Live data from Hacker News

Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

threadreaderapp.com

221–230 of 506 posts

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#221

> The chief products of the tech industry are (in B2C) developing new habits among consumers This was a profound revelation I didn't realize until I read it just now. Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc. have all done so well by starting a habit for their users. ("Check Facebook daily to see what your friends are up to." "Google it whenever you need info." "Buy your stuff conveniently on Amazon when you don't want to go to…

It's not actually insightful. Every product trivially creates a habit amongst its users of "when , use ."

The insightful part for me is that you can get better or novel products in areas where the "when , use " is the dominant habit by optimizing or changing the habit.

Some more examples:

- Keurig coffee makers fundamentally changed the coffee habit for many people.

- Netflix fundamentally changed the "going to the video store" habit.

Making coffee and watching movies were already habits for many people, but it was possible to change the habit and create something revolutionary. I'm sure there are other new untapped habits that can be developed around existing solved problems.

It's a variant on "solve a problem people have". Make a solved problem better by optimizing the habit.

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#222
post #62
post #58

> Your idea is not valuable, at all. All value is in the execution. Then why did Amazon patent the concept of a drone that will fly to your car and recharge it?

To prevent others from executing it better than them.

Without the idea, there would be nothing to execute on.

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because they are not allowed to use IQ tests There's actual employment law that prohibits using IQ tests? I'd never heard that before

It's related to anti-discrimination / "psychology-test" laws. If there is any sort of "test" given as a condition of employment, it must be relevant, standardized, non-biased, reviewed by specialists and approved, etc. http://cdn8.openculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Test1... The value and definition of "IQ" is widely disputed and generally seen as of limited relevance to the actual work and performance of that…

The linked image you shared is one I've seen before that was a Louisiana state voter literacy test used for voter suppression. It was disproportionately administered to black voters[1]

I'm not saying that IQ tests are useful measures of ability to do a job. I just wasn't aware there was actual law or precedent forbidding their use.

> If there is any sort of "test" given as a condition of employment, it must be relevant, standardized, non-biased, reviewed by specialists and approved, etc.

Wouldn't this disqualify a lot of whiteboard interviews too? Most startups don't have a standard question bank reviewed by experts or grade on a standard rubric.

1. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_vault/2013/06/28/voting_right...

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higher education is used as a proxy for intelligence by companies who are hiring because they are not allowed to use IQ tests. So I think it kind of makes sense that our society is confused about the purpose of higher education.

> because they are not allowed to use IQ tests There's actual employment law that prohibits using IQ tests? I'd never heard that before

An IQ test can be used during the hiring process but the employer has to be able to defend its use as directly relevant to the work at hand. So most employers aren't willing to spend the legal fees related to defending the use of a direct IQ test... Possibly because the college degree is a good enough litmus test for IQ to satisfy their needs.

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#225

> People underestimate how effective a generalist can be at things which are done by specialists. People underestimate how deep specialties can run. These are simultaneously true. This is really, really important. In my experience, this is not just unknown but actively ignored and disagreed with (either explicitly or effectively) by a large majority of people involved in software businesses. This hamstrings: companie…

There's also often a messy transition period where a team goes from a bunch of generalists to more specialists. This can be extremely rocky for all involved as often generalists have lots of historic operational knowledge and strong opinions, but the new specialists come with external knowledge of best practices and how to scale. It is important that historic knowledge is respected for the context it provides, while…

Am I crazy to think that generalists are the best-suited engineers to making the managerial move? You can keep a good broad knowledge base sufficient to be useful in early directional discussions, and sufficient to sniff out a lot of (not all) BS artists and identify which specialists to listen to/loop in, in less time than it would take a specialist to do the same in terms of juggling things across team, due to the nature of the generalism skill.

I think otherwise trying to be a "senior generalist" or "staff generalist" is going to be very hard, but for logical reasons.

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#226
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, when a company is young, you have a lot of people wearing a lot of hats. They may in fact be quite good at wearing some of those hats. Likewise, having visibility and exposure to multiple domains aspects of the same company gives a perspective that is hard to have if you live in a super specialized silo. However specialists don't need to be generalists to be productive as long as they come in with the min…

I get where you are coming from. For me, being a long-term employee having gone through a few transitions from smallish to biggish, and when your storage guy you hired doesn't really know networking basics, or the database administrator has no clue about Linux, etc. it tends to slow everyone down. "Scale" often seems to equate with SF hotshots from one of the big names that will come in and airdrop a brand new archit…

IMO that's a problem of hiring the wrong specialists, or BS artists in specialist hats (see the article's point about "the tech industry is not serious about hiring" :) ).

