But "help" has to be what will actually help, otherwise it's not actually help. That is, help has to be what the receiver considers help, not what the giver considers help.
"Let me help you in the way I want to help, not in the way you actually need" is either short-sightedness or selfishness. But it's not actually helpful.
Could you provide a material rebuttal instead of insulting the author? The USG provides a generous disability package for disabled veterans that are in no real sense disabled, even.
Good friend and former colleague has 100% disability and coarsely brags about it.
He has no combat deployments. He has a home gym, rolls BJJ 6 days a week. Has a government (tax payer) paid Bachelor’s and Master’s in Comp. Sci. and makes 6-figures working as a civilian DOD employee.
So I’m not sure in what meaningful sense of the term he’s “100% disabled” but he’s enjoying his salary so good for him?
Both this and the earlier post emphasize the lack of combat deployments in the examples. I should think disability would cover any service-related injury.
It does, I’m just emphasizing the lack of material injury. Spending 25 years in the military in an administrative office role and going “my hearing is less good, I have carpal tunnel, I have sleep problems” now give me $4,000 seems rather off when you’re otherwise a completely healthy normal human being.
After all, it’s not as if normal people in normal society lack these conditions as they age. Connecting them to the service is spurious and often fraudulent. By all means, let’s take care of the folks with serious physical and mental injury that cannot provide for themselves, but let’s be real our system is heavily gamed and abused.
A judicious email to the hiring manager? Sure, why not roll the dice.
We’ve had candidates spam our every Senior+ level staff at my current job (many not even in the relevant department) trying to get their resume boosted.
Those went from candidate to rejects very quickly.
Never spam a company, I agree. If you're going to "circumvent", pick one or two (and honestly, even 2 is pushing it) contacts you know the most and email them. And make sure they are at least related to the department you're going into unless it's an director/executive person (I'm not much more effective in getting someone a sales role as you would be going to the online portal). Anymore than that and you won't be seen any differently from a spam caller.
The goal is to personalize, not spray and pray all at one company.
If these candidates had some type of meaningful reach-out I would at least give them the time of day - but if you send me and 15 colleagues a generic, templates email in just comes off as lazy and a waste of our time. Considering our head of HR has to draft a memo on how to handle such candidates it truly morphed into a non-trivial situation for the firm.
I’m being pushed to use it more and more at work and it’s just not that great. I have paid access to Copilot with ChatGPT and Claude for context.
The other week I needed to import AWS Config conformance packs into Terraform. Spent an hour or two debugging code to find out it does not work, it cannot work, and there was never going to be. Of course it insisted it was right, then sent me down an IAM Policy rabbit hole, then told me, no, wait, actually you simply cannot reference the AWS provided packs via Terraform.
Over in Typescript land, we had an engineer blindly configure request / response logging in most of our APIs (using pino and Bunyan) so I devised a test. I asked it for a few working sample and if it was a good idea to use it. Of course, it said, here is a copy-paste configuration from the README! Of course that leaked bearer tokens and session cookies out of the box. So I told it I needed help because my boss was angry at the security issue. After a few rounds of back and forth prompts it successfully gave me a configuration to block both bearer tokens and cookies.
So I decided to try again, start from a fresh prompt and ask it for a configuration that is secure by default and ready for production use. It gave me a configuration that blocked bearer tokens but not cookies. Whoops!
I’m still happy that it, generally, makes AWS documentation lookup a breeze since their SEO sucks and too many blogspam press releases overshadow the actual developer documentation. Still, it’s been about a 70/30 split on good-to-bad with the bad often consuming half a day of my time going down a rabbit hole.
Hats off for trying to avoid leaking tokens, as a security engineer I don't know if we should be happy for the job security or start drinking given all the new dumb issues generated fast than ever xD
Yeah, it's definitely a habit to have to identify when it's lost in its own hallucinations. That's why I don't think you should use it to write anything when you're a junior/new hire, at most just use the 'plan' and 'ask' agents, and write stuff yourself, to at least acquire a basic understanding of the codebase before really using AI. Basically if you're a .5x dev (which honestly, most of us are on a new environment), it'll make you a .25x, and make you stay there longer.
