The dual spidey meme is cool and is correct if you understand social networks in terms of functionality and not what matters - audience. Functionality is similar although Threads does have more of a sterile approach to product branding. So yes spidey meme works if that’s your lens. But the audiences are VERY different. Those that succeed in text-based microblog platforms have succeeded on and migrated to Twitter. That audience is dramatically different to the Instagram audience which is look-at-me visual types. Couldn’t be further apart. Ben and Zuck are looking in the wrong direction when making the spidey meme comparison. This is the 2023 equivalent of Eric Schmidt saying that Twitter is just email. It’s the audience, stupid.
She is not rich and has to hustle like crazy to sell her artwork while also working tables at a casino and raising a daughter. I doubt that she would advise anyone to just follow their passion without first establishing some kind of financial base.
There tends to be a difference between the kinds of parties thrown by someone who is staying in a place for a weekend versus someone who has to face their neighbors days/weeks after said party.
Parties are one problem. I'd be more fearful of theft and destruction of property... and a general discomfort in having complete strangers coming and going from my building. That said, it seems extremely rare that an Airbnb guest would engage in the kind of behavior that would generate headlines.
FRONTLINE seems to be the only investigative journalism program of note left on television. Will be interesting to see their report on the NSA, assuming that they're working on one.
I remember watching this and being shocked! A real eye opener, even after snowden. It shows just how big the spying industry has gotten in the last 10 years.
While the author makes a good case that 'confidence' and 'ability to impress' are key drivers of the tendancy to promote incompetent individuals to leadership roles, another dynamic may be that some leaders who fear exposure of their own incompetence tend to surround themselves with 'yes' men/women who themselves aren't particularly competent or skilled in anything other than making the master feel superior.
In such a situation, when the incompetent leader exits, all those who are next in line are these incompetent 'yes' people, increasing their chances of being considered for and granted promotion.
This dynamic exists in some institutions in contrast to the 'surround yourself with people smarter/better/more competent than you' philosophy of leadership. Jim Collins talked about these approaches in Good To Great, comparing Bank of America's 'weak general' promotion culture with Wells Fargo's approach of getting the most talented people into the highest organizational positions possible. You could argue selection bias, but it's interesting to compare the financial performance of the two banks over the last 10 years or so.
Apple found 11 facilities across its supply chain using child labour last year, the iPhone maker said in its annual “Supplier Responsibility” report. The California-based company, which has stepped up its auditing efforts in the past year under chief executive Tim Cook, said it had uncovered 106 “active cases” of children being employed by its suppliers over the course of 2012, and 70 people who had been underage and either left or passed the age of 16 by the time of its audit. None of those individuals is still employed by the suppliers, after Apple worked with its partners to help them spot fake identification documents or falsified records. In one extreme case, 74 of those 106 under-16s were employed by a single Chinese manufacturer of circuit-board components used in Apple products. A large local labour agency “knowingly” supplied the children, Apple said. Apple terminated its relationship with the supplier and reported the labour agency to the local authorities, who fined it and suspended its licence. “Our approach to underage labour is clear: We don’t tolerate it, and we’re working to eradicate it from our industry,” Apple wrote in its report. “When we discover suppliers with underage workers or find out about historical cases … we demand immediate corrective action.” As Apple extends its audits deeper into its supply chain, prevention of underage labour and juvenile worker protection were the only two categories among its eight human rights auditing criteria where violations had increased since the previous year. Apple found improvements among its suppliers during 2012 in areas such as anti-discrimination, freedom of association and wages. The Cupertino-based company is one of the few consumer electronics groups to publish detailed audits into its supply chain. Overall it found that just under a quarter of its suppliers failed to comply with its labour and human rights standards, with other breaches including 11 facilities using bonded labour.
We don’t allow suppliers to act unethically or in ways that threaten the rights of workers – even when local laws and customs permit such practices - Apple As it tries to reduce excessive working hours, Apple said that 92 per cent of weeks worked by 1m employees tracked across its supply chain met its weekly criteria of a maximum of 60 work hours and at least one day off. That figure marks an improvement from 38 per cent a year ago, while Apple said that it had changed some of the ways it measured working hours to be “more meaningful and effective”. Overtime increased among Apple’s suppliers during September, October and November, when Apple was ramping up production of its new iPhone 5 and iPad mini, but decreased again in December. “We don’t allow suppliers to act unethically or in ways that threaten the rights of workers – even when local laws and customs permit such practices,” Apple said. “We’re working to end excessive work hours, prohibit unethical hiring policies, and prevent the hiring of underage workers.”
I'm unsure why this is on the HN front page, but while it's there I'll throw in an opinion...
If the father had done a better job parenting instead of permissively coddling his children or allowing others to parent them, he would never have had to write this email.
Parenting is coaching. It's a process of constantly weening children from dependency after dependency. It can be tough when they cry at every rule you put in place and at every missed chocolate or toy or tv show. But you have to be firm, stay true to your vision, and view yourself as saving your children from "the tyranny of their own desires".
If you want it done right, you can't do it from a distance. You can't oursource the effort by sending them off to boarding school and hope someone else will do your job for you.
It's not easy. I have 3 of my own. Perhaps the hardest thing to do is to realize that the way your kids turn out is largely due to how effectively you and your partner parent. Yes they make their own choices. But they should make those choices within a framework of confidence, intelligence and independence that you as a parent have cultivated.
That's a lot of responsibility. But you have to take it on if you want to increase the chances of your children having good lives.
Waiting until they're 40 to write them an email expressing your disappointment is far too little way too late.
I am in deep agreement with the thrust of your argument, particularly parents job in relation to "the tyranny of their own desires".
However, I can't agree with "Perhaps the hardest thing to do is to realize that the way your kids turn out is largely due to how effectively you and your partner parent."
If you mean you as a parent will have an enormous impact on your child's life-arc, I certainly agree. But who a child is is often not nearly as malleable as parents, and especially non-parents think. Parenting matters enormously, but I can't agree how a child turns out is "largely" due to parenting.
Sure. If you plant an acorn in crappy soil and fail to fertilize and nurture it, does it still turn into an oak tree (if it turns into anything at all)? Of course.
But does it turn out as well as it would have if it got off to the right start and/or was cared for appropriately? Probably not.
How the oak tree turned out is largely dependent on the environment it was raised in, the care and attention given to it, no?
Humans have more ability to control or change their conditions than oak trees but the principle still applies reasonably well. At the very least, taking on this responsibility as a parent minimizes the chances that one will be absent or non-attentive.
I also deeply agree with your post - and love the "tyranny of their own desires" quote. However ...
I have two kids and worry constantly that their dad will let them down in some slightly vague and unspecified manner that I won't notice till they are 16. I can cover the usual stuff of shelter, clothing, food, love, attention, bit of discipline etc. But there always seems to be one more thing that psychologists, parenting magazines or schools are aware of that I am not doing. Or doing wrong.
I am coming round to the view however that evolution long ago decided that leaving the future of the human race in the hands of parents was far too risky - and kids are likely to grow up to be who they will be. And only extreme action will sway them.
My actions now, will I hope, have some positive improvements on my childs happiness and life outcomes. But in the main who they are is a genetic gift. Mother Nature, as mothers are wont to do, decided that Dads are likely to be wrong too often to rely on.
So I can relax and focus on trying to raise happy inquisitive kids - I shall try and focus on the big things - happiness, inquisitiveness, healthy lifestyle, not as bad with money as dad, marry a happy person. I think of it as like laying down railway tracks that slowly open up to become roads, then prairies with rules that trammell them becoming advice about exploring.
And find out with them, just who they are going to grow up to be.
