Nope. It's the opposite way. The cow produces so much milk, because it's milked so often. In normal world, cow produces milk for the children, and when they drink less and less milk, the cow produces less and less milk. In the not normal world (aka the farm) cows are inseminated almost every year, the children are taken away (causing shock in children and mothers) then cows are milked all the time. Then impregnated and so on. Till a cow is so exhausted that she cannot give enough milk to be "economically productive" and then she's slaughtered as useless.
Well, they’re correct. It’s a predicament the farmer has put the cow in. The top comment’s framing makes it sound like cows just exist in nature and need us to milk them.
I hope unchecking the setting really disables the feature. I have hard time trusting Mozilla now... or rather I should write "again".
On the other hand: there is a ticket [1] asking for container-based-extensions, so something like Grammarly (aka the keylogger) could work only inside a container. It's been there for years, nothing changes. Seems like people are not interested in this kind of privacy stuff.
Google's Sundar Pichai took home $226 million for managing 182,000 employees and making $305.6 billion in revenue, so $1,238 per employee and 0.07% of revenue.
Mozilla's Mitchell Baker took home $6.9 million for managing 750 employees and making $593 million in revenue, so $9,200 per employee and 1.16% of revenue.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art's CEO earns $1.28M with 2000 employees and revenue of $328 million, which is $640 per employee and 0.4% of revenue. Although I can't say for sure whether that figure is full-time-equivalent employees or if they have a large number of part time staff.
So you might consider the Mozilla CEO's salary very low or very high, depending on what you mean by "comparable"
In terms of value for money - a generous salary might be justified if Mozilla is a thriving organisation that's going from strength to strength thanks to the wisdom of its leadership. But is it?
Thank you. I think it's a bit misleading then to call it a "terminal emulator". It's not really emulating one of those old boxes, is it? It's providing a text interface to a computer's functions. That's great but it's not emulating anything.
It emulates them in the sense that they implement a virtual display and keyboard for the same wire protocols those old boxes used. Those protocols are mostly plain text, but also escape sequences for cursors, colors, layout, etc. Check out the VT100 sequences for example.
Hug him. Support him. His life is most probably ending and he is most probably quite depressed. Stay with him.
Your company is just a job, just a company.
What would you expect of him if you'd be in his situation? I'm sure that having a successful company would be the last thing on the list (if it was there at all).
I'm involved in an Intervention Hostel in Poland/Europe. Many people need short-term help, not only with homelessness but they also need some real support.
What is provided by the city, is only some night shelter, where they can eat, sleep, and wash. The thing they don't get is a psychiatrist and psychological treatment. The Intervention Hostel provides that too.
From my perspective, one of the main problems is that, in general, people are not interested in helping those homeless people. We have problems with gathering money, there is no city support, and we also have higher costs (because of the psychiatrist and psychological treatment). We have quite nice results, but every three months we think about closing it due to lack of funds.
The thing that made me really sad was that when a couple of days ago one of Polish parliament members hit a woman and used a fire extinguisher on a hanukkah menorah, people gathered over $50k in just a couple of hours to support him.
However, when I was in USA a couple of years ago, I have never seen so many homeless people on the streets. This is really worrying and sad.
But seriously: I wish more programmers had really good background (I'm not talking about academia, but e.g. learning from many books and conference videos).
The "good practices" are often a set of ideas like "do it this way, so you won't suffer later". Nothing more. This way you can avoid mistakes made by others. Of course, you can do whatever you like and suffer later.
C is C. C++ is C++. If they are the same, well... why do they have different names?
Let's call them C/C++/Fortran OK? You can use one tool (you called it "one compiler", while in fact they are different compilers with common core) to rule them all, even in the same program... https://www.cae.tntech.edu/help/programming/mixed_languages.
I'd love to see more programmers naming things with care. This way we would have C, we would have C++. But also we would have MB when talking about megabytes, not mb (millibits, is that even a thing?).
If surgeons would have freedom to do things the way they want... in fact they have the freedom, but they rather follow the "good practices" made mainly by the retrospection after someone made a tragic mistake. But if they really would do whatever they want... let's not talk about it for now, OK?
I love the praised projects "xxx in yyy lines of code in zzz". While the reality almost always is: not documented, not tested, badly written glue for some libraries doing the real job.
I'd love to see here really well designed, documented, and implemented projects doing complicated stuff in simple way.
> E.g., in Germany you get the entire spectrum from “be a professors slave for 6 years with minimum pay” to “I don’t care where you are - but the publications count”.
Yea... I wanted to start PhD this year. Unfortunately it turned out that the only thing that counts, are my previous and future publications. Any work experience seems like a disadvantage. They value more someone with no experience, but with a couple of, usually not very inventive, publications.
I have over 18 years of work experience. I used to make more complicated things at work, than you can find in many published papers or even PhDs. So I asked a professor about how to start it.
It turned out that: the pay is much below the minimum salary + I will be thrown away if I won't have one publication in a good journal after the first year. If you also think that after sending a paper to a journal, they usually reply in six-nine months with a rejection or a list of comments to fix... it turned out that I have to start my PhD with a bunch of papers already written. And to have them count, they need to be exactly about the same topic as my PhD.
So, after rethinking all this, I stopped dreaming about a PhD. I can publish my paper on arXiv without all the academic fun.
