Not surprised, we dropped them the week after apple acquired them and destroyed our processes and controls overnight.
Fleetsmith pre apple was fantastic. I'm concerned that with Apple you're forced into only using App Store apps which simply doesn't work for in-house binaries and or third party tools you don't acquire through the App Store.
Apple likes to do a half in half out dance without consulting with teams that use the tech. Hopefully this doesn't impact too many people.
There’s always that avoidable constant extra mile needed for Apple products and how the true fruit company followers never fail to mention it in a a way that it sounds okay.
Didn’t OP’s question clear it up that this was not an option/intention? Or did you assume OP didn’t know the watch could be charged at night?
You have to pay for upkeep...electricity, gas, landscaping, local taxes, etc while you own the home. It also ties up capital for future purchases. They don't want to do that indefinitely as it would eat all the profit. They've probably done the calculation, realized that losing 1% (or whatever) is better than keeping the house on the books and making a small profit on the sale, but being negative after all the money they have to spend on ownership.
So, the unfortunate truth is that the #1 recruiting tool in the industry is LinkedIn and recruiters aren't going to look farther than LinkedIn 95% of the time. They are also going to take an application and then look up the person on LinkedIn and, if they don't see any information, they are going to pass more often than not.
I know you don't want to do it, but if you are serious about finding new work then I'd strongly urge you to make your LinkedIn shine. You can always remove it after you find a new job.
What are recruiters going to look for?
First and foremost it's going to be about technology affinity. If they work for a Java shop, they are going to be looking for people with Java or C# backgrounds. If it's a ruby shop then for ruby, python, node.js, etc.
Second, they are going to look to see if what you've actually done matches what they are looking for. Are they looking for someone to do machine learning pipelines? Are they looking to decompose a monolith into microservices? Those should show up in your descriptions.
Third, and probably way less important for many places, but they are also going to look for your company history affinity. Do they think of themselves as "IBM-lite"? Then they'll look for people who have lots of big company experience. Are they a rapidly growing Rails shop? They are going to look for places like Shopify, Stripe, etc.
If they can't find you on LinkedIn, you are putting yourself in a bit of a hole. Not one you can't get out of and be successful without, but it's a handicap.
As an example, and not to try to be self promoting, I received a notification this morning that 445 people had viewed my LinkedIn last week (I'm being generous and assuming LinkedIn is telling the truth here...i know i know). I've been in the industry for 20 years. I'm mgmt now, which makes it slightly different, but out of the 445 views I received 10 or so solicitations for jobs, 5 or 6 people reaching out looking for a job, and 100 or so sales pitches.
Anyway, I wish you luck. I'm hiring (rails, monolith -> SOA, postgres, APIs, etc). Happy to chat if you want to learn more.
I've worked in places where, if it's a senior VIP's idea, nobody questions it. You just do it. Doesn't matter if it's good, clever, high-value, safe, ethical, legal, or even possible. You just do it and don't ask why, or so much as hint that it's a terrible idea. Everyone just whistles and pretends it's great. I would hope that this wouldn't be the case in a car company, where safety needs to be a huge part of the whole process, but I've never worked there.
They probably designed the car with Europe regulations in mind first, and then rather than try and design an entirely new brake light for the US just took the lazy/cheap way and lit up the other two available light bars.
Is that really the case? In the UK at least indicators have to be orange, so they are easy to distinguish from brake lights. I find it insane that there are cars with red indicators like this one. Definitely couldn't be sold in the UK.
The article writer believes EU spec indicators are just horizontal (amber) lines so they would not have the issue.
But presumably those would be too small for US rules so they lit additional segments, making the arrow, which is what the parent commenter referred to.
What if you're in foggy weather or bad rain and can't properly see the car in front of you, and you see a "arrow pointing left" flashing ahead... Not only is the arrow pointing in the wrong direction but you may incorrectly assume that the vehicle itself is to the right of that light when it is in fact to the left of it.
Signals are most important in reduced vision conditions, and this reduces the reliability of those signals.
They're shaped like arrows pointing the opposite way, and we've had arrows for directions long before we had turn signals. If I ever see one of those in the street you bet I'll be confused for a split second. Being confused even for a split second is not a great thing when you're driving a two ton vehicle.
The article talks about this: "Now, I think the vast majority of drivers will understand what’s going on and treat them as normal blinking turn indicators, but these indicators hurt your brain, at least a little bit"
I think you are interpreting "confused" as "I can't tell which way the car is turning", while everyone else is talking about "This UX forces me to use my brain when I shouldn't have to".
Yeah, I don't think they're literally meaning "hurt" here.
Maybe a better analogy is where you're having a conversation with someone, and they throw in a double-negative. It's not like you're literally unable to work it out, but you need to engage with it consciously for a second. In a high-stakes conversation, that's just something that's good to avoid.