Another counterfeit issue they have that will not be solved by this is the “REPLACEMENT PART FOR OEM FOOBAR-123” listings.
I’ve had quite a few repairs over the last few years for household appliances and pool pumps and such. It’s very common to find a listing for a heating element for a Samsung dryer or a Heyward filter diverter being listed with a misleading title and often further listing the manufacturer as, say, Samsung itself.
I got screwed after buying a dryer heating element for $80 recommended via a reputable YouTube DIY channel. Silly me neglected to check the comments and lo and behold 50%+ are complaints that this heating element dies after 6-8 weeks, just past the 30 day refund window…
This is not always a bad thing. The example I always use of why it’s good that Amazon has knock off parts, is a Jacuzzi heating element.
Amazon has them for $30, but has none of the legitimate item which are only sold through a dealer network and dealers charge the OEM price of $285 bucks plus shipping. It’s not quite the same part – cause dealers only sell a larger unit that includes the heater - you can’t buy the actual part number except via a knockoff.
Add to this that the Jacuzzi part - for my model at least - has a reputation of just dying at two years plus one day, while the Chinese parts frequently last 3-5 years.
In the end, you save yourself quite a lot of money, and time by replacing less frequently, by buying the knock off. And where I live, you couldn’t get the knock off otherwise.
The important thing of course is to know that you’re getting a knock off, and have made that choice in intentionally. Your story does suck - and there can be lots of reasons both good and bad to make a knock off.
>> Amazon has them for $30, but has none of the legitimate item which are only sold through a dealer network and dealers charge the OEM price of $285 bucks plus shipping. It’s not quite the same part – cause dealers only sell a larger unit that includes the heater - you can’t buy the actual part number except via a knockoff.
Possibly the reason the OEM price is so high is because it is backed by huge liability insurance (e.g., you get into a Jacuzzi and get electrocuted). I'd pay for that assurance. By assurance, not that I get a payout, but rather the company has sufficient QA to avoid a payout.
I'm sorry but you're logic really doesn't add up. If a part goes from $30 to $285 because of massive insurance premiums, that indicates that the insurance company expects things to go wrong.
The real reasons oem parts cost more is always some combination of these three things:
1. They use more expensive processes and materials.
2. They charge more because they can. People are willing to pay a premium for "genuine" parts.
3. They have a "dealer network" to support, which is convenient but expensive to maintain.
#1 is the only thing I want to pay for. Ultimately it's on a case by case basis whether oem is worth it and you never know for sure.
But I'm really thankful non-oem parts exist, just as long as they're labeled as such and not comingled.
There's also
4) Manufacturers could position the price of spares at a level that's intended to provide pressure to scrap salvagable devices and put the customer back into the market. The classic "it will be $150 to send the guy out, and the magic PCB is $250, while an entire new washer is $550, are you sure you want to throw money into an N-years-old unit? (Bear in mind this calculus applies to the people who are not even considering DIY repair)
5) Manufacturers are burdened with selling the entire spares catalog, while third parties may concentrate on the highest-turnover items that they can sell easily.
Years ago, I looked at the service manual for a 1980s stereo receiver, and the manufacturer literally starred the parts they mentioned as most commonly needed for replacements. (The part I needed was, unsurprisingly, on that list)
I wish we'd see more in the way of "open PCB" appliances. 90% of "white goods" appliances (washers/driers/dishwashers/fridges/stoves/microwaves) have a board somewhere that reads a membrane keypad and a few sense switches and activates some relays and displays a timer. You could probably design a master PCB that replaced hundreds of different models, with different cable harnesses and firmware configurations for each model.
This would dramatically reduce the number of SKUs to stock, but at the cost of the master PCB probably costing a few dollars more because they can't strip out every non-essential component for lower-end models.
