I have an oddly relevant story.

My wife and I got to do a “swimming with a capybara” experience. My wife forgot about the instructions to not wear anything dangly because the capybara may play with it.

Well, she wore a bikini top that had a big bow in the front.

That capybara motorboated my wife like he was Vince Vaughn after a dry spell.

I just turned to the other (horrified) guests, shrugged, and said I didn’t blame him.

Gotta imagine that ladder was covered in ice for much of the year.

In Soviet Russia, OSHA violates you

I find the “clean history” argument so flawed.

Sure, if you’re they type to micro commit, you can squash your branch and clean it up before merging. We don’t need a dozen “fixed tests” commits for context.

But in practice, I have seen multiple teams with the policy of squash merging every branch with 0 exceptions. Even going so far as squash merging development branches to master, which then lumps 20 different changes into a single commit. Sure, you can always be a git archeologist, check out specific revisions, see the original commits, and dig down the history over and over, to get the original context of the specific change you’re looking into. But that’s way fucking more overhead than just looking at an unmanipulated history and seeing the parallel work going on, and get a clue on context at a glance at the network graph.

Good lord. Re-read the quoted text from the article.

Even their source isn’t claiming that the distribution that they cite represents all the people negatively affected by the RTO order, they explicitly say this is one person’s anecdotal experience on a very small sample size.

And then they immediately project this small cherry picked sample with claiming the mandate itself is sexist. And it appears to be the source of the unverified sample itself that makes that extreme assertion on sexism. Which is extraordinarily sus.

Reading comprehension and critical thinking.

Systemic bias != cherry picked data sets

Our first source cited personal experience of the return-to-office order’s impact and told us only two men were affected, compared to 29 women. Our source made calculations about the impact using internal data, and suggested women will bear the brunt of the RTO mandate.

“Per sample data pulled, this group is disproportionately female,” with women whose partners serve in the military perhaps especially impacted as life in uniform often means relocation.

Again, that’s a huge leap they are making.

The sample set could have simply been from a female heavy department. Other departments could be disproportionately male afflicted. We have no idea what their sampling covered, and given how incredibly biased the source seems to be, that’s more than enough reason for me to doubt their methodology.

Again, RTO is not inheritantly sexist, as this article claims. If you’re intentionally targeting departments with disproportionate representation to specifically marginalize them, then that’s discrimination. If this is a corporate policy expanding many departments, and one happens to be disproportionately represented by a gender, then it’s far harder to substantiate claims of prejudice.

Maybe closer to cars not having limiters to prevent speeding.

They could. The tech exists. Even to lock it to specific speed limits (not just an upwards cap) using GPS.

But most would say that’s overreaching. Until an insurance company sues/lobbies for it because it would improve their bottom line to force drivers to drive more responsibly by legally pushing the manufacturers to add limiters.

What the hell does RTO have to do with women specifically? It’s a mandate regardless of gender.

Reads article.

Ahh. Nothing. One department happened to be more heavily impacted for females, so suddenly it makes Dell a “boys club” (someone quoted in the article). The only reason provided was the possibility of women with spouses in the military that couldn’t move.

Yeah, that’s really stretching there and then slapped into the title for rage bait.

RTO mandates are newsworthy by their own right. No need to rage bait with nonsense to accompany it.

Well, Ibought a few Google speakers back in the day for easy voice commands, mostly for lights and weather.

I unplugged them for privacy. Still use one in the garage for music, but it might as well be a Bluetooth speaker at this point.

And easy to hook up local home assistance would be ideal for me. I don’t want to spend weeks of my time fussing with it. It’s not a hobby to me, just convenience

I would love to walk around with a video playing in a fixed hud while I go around doing chores. I’m constantly finding places to put my phone down every time I move to another station.

I’m not paying $3500 for that, though.

I wouldn’t say coincidence. I’d say the others were wanting to do the same, but held back because of bad press. After Elon did it, they had an excuse that took the heat off.

I get douche bros peddling instant meal powder crap. Which I have never, ever, looked for or researched, but my wife’s shopping habits tend to dictate my ads, even though we’re on completely different devices.

Car companies out source to 3rd parties for their car apps. And these 3rd parties just pump things out on aggressive deadlines. A couple former coworkers work(ed?) at one.

Edit - although, given the amount of in house tech at tesla, I’d expect them to mostly do their own software

deleted by creator

I take it you don’t own an EV?

Range is always relevant. For me, my max normal range (without the very time sensitive full charge) is a day to day factor.

Maybe because the real world conditions is being reported by owners at roughly 50% of Teslas advertised range. When for ICE, real vs advertised is typically around 80%.

Also, there has been reasonable skepticism on the range of heavier EVs, like trucks. And Tesla being the self made premium brand, and the Tesla truck being such a weird style, is in a spotlight of its own making.

Have you not noticed the same exact comments being made about ICE vehicles, particularly when their mileage estimates are highly advertised?

You all seem to act like this is particularly unfair to Tesla, when it’s literally the same exact discussion we’ve had for decades.

80% is a full standard charge. You only actually full charge immediately before a road trip, because it wears the battery faster to charge to 100%, and wears even more of you hold the charge before using it.

Do for someone charging their car over night for normal operations, 80% is a functionally full charge.

Yep. It’s a very transparent extortion. “I will intentionally (illegally) manipulate the stock to tank it if you do not give into my demands”

Obviously, being forced to buy Twitter wasn’t enough punishment for him to stop him from blatantly manipulating stocks.

Just like musicians, voice actors have spent years working on their style and range, making their particular flavor unique.

AI is essentially stealing their entire product for cheap.

AI will eventually be able to convincingly clone music styles and voices. You don’t think NIN would be justified in being upset when AI will be able to put out entire fake albums in their style and voice?