Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jaredklewis's commentslogin

I’m fine to share a car. I’m less keen on dying in one.

Riding in a car is easily the most dangerous thing I do in my daily life and my subjective impression of how well uber/lyft/taxi drivers drive is not great.


I use the official iOS client everyday. What’s wrong with it?

I also use it every day. It does its job, but it has many usability issues that make it less than ideal.

For example, copy and paste retains the text color (probably by design). So, sometimes I get black text on a black background, when the app is in dark mode.

The editing process to remove the formatting is pretty annoying.

It takes me time to find the edit button, which is buried in the menu but prominent in the desktop version. Then, I have to toggle the HTML mode and delete the retained tags, which on a phone takes time. The desktop version, instead, has a button to remove all formatting.


Ah I see. I very rarely edit or create cards on mobile so for me it’s mostly a a card review app.

The App uses the Mac Text element rather than a custom one, so it'll have the same shortcuts as all of them; `⇧ Shift ⌥ Option ⌘ Command V` to paste and match the formatting of the current field (in the case of a blank field, remove formatting).

Try pasting into an app/textbox that doesn't support any formatting then copy/paste from there.

iOS one is fine, pretty good. I use it daily too. Ankidroid is much better, which I would attribute to being open source with lots of eyeballs on it and making improvements for the love of it.

I do too, and I hate it. Some of my pet peeves from the top of my head (there would be more most likely if I'd think a bit, but maybe later):

    > I keep pressing the second button to OK a card, I rarely use the 3rd and 4th. But if I fail a card, that button becomes a NOK, and I keep pressing it out of reflex
    > I can't help interpreting "card was a leech" notification other than "how dumb can you be". Fortunately there is no way to turn it off.
    > It keeps phoning home for some reason, each time it gets into the foreground. It is really great when you are behind a proxy, and it keeps complaining that there is no network, every single time. Of course that call can't be turned off. Also, have no idea what it sends home. I try to trust that it's not some nefarious.
   > Some years ago, for some reason Anki changed DB format, in a backwards incompatible way. There was a notification at the start of the app, that if I don't want it, I shouldn't update my app. I did turn off auto-update. A few weeks later it bricked my deck (my deck got updated to the new format, even though that old iOS app was the only way I accessed it), also trashing my 3 years long strike.

I mean if people had to pay $9.99 per application that would drastically reduce spam applications. So the mail proposal still has a good effect here.

Well, presumably your business charges something to mail out job applications to companies? Like an application fee, that charge incurs a cost to applicant which will do something (presumably reduce applicant volume).

Plus by making that fee optionally replaced with time spent writing the letter, people who don't have the finances to pay a whole bunch of application fees can still apply for as many jobs as they're willing to put in the time.

> I understand that recruiters/hiring managers/whatever get a lot of junk applications, but frankly, it is your job to sort through them. You are paid to do this.

Recruiters, hiring managers, and whatevers are humans too, with ordinary human limitations. Just because they are paid to do something doesn't mean they gain superhuman capabilities.

Even if I am a recruiter with nothing else to do, if I get 5k applications for a role each week, I won't individually review 5k applications in a week. It's not possible. So I will have to rely on some automated system that filters out most of those applications. Who knows how good that system is.

On the other hand, if I get 100 mail applications for a role each week, that I can review that.

I'm not in love with this proposal, but I definitely see the appeal. Adding a little cost/effort on the applicant side automatically filters out a ton of applicants that have not bothered to learn anything about the role or company.

In the past I've had success with adding things to the job description like: "please include a link to your favorite gif in your email." And that filters out about 95% of applicants who don't read the job description and don't have a gif link in their email. But with LLMs I imagine those kinds of filters work less well than before.


That's a fair point! It is true that recruiters are human and cannot review 5k applications per week.

I don't mean to say that recruiters must/should review all applications, because indeed this is sometimes impossible. I'm just saying that, as a recruiter, your job is to review applications and you should therefore not be making things harder for the applicants.

Asking for someone's favourite GIF to filter out junk applications is a great idea. This does not detriment the applicant, and it makes the recruiter's job easier. This is good. Making all applications mail-in is not good, because it detriments the applicant (by way of costing significantly more time and some money), while also not solving some of the larger problems when it comes to the job application process.


Well they didn’t wear masks and grab people off the street and shoved them into unmarked vans under previous administrations.

[flagged]


Is it really a problem though?

It seems to be, given how many people voted for "mass deportations".

It also makes it easier for employers to get away with poor working conditions for those workers.


Nope. While there was a large increase in immigrant inflows, there is no evidence their enforcement decisions were significantly different than e.g. Trump 1.

What the statistics actually show is that the United States was a far more attractive destination for immigrants under Biden, but that enforcement policies were largely the same. That makes sense since enforcement policy is mostly set by Congress and not by POTUS.

The increased appeal of the US is entirely explained by the fact that the US economy was excelling far beyond any country in the world, and especially any country in the western hemisphere. At the same time, Central and South America were getting hit by successive political and economic shocks amplified by COVID.

The significant reduction in immigrants towards the tail end of Biden is not because they suddenly decided to "follow the law" and "close the border." It's that they decided NOT to follow the law anymore and to unilaterally ignore the asylum laws that Congress actually sets.

This was later struck down in court: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/district-court-strikes-d...

So really what you're seeing is the difference between the US being a desirable place to come to versus an undesirable one. I'm sympathetic to the argument that there's moral hazard involved in making the US appear to be highly desirable to people who we don't want to accept, but I'm not sympathetic at all to the view that that means the executive can simply ignore whatever laws they want, or they can turn the US into such a dystopian hellhole that only the most desperate immigrants around would bother attempting entry.

Some additional sources:

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-deportation-re...

https://www.cato.org/blog/data-show-trump-wouldve-released-m...


Press release says

> On mobility, the India-EU FTA provides a facilitative and predictable framework for business mobility covering short-term, temporary and business travel in both directions.

Do you predict short term business travel from India will increase youth unemployment in Europe? Why?

Don’t you think a larger export market for EU products like cars will increase employment in the EU? That would be my prediction.


Does it say that about short term business travel only?

"offers an excellent opportunity for us to cooperate on facilitating labour mobility" "This cooperation framework will facilitate the mobility of skilled workers, young professionals and seasonal works in shortage sectors" "The Office will help Indian workers, students, and researchers find out about opportunities in Europe, starting with the ICT sector with the aim of expanding it further in the future."

Beyond that press release apparently it commits member states to EU commits to uncapping student visas for Indian students


Maybe I’m missing something, but why can’t it be true? If I’m a PhD deciding what to do with the next few years of my life, the fact that government jobs currently seem very unstable might make PhDs hesitant to choose this path. There’s probably also at least some PhDs (given the overwhelmingly left leaning politics of grad students) that don’t want to be involved with this administration. So maybe more PhDs are going into the private sector.

On the other side, budget cuts might mean that you have less money to spend on the PhDs that are interested.

So it doesn’t seem inherently contradictory to me.


Do you mean pardon?

I find this comment baffling. Apple needs a new CEO because their products come in lots of colors? And they have (gasps) two series of laptop chips?

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: