
It’s much more egregious with ABNB. A hotel might charge you some small local taxes and fees, but with ABNB you get those plus a whopper of a “cleaning fee”, which can be hundreds of dollars, even for short stays.
The "cleaning fees" on Airbnb are super reminiscent of the the "shipping fees" on early 2000s e-bay. The only difference is that it was a somewhat fresh concept with e-bay. The people who built Airbnb should know better.
Good point! I just stayed at a hotel in hollywood and was charged $20/day "destination charge" and I've had similar resort charges at hotels in hawaii. Hotels are no better than airbnb with these extra fees.
Wholeheartedly agree, except that I travel almost exclusively with Airbnb because hotels suck and VRBO has less listings and at the end of the day airbnb is amazing for traveling. If you work at Airbnb, please fix these dark patterns. From a loyal user.
Also sometimes even which listings are still active. I've had a few times where I've booked and the host responded not even knowing their listing had been up.
The second sentence doesn't support the first. Airbnb is just doing the minimum to keep up with everything else. Having additional charges is very common inside and outside of booking places to stay. The actual price usually falls somewhere between 2% and 30% extra, so it's not like there's no relationship between quoted prices and the final prices. The exception on AirBnb is cleaning fees. For that, they're helping out their hosts, who would otherwise feel pressured to charge $0 for a cleaning fee, which just isn't fair. Another exception is airline fees, which is solved by showing the total price. Often a cheap flight will have a laughably small airfare, sometimes less than $10. There must be some regulation that has the airlines show the price including taxes. This doesn't apply to many other things though, including cell phone bills.
I have severe animal allergies. I used to get really frustrated by people bringing their pets onto the plane. There is generally no way to let the airline know ahead of time that I can't be seated next to an animal, and no guarantee that there will be a place they can relocate me to. Now I always have an n95 mask on me, so it's not a huge deal unless the flight is super long (itchy eyes are still a thing). Wish I had thought of that sooner.
Pseudoephedrine helps with some sinus issues but isn't an antihistamine. There are a cocktail of allergy meds that help, but are not fast acting so I need to be on them all the time to account for one-off exposures. They don't stop the allergic reaction entirely but they do make it more bearable and buy me time - with those built up in my system I can generally be around animals for about 4 hours before my allergies become unbearable.
I had the pleasure of meeting the CRO of Bento[1] last year, and one thing she said has really stuck with me. She said that guilt is an attribute she looks for in team members. It shows that you care, learn from your mistakes, and want to do better. As I've grown as a manager, I have a lot of guilt over how I (mis)managed teams in the early days, but I had never thought of the guilt itself as a positive thing before.
Anyway, good on Eric for fully owning what went wrong here, and vowing to do better.
Am I in the minority in thinking that we should stop trying to optimize for huge monorepos? The problems created by them seem far worse and more expensive than the problems they purportedly solve.
You might want to put supported languages more front and center and not buried on a hard-to-find faq page. Might also want to allow folks to sign up to be alerted when their favorite language is supported, which will also let you gather data about where there's the most interest.
Thank you for the feedback. We made a change to the landing page, it should be more clear what languages are supported now. The first sentence now is "A new, capable, and fast code editor for Go and Rust, focused on both reading and writing code". A signup is missing, but you can follow us on Twitter @ZasEditor in the meanwhile.
And it'd be nice to get notified if: It starts working on Linux, and it becomes open source or source-available. (Having to pay for it is fine :-) of course)
What would you recommend for someone who a) wants to see something as small as mushroom spores, and b) would like to take decent quality pictures of them? DSLR or smartphone mount if there's one that's not super fiddly?
I'm an astrophotography nut, but I can see where imaging with a telescope has similar issues/hurdles as imaging with a microscope. There are mounts that allow you to position a smartphone on the exit pupil of an eye piece of a telescope so that you get the benefits of the magnification of the eye piece. I can only imagine that there are similar for microscopes as well.
As for using a DSLR with the microscope, I'm guessing it might have similar issues as astronomy. When attaching the camera to the telescope (possibly same for microscope), you lose the magnification of the eye pieces. The image data is hitting the tiny tiny pixels of the DSLR so that the scale of things will be very small in your high megapixel image. This is why so many people prefer lower resolution cameras as the pixel sizes on the sensor are much larger. Just based on experience with optics, I'd imagine this would hold true to microscopes as well.
The graphic showing the platforms from Austin to SF shows a disturbing trend of these autonomous platforms getting bigger, and therefore more dangerous for those of us on the outside of these vehicles. I would love to see regulations capping the size and speed of these autonomous platforms to minimize the danger to the public.
Sure, eventually they might be proven to be safer than having humans behind the wheel, and then we can consider relaxing those regulations, but even then perhaps the standards should be higher, since they are likely to increase the overall number of cars on the road significantly - traffic will not discourage people from driving as much, if they are not in fact driving.
(FWIW, I would love love love to never have to drive again. I just want us to take a measured approach to getting there for safety.)
Considering that cars already kill people en mass there's no real advantage to slowing the pace of SDV development other than to make people feel warm and fuzzy. I personally prefer Tesla's approach where they give customers permission to go ham with their latest beta software. The quicker we get to L5 the quicker we can put the automobile safety nightmare to rest permanently.
Given that cars already kill people en mass, there's no real advantage to slowing down something that will likely 10x the number of cars on the road, or making those cars smaller and safer?
Sure, let's get to L5 as quickly as we can...without killing lots of people unnecessarily.