This feels basically exactly like my experience too this year and last. I even had a professor tell me straight up when I emailed him that I basically wouldn’t get in since he already had prospective students with publications in the exact area reach out to him. I’ve kind of realized that without a string of publications ahead of time you’re basically out of the game before you even try. It’s like you have to have done PhD level work before you can do the PhD. It’s left me totally lost on what to do from here, getting a PhD has been a life dream for me so it’s hard to ditch the idea. I guess we might be in the same boat.
Don't despair. PhD life looks good from the outside because all parties involved (students, professors, administrators) have incentives to make it look good. The reality can be much different.
Besides, you've got to think how would you use this degree after you finish. Inside academia, you will be locked in a job with a mid-low salary with scarce options to advance. Outside of academia, PhD is less valued than most people think. I know quite a few people who do great research in the industry with only a BSc degree.
> I know quite a few people who do great research in the industry with only a BSc degree.
But what kind of recognition do they get? I know somebody who worked at some really good labs for ~10 years and did great work. He co-authored a couple of Nature (?) papers of which he did most of the work and writing. But ultimately with a BSc you're just a lab tech and nobody takes you seriously.
OTOH, that person just finished his Ph.D at Harvard but this is pretty much the end of the road for him--I don't think he's keen on navigating the cut-throat world of academia or commercial research.
It's kind of a lose-lose. If you love basic research, no recognition and you're stuck following orders. If you want recognition and some autonomy, you're stuck playing politics.
This is something that definitely weighs on my mind, I think. I've got an MSc, but I feel intense self-doubt and feel like I can't be an expert until I've gotten a PhD. In that sense maybe I've internalized the idea, and telling myself I'm not "qualified" to speak on issues of science in my field. And not to mention, doing a PhD brings the benefit of several years of being able to devote full time to learning and development. A full-time job can (should) be a growth environment but one's work will always be subordinate to business needs (most often applying knowledge you have rather than learning new things), and take most of the time of your week.
The quest for autonomy and recognition is rough, it's a very tough game and it's not easy to stay motivated at trying to make progress.
They get paid well. Most of the stuff they do cannot be published due to intellectual property reasons, so they indeed miss out on academic recognition. This is a trade-off one has to make.
Sad to hear the story of that person. Ideally, you should not start a PhD unless you have a burning question to answer and need ample time to study it. Given that a career post-graduation is not guaranteed, it's best to hedge your bets and study something that has immediate applications and/or gives you transferable skills.
The big draw for me is to be able to actually invent and innovate and not just implement old ideas over and over in a boring corporate space. All the exciting research jobs I see in my field (NLP) require a PhD, so I feel like I'll hit a career ceiling at some point and be implementing boring corporate solutions for the rest of my life and never really innovating.
But as you say, appearances can be deceptive and it's like the grass is always greener, so maybe I need to broaden my horizons somehow. It's definitely hard to find that path at the moment though.
Edit: Oh and I do have to admit the fancy title that lets me feel like I'm truly educated and learned, and satisfies credentialism in the world is a draw too... Peer pressure is a hell of a drug
Companies explicitly requiring a PhD is an unfortunate consequence of having too many PhDs being already out there and additionally produced each year. If you have done some interesting work and can get in touch with a recruiter, you can probably challenge that requirement in your case.
If you don't have a PhD, you do have to compete with everyone who has it. But it is still possible to gain an edge on them by simply studying what your prospective employers need. For PhD students, it is actually harder to do that unless their PI is doing something closely related.
Just a hypothesis: that professor would have abused you as a working slave. And he knew that no person in his right mind with significant work experience and “above minimum pay” could be Ok with it.
I suspect it had nothing to do with your qualifications - rather he probably wanted to avoid saying “sorry, but I wont be able to abuse you enough”.
At no institution in Germany have I head of “if you don’t publish in a year, you are out”. Usually you work 2 years as a slave with no context what your research is and after the first couple of years, you are allowed “to think loudly about a topic”.
This encounter is not “normal”... Keep looking. And yes: Academia knows that industry works on hard shit. And they often don’t want “outsiders to take a look under the rug”... They create a fake world to justify themselves more often than not...
For now. What about the future? I just don't trust any company which changes the agreements without asking for my consent. In this case I just want to close my account and delete all my data. Seems like impossible. In Europe after making things like this they could end in jail for breaking GPDR rules. In US it looks like it's fine to gather user's data, sell them without consent, and then forbid to close accounts. And there are always people who repeat "the company is fine, they have right to do it". Except they don't.
I don't know the US law. I'm just wondering... if US companies have to ensure their software is fine according to GDPR for Europe clients, I'm wondering how it is with other law.
The other law I'm thinking about is the general rule that for every change in a contract all parties must agree. It is normal that I get a letter from my bank "We are changing the rules, here you have 30 days to say you don't agree. If you won't, we'll assume you agreed. If you won't agree, your account will be closed.". So, I can say I don't agree. Here, they just assumed I agree.
Any change, like the one Triplebyte made, is not legal here without my consent. Yet, they made it.
I'm wondering what else they would change. I don't want to wake one Sunday morning to notice that they I'm charged a couple of millions because they changed the rules during the previous night.
I'm not going to show then any of my IDs. Just no. Knowing all information from my ID here has a similar power to knowing SSN in US. Instead, I just devastated my profile. There is no real information anymore. I'm wondering about adding some longer description that I'm protesting against their change of rules. I'm wondering how they would react to this. Maybe it is the way to delete my account, who knows.
