I've been working on a project called x174 to deal with this disaster. Think of it as a bugfix. Will reach out
Btw - this sort of project is what my startup does - we spin out autonomous projects - that could be companies - that provide social good and solve otherwise unsolvable problems.
You're talking ahead of the others in this thread, who do not understand how you got to what you're saying. I've been doing research in this area. You are not only correct, but the implications are staggering, and go further than what you have mentioned above. This is no cult, it is the reorganization of the economics of work.
They sometimes build the tools themselves if communication /finding help would take more effort and time than diy.
Any other deployment indicates waste (e.g. ego / needing to show off your awesomeness, or needing to upskill yourself because you aren't the right skill-shape for the job) or a company starved for capital that is sacrificing the long term for the short in order to survive.
Replacing my time capsule is not a priority for me, because it's a backup. If the backup goes bad / fails, I'm not sure why I should care (unless it fails silently)... By definition, I have a duplicate copy so all I need to do is to replace it when it fails, with whatever the latest greatest solution is. I do recognize that there's a bit of risk during that replacement period, but I'm not losing sleep over a few days of exposure. And I'm not worried with it failing silently because my machine is constantly writing to it and it's constantly moving and compacting (aka reading) data to eliminate the oldest stuff anyways.
My only actual concern is whether or not the networking aspect of my time capsule is up to snuff... Perhaps it makes sense to get a better wireless router, and perhaps there have been advances in router tech that mean I could get way better performance on my network. But there's no easy way for me to know if that's actually the case, so I'm just holding on to my time capsule until some event triggers me to make a change.
I use SKEDit to achieve this functionality today on my android phone. It works with phone calls, sms, whatsapp and emails. It's really cool when it activates - it literally will pull downthe search bar, type in 'whatsapp' to select the app, launch the app, search for the contact I told it to message, tap on them to message them, and type in the message I had automated - and you can just watch and follow along as it does all this. V awesome if you have social anxiety, a poor memory, a busy schedule, or all of the above.
1. the cost of having and maintaining a fleet of scooters
2. the network of flexible staff charging scooters
3. proprietary battery packs
4. the network of flexible staff moving the scooters to better locations
5. exclusive access to a scooter with a performance profile that the rest of the market cannot match (think tesla).
x. contractual moat
1) will not stop startups with access to funding from entering the market. Providing service will require a fleet of these lite EVs and as the economics becomes obvious, the companies will merge (so they share overhead costs) until there are only one or two fleets.
2) Is very short term, because eventually the companies will figure out that they can get their users to charge the scooters themselves - by literally bringing their own battery pack (it's pretty portable - see https://electricscooterparts.com/batteries.html) to the scooter and plugging their battery in. The scooters will validate the powersource to ensure it's safe and that will be the end of the "paying random people to charge scooters" business.
3) They can't even charge for proprietary battery packs and use that sunk cost as a moat, because with VC money, competitors will just give away their own proprietary battery packs. Maybe the switching cost will be the time it takes to receive your free battery pack in the mail, but you'd just order a free one from each competitor in your area, so this is an insignificant moat.
4) Is also relatively short term: They will also eventually tell users where they are allowed to leave the scooters, and charge people who don't comply. They may frame it as a discount, but.... In the end the hard work will be outsourced to customers, which means there will really not be lock in. Any leftover work will eventually be done by professionals, or maybe by a smaller network of people moving scooters, if they are cheaper.
5) This is the best moat, but it's similar to the moat iphone used to have. They will need patents and to basically be on the forefront of the industry, forever. Boosted Boards is likely to wind up occupying this position, though they are likely to not directly operate their scooter rental product, but instead sell the scooters in an exclusive agreement to a particular company that turns around and wins the market with lower costs and higher reliability. Boosted would use their monopoly position to extract as much profit from that partner as is possible while allowing the partner to still be cheaper than getting and maintaining other scooters. Eventually their partner will try to clone their product and get it cheaper elsewhere, unless Boosted's patent game is very strong.
x) I think there's another possible moat. A particular service provider may be able to force users to agree that they only use their own boards in order to have access to lower marginal cost. Users may get a discount for not having the competitor's app on their phone. Alternatively, a provider might allow users to buy like $500 credit up front for a significant discount to achieve similar impact.
This approach may make sense if you're either uniquely qualified or willing to speak to a lot of companies.
You are basically signaling what type of person you are, divulging critical information to the hiring manager when you do this.
Specifically, you are saying that you will not put up with BS. The problem is, work is generally at least 60% BS, and as a hiring manager, you want someone who will put up with the shit to get to the glory. And you really want someone who believes there is glory to be had - that person will outwork anyone else.
So you've signaled that you will not outwork others and that you will not put up with BS - you're interviewing and have already exposed yourself as a flight risk willing to do less than a theoretical other person would.
So yeah, they will pass on you in droves unless you have some unique aspect to your profile that makes you uniquely qualified.
Did you write the book on what the company is trying to do? If yes, more power to you - people put up with Steve Jobs to get access to his potential. Maybe you're worth it.
If not, you'll have to find someone who appreciates you and your values. And forget company value statements - that shit means nothing in the day-to-day. What you're basically looking for is a hiring manager with strong values aligned to yours, who also has the power to do the hire. And you'll find him if you look hard enough.
"In order to get a good understanding of the purchasing power of your future retirement savings for today, you can do a “simple” calculation: Take your total retirement savings and multiply it by 3%. For example, if you have $1.25m (retirement savings), multiplied by 0.03% (inflation), you get $45,000 in inflation. Then you subtract that number from your total savings: $1.25m - $45k = $880k. This will give you a baseline to understand your financial situation."
Yeah, so $1.25m - $45K is NOT 880K.
Also, the effect of inflation compounds every year. So maybe you want to divide the nominal answers you are giving out by (1.03)^num-years-from-today to get the real value (in today's dollars) .
The problem is that facebook changed their business model (so you have to pay for people to see your content - he calls it payola), and a lot of content providers did not change their business models away from expecting free publicity from facebook. Really, all funny or die needed to do is to switch to a mailing list-type setup, where they actually can reach their customers without paying auction prices for every message. They should basically have given up on facebook as a means of reaching new customers, except for signing people up to their mailing list-type setup, and then trimmed operations to work at whatever scale that business could support, with the knowledge that they could grow that operation on a monthly basis to eclipse their facebook viewership.
More content providers need to recognize that facebook sees their relationship as being zero sum, and that facebook controls all the cards in their own game, so it doesnt matter how many impressions/views you can get from facebook - they are the ones who benefit. You get to pay content generation costs.
Honestly, just make it into a bullet point list: your reformulation of the ideas is WAY clearer and requires no additional explanations. Maybe add graphical examples if you must, but referring back to the text of the original site actually makes yours worse.
I think the POV he's taken is that the kafka stream is the one true datasource (for all time), with all other dbs being derivatives. This insane strategy seems to be over engineered to get around db migrations... though i'm sure the event stream will also change over time, and he'll have to write migration-like code anyways.