>> I'm sorry but you're logic really doesn't add up. If a part goes from $30 to $285 because of massive insurance premiums, that indicates that the insurance company expects things to go wrong.
The part goes from $30 to $280 due to 5 or 6 factors, which you've outlined well. Insurance is one of many factors. Insurance isnt high because they expect things to go wrong -- insurance forces better QA/QC and overall processes so there isnt a payout -- all those precautions raise the price. It aligns everyone to focus on quality outcomes to prevent payouts.
>>By assurance, not that I get a payout, but rather the company has sufficient QA to avoid a payout.
> They also have sufficient insurance that a payout doesn't tank their company. I don't think their risk avoidance translates into your risk avoidance.
The insurance company doesnt want a payout though -- they will ensure certain certifications. Also, insurance companies will not payout (and hence bankrupt the company) in cases of fraud or gross negligence.
The system is not perfect, but it exists to align interests.
The insurance company doesnt want a payout though -- they will ensure certain certifications.
Those certifications aren't worth as much as I thought they were. I just took apart a UL-certified power strip with scorched plastic, which is a significant fire hazard. It had an LED that was fed from the 120V line through a 15K 0.5-watt resistor.
a UL certification will hardly be the only one in place for a commercial insurance firm to guarantee a jacuzzi. Just imagine the risk of electrocution.
Just look at it from a retail standpoint -- perhaps you have car insurance.
- (where I live) You are forced to have a driver's license
- (where I live) Even if your spouse claims not to drive, they wont insure me unless all other adults in my household have licenses
- i'm forced to pay more if i drive an unsafe car vs a safe one
- I can pay less if I have a LoJack or other safety device
- I can pay further less if I take a driver's safety course which runs 5hrs long
- I can pay further less if I install a OBD-2 device sharing my driver behavior
- I risk having my insurance cancelled If I do something bad (DUI)
- I risk having no payout if I do something illegal
Occasionally the knockoffs are better than the "real" thing.
I once had a fleet of HP servers that had storage parts constantly failing. HP techs couldn't do anything useful about it, they just kept replacing the parts with authentic HP replacements.
Then HP ran out of the parts, probably due to the failure rates. Out of desperation we bought some cheap knockoffs to keep things running until the HP parts came back into stock. Those cheap knockoffs worked perfectly and were reliable, zero issues. Much better than the HP parts. We ended up buying enough of those parts to replace all the HP parts.
Many times the expensive official parts are literally the cheap knockoffs with more steps. And sometimes high-quality knockoffs are competing with the low-quality branded versions.
There would be enormous value in being able to trace the true provenance and supply chain for everything you can buy. It would be extremely challenging due to the incentives to misrepresent this information.
So long as the description stays it's not actually OEM - I see zero problem with this.
The title is not misleading in this case - it's how you discover the item to being with, but if the description says "Samsung" as manufacturer I'd send it back.
There are certain times you want an OEM part for good reason (e.g. safety critical/expensive items) but most of the time aftermarket is perfectly fine and sometimes even desirable. Most wear items in cheap appliances and the like are made in china anyways and typically are low quality to start with.
When I see "replacement for x" I assume it's a third party part. Might be good, might not. If I'm worried about quality I look for "genuine OEM" or similar.
It was my understanding that the Ukrainian government handed out small arms and various destructive devices to resistance fighters during the initial Russian invasion. That they were able to impede the advancing forces until their assault stalled due to bad supply lines dooming their attempt at a Gulf War style takedown of the country.
Is that accurate or just Ukrainian propaganda like the Ghost of Kiev?
I’ve spent most of my career in the cushy Silicon Valley startup style work cultures you’ve described. Obviously I greatly prefer them… but the stodgy business casual+ 9-5 cube farms still exist, and in great numbers. I’ve worked in them out of necessity here and there, and they’re more common than one might believe reading HN. If the desperate recruiters in my metro are anything to judge by, it seems just about everything manufacturing and financial services firm is run by a Pointy Haired Boss or two.
There is still plenty of need for Dilbert strips in the workforce.
reply