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you framed your anecdotal evidence as supporting the OP's statement, but also that you misunderstood such statement; and you actually present evidence against it. If companies find it hard to reliably staff generalist positions, _and_ you're a generalist as you claim, then you would find it _easy_ to get a job.

I think the anecdote and OP’s statement support one another - companies have a hard time reliably staffing generalists and one of the reasons for that is that they are bad at identifying them and determining how to use them. Parent showed them a generalist skill set and they saw a lack of professionalism.

Another way to see the statements as non-contradictory is: since companies cannot hire people like this, they structure themselves such that such people are not required. Then, when one does happen along, the company has no place for him.

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#228

I thought this was going to be a list about "life". I was actually pleasantly surprised it was about our industry! I would still like there to be a list like this about life though.

I'll have a go. Here's a few that seem almost axiomatic to me but that I think might be somewhat less so to this crowd:

- Words are important. Choose them carefully. Hear them carefully.

- "Tolerating everyone but the intolerant" is no real tolerance at all.

- Only being "free" to hold your views in private, is no real freedom at all. Freedoms of speech and association and religion must be public freedoms if they are to be meaningful in any real sense.

- There's a continuum that exists between equality and freedom. Governments and society can more-or-less choose where they sit on the continuum, but can't move more towards one value without trading off some of the other.

- Prices agreed to by individuals in a free market (read: without coercion) are a statement each individual is making about the value of the good or service being traded. What's a "fair wage" for mowing lawns? What's a "fair price" for a watermelon? How much is "too much" profit for a legal firm? Capitalism is nothing more than a recognition that built into humanity is a desire to trade what you have for what you want, and a declaration that the Free Market is the most economical (read: efficient) way for humans to fulfill that desire. Following on from the previous axiom, you can certainly declare a "fair price for watermelon", but you're removing the freedom of individuals to decide for themselves how they value the world around them.

- Be highly skeptical of anyone handing out pitchforks. And learn to recognize when you're being handed one in a news article, youtube video, reddit comment, political ad, etc., etc.

- When you feel like the world is full of people who aren't changing their values fast enough, remember Chesterton's Fence[0]. In the main, the world around you exists the way it does for a reason (or for a plethora of reasons), and if you don't understand that reason, you're less likely to understand what the right fix is.

- Debt (of all kinds: student, mortgage, business) is a promise you're making about your future. The older, more formal term for a loan is a "promissory note".

- Before you make any promise, consider your ability to predict and control the future.

- Constraints are natural pressures, disadvantages, and discomforts that can be helpful in decision-making. Don't avoid painful situations.

(I think those last three make a powerful argument for bootstrapping startups instead of chasing VC funding or debt.)

- We will always have "bad" laws. There is no one set of guidelines which humanity will ever discover that will cleanly cover all use cases and will be agreed upon as being right by everyone.

- Humans are moral creatures. Whenever anyone uses the word "should" or "ought" in a sentence, they're making a moral statement. Hawking may be a world leading physicist, but when he declared philosophy to be dead, there's a reason philosopher's all around the world shot milk out their noses[1].

- You can't legislate morality. But in a democracy, legislation is the lowest-common-denominator of the morality of the governed. This means that just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's moral. It also means that in a society which encourages diversity of values, you'll have less common ground upon which to legislate.

- Don't act surprised when someone is ignorant of a fact or subject which you know. Help them understand it with humility.

- Don't hesitate to disclose your ignorance of a subject to someone who can help you learn more about it. They may not want to point out your ignorance, and silently pretending you do understand it only keeps you from learning new things.

- Corporations are people. Or more precisely, its impossible to separate out the corporate entity's values and behavior from its owners' values and behavior.

- As much as possible, have your mind made up how you will handle pressure to compromise on your values before you're in a tenuous situation.

- Don't worry about "missing out". FOMO is terrible justification for doing things you wouldn't otherwise do. Though this isn't an argument against spontaneity.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton.27...

[1]: https://www.quora.com/How-are-philosophers-reacting-to-Steph...

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#229
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get where you are coming from. For me, being a long-term employee having gone through a few transitions from smallish to biggish, and when your storage guy you hired doesn't really know networking basics, or the database administrator has no clue about Linux, etc. it tends to slow everyone down. "Scale" often seems to equate with SF hotshots from one of the big names that will come in and airdrop a brand new archit…

IMO that's a problem of hiring the wrong specialists, or BS artists in specialist hats (see the article's point about "the tech industry is not serious about hiring" :) ).

True. I think it's easier said than done to find the cream of the crop with a limited talent pool for many specialized areas.

Re: Things Many People Find Too Obvious to Have Told You Already

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... which are not at universities.

And will also not prepare you for a job in computer science.

They might prepare you for an intro-level job in software development though, if you actually continue learning things and honing your skills after completing them.
Post reply on HN