I've always taken to the perspective that money alleviates stress and anxiety, but alleviating stress and anxiety is not the definition of happiness (even if it helps).
Your perspective encapsulates mine and I would add that having no financial burden does grant one all of their time too if they choose. Time is the one thing that no one can ever directly buy more of and earning more time is done day in and day out through sound choices around mental and physical activity. Money buys experiences, invest wisely to earn more time, while I state to everyone to "Stay Healthy!" and make sound long term choices because one's potential future health event can significantly change one's future. I speak from direct experience.
This is entirely false. My s.o is relatively well known in comic art communities and they (and many others) are using this right now. I don't think HN quite grasps how much artists are trying to ensure ownership and governance over their art.
This is an extremely interesting subject. I understand the "hate" for leet code, or simply live coding exercises in general, though so far the majority of "hate" I've heard for this comes from the candidates who haven't had to do a ton of hiring. Or they've had the ability to hire slower and take their time evaluating fewer people over a longer period of time without a ton of inbound pressure. Or they've set some arbitrary bar for inbounds that many people also disagree with (such as only talking to people from top ranked CS schools, or only candidates from well known companies, basically some other metric they can use for themselves as some abstraction on competence).
I do believe having someone do paid work / pair with the team for a few days is likely the most valuable, and I do actually think the best people are ok with this because they use it as a way to evaluate a company. But this strategy simply isn't scalable and can take a lot of company man hours without extremely good up front vetting.
I've found coding exercises, of some sort, they don't have to be leet-code-esque, to be one of the very few "put your money where your mouth is" activities to perform. The amount of folks that can speak forever and in-depth about what they've worked on, and then will completely fail at writing for-loops in their favorite language has astonished me. I don't believe live coding exercises have to be adversarial, I believe candidates should be offered a more accessible often if it's too high pressure for them, but I don't believe coding exercises are inherently bad or evil. I do believe there are bad or evil exercises that can be chosen.
A practical coding exercise that requires no more than 8-10 lines of code done live has generally served well in my experience for assessing candidates. I've seen similar pure failure rates from practical exercises as I have from "perform a dfs" style exercises, in the above 60% range.
Assuming they sign up for an account. Email them, and ask. There are tons of products out there to allegedly help with this within your site: i.e feedback popups, chat popups, etc. But the easy way is simply to email them!
As an engineering leader who has done a reasonable amount of hiring in the heart of silicon valley, every single negotiation tactic provided by a candidate who received an offer (when we hired for on premises) was along the lines of "I need more / should be given more salary because of Cost of Living".
Some might say there's a power dynamic, and it's just an excuse used by a candidate to negotiate higher - but at the end of the day that is what I heard every single time, without fail, when someone wanted to negotiate their salary.
If that's the case, then it does definitely indicate to me that "where you live" is a variable, and an especially important variable.
If you're collecting data, you generally want a) as much as you can get and b) be able to make use of it any way you want.
Yes users of a privacy centric analytics tool are opting into less information, though the inability to do more may be a large downside to counter (if it is the case that it has less data collection capabilities vs plausible at this time). You never know what data you will need later, better to collect however much you're able to in a fashion you can do anything you need to with it.
Can't speak for the OC, but I'd say decision paralysis for these sorts of utilities is more about "will I regret having used this after a year vs something else" and less about "can I dump this after trying it for a week".
Competition is great, but people are people and want to know they're making a good longer term decision, which isn't always clear in the short term.
This is just something you can't help with outside of provide information, especially since use cases and desires of users of these services change over time.
