691–700 of 918 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It sounds... amazing? Less stockpile and spoilage. Less carbon footprint from transportation.
JIT shipping doesn't necessarily mean less carbon footprint from transportation. A single large shipment is far more efficient than many small shipments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least one of my local, out of town, supermarkets doesn't have a warehouse any more. It's all Just in Time, with a residual amount above the main shelves. If you can't find what you want, they don't have it 'out back', because apart from an unloading area, there's no 'out back'.
There was a brief period after 9/11 when planes were grounded that people realized JIT might not be such a great idea. Why does society need to learn the same lessons over and over?
Skilled workers are not fungible, and process people have made that bias error for decades. =3
> Still, stretched-thin HR teams say it’s the only way to handle thousands of applicants. You're doing it wrong if you're considering "thousands" of applicants. First of all ask your current good employees if they can refer anyone. If you need to go to resumes, sort by qualifications. Screen out obvious robo-applications, you know them when you see them just like you know spam email from the subject line alone. Hint:…
First of all ask your current good employees if they can refer anyone. Not permitted, depending on location and industry. That kind of thought is how you end up with entire departments of 20-year-old single white guys wearing the same polo shirts and khaki pants. A company with any size legal department is going to require you to consider applications from the general public.
Seen it play out at a company with over 40k employees so I figure its common everywhere to operate like this with these legal fig leafs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conservation of energy is a useful, widely applicable model, not a universally true law, so I think you proved their point.
Conservation of energy is universally true given that you or i cannot travel at the speed of light. Whereas supply and demand is obviously not universal and i'm not just talking about Giffen goods, Veblen goods or the Chivas Regal effect. No i'm talking specifically about ceteris paribus. Application of ceteris paribus is to step away from reality, the more you do it, the further away from reality you've gotten. The…
But beside that, you’re incorrect. Energy is not conserved in this universe. See e.g. https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/02/22/energy-... for an explanation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"While some worry AI will dehumanize the hiring process, we believe the opposite." "AI will create jobs instead of destroying them." "AI will solve the climate crisis despite doubling or tripling humanity's energy footprint." At some point it became acceptable to lie to the public with a straight face.
I feel like we are already there. That these people are allowed to keep the profits they made through lying and environmental destruction-- ("um well actually compared to generations past we are much greener")-- is the most telling flaw in the system. They aren't penalized at all for lying, and not lying is a massive loss of potential profit. So then, why not lie, is their logic.
This doesn't mean climate change isn't a problem, because even with this progress, we're way behind and not moving nearly fast enough. But often it's the green side of the spectrum that's lying by catastrophizing and understating progress, while overstating the severity of what's happening.
It's happening similarly with AI, where the green movement has decided that AI is unacceptable, even though it has a tiny ecological footprint compared to activities like watching Netflix or eating nuts, let alone eating beef or flying on a plane.
> Still, stretched-thin HR teams say it’s the only way to handle thousands of applicants. You're doing it wrong if you're considering "thousands" of applicants. First of all ask your current good employees if they can refer anyone. If you need to go to resumes, sort by qualifications. Screen out obvious robo-applications, you know them when you see them just like you know spam email from the subject line alone. Hint:…
You are giving advice to some of the dumbest people in the country. I'm not saying its bad advice, but these people are universally stupid. I don't know exactly why things ended up this way, but I'd love to hear where this isn't a truth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First of all ask your current good employees if they can refer anyone. Not permitted, depending on location and industry. That kind of thought is how you end up with entire departments of 20-year-old single white guys wearing the same polo shirts and khaki pants. A company with any size legal department is going to require you to consider applications from the general public.
Well they will ask you to "formally" consider applications from the general public. How this often works is you already chose your ideal candidate before the job ad lands, you have their resume in front of you, you tailor the job ad perfectly to fit this resume. And then you put out the job ad for the obligatory 2 week period while you informally onboard them. Maybe you even let them crank overtime for the first mont…
The company I work for (under 10,000 employees) hires an outside company to conduct audits for this every two years. I have no idea how it works.