A memorable example of this for me (if a bit of a tangent) was when Felix Baumgartner was doing his mega parachute jump, and they kept screwing up the comms for which direction the wind was coming from / going in: https://youtu.be/rNhmYaWiPEk?t=4200
(by convention, people talk about wind in terms of the direction they come from).
I think the whole thing here is that driving involves a lot of modelling other drivers and their intentions, so our tolerance for bad UX that requires conscious thought should be really low.
I think the author is more accurately simulating how his brain will feel when he's flying down the road, tracking the trajectories of the very fast metal boxes surrounding him, and suddenly encounters a non-standard ambiguous signal. Turn signal decoding should be instant and unconscious, and this mini signal disrupts that. If anything I think he's understating the risks.
If I were behind that I would not be perpetually confused. But I’d sure as hell have a split second of confusion, and generally we try to avoid those sorts of situations when driving.
They do not follow the pattern if every other turn signal you have seen, because no other turn signal has an arrow pointing in the opposite direction of what it is indicating.
Can you really not understand how that might cause a moment of confusion? You see a turn signal like normal, but then you notice it is pointing in a different direction… you don’t think that might make some people pause for an instant and think?
We are used to both turn signals and arrows being used to indicate direction… when they contradict each other, it is going to get past our automatic brain and make us think, which is bad when driving.
Okay, maybe your brain is wired differently, just like the brain of the designer who created the lights.
The position of the light on the car is a signal for my brain, but it takes some processing. If it's on the right side of the vehicle, my brain evaluates that to "right" and vice versa, but maybe it's a short car, like a Smart ForTwo or a Fiat 500, and I'm looking at its side, so the right-hand-side indicator is left from the "center of perceived mass", but in that case there should be another smaller light somewhere around the side-view mirror and hmmm, yeah, it's turning right. It just takes a tiny bit of processing power and a tiny bit of time.
But an arrow, boy, I've been looking at arrows all my life. They've been telling me where to go at the train station, which way to turn on Google Maps and sometimes even literally which way to turn the steering wheel, on the outside of a sharp turn. An arrow requires no additional processing and is a strong, unmistakable signal.
So what my brain sees on that Mini flashing its left indicator is something like "Car turning left, btw RIGHT".
I agree! In fact, I’m sick of red meaning stop, and green meaning go for traffic lights. After all, this is redundant information, we all know the arrangement. Why not swap up the colors for fun?
This idea is only slightly worse than using wrong-pointing arrows for turn signals.
There's this trick question among children here. One makes the other repeat "white" ten times and immediately asks "What do cows drink?". The answer is almost always milk. It might even be working without repeating white part [1].
You should have encountered many situations like this before, simple tasks creating cognitive load, how can't you know what the fuss is?
The Mini indicators don't look like arrows to me. They look just like basic indicators. I don't know what else to say?
To be honest I think people are massively exaggerating how confusing they are for fun Internet outrage points. People calling for people to be sacked and things. Crazy.
> like every other turn signal you’ve seen in your entire life.
You don't know a priori that they work like other turn signals.
You are presented with a new paradigm. Blinking side AND arrow direction. All bets are off. You now have to decide whether they indeed kept them on the right side or if they innovated and it's the arrows that are right.
It's a turn signal on a car. It's not the enigma you're making it out to be. Thousands of these on the road for like a decade. Absolutely nobody is actually confused.
A whole lot of people pretending to be mystified for some reason in this thread.
Do you honestly not comprehend the difference between being able to think about this for as long as you want and post comments on HackerNews, and having to make a split-second decision while driving at high speed? Yeah, obviously System 2 gives the right answer. But what about System 1?
I don't know what else to say? I've seen them on cars. They really aren't confusing. They've been around for like a decade. Nobody seems to actually have a problem with them. Only people looking at photos of them on a website and discussing on a forum seem to be irate about it.
Just looking at the video in the tweet had me slightly confused. Arrows are powerful.
It's like those puzzles or quiz's or whatnot that have the word "red" written in a blue font. Of course everyone can read the word, but in split second decisions the brain is going to grab whichever details it can.
HomeLight is working to make US Real Estate easier for all parties involved. We are competing (quite well I might add) against some really big and well known names in real estate and have a very exciting product pipeline in the works. We have central offices in San Francisco, CA and Scottsdale, AZ as well as many branch offices across the country and COVID presented the opportunity to shift to a hybrid-distributed model (once we open our offices again later this year)
Our tech stack includes Ruby/Rails, JS/Node, GoLang, Python, React and React Native, Postgres, Redis, Kafka, Heroku, AWS, and more
Roles:
PRINCIPAL ENGINEER: Looking for our first principal engineer to take the lead on our core technologies.
DIRECTOR: Looking for a director to build out our Home Loans team to compete against modern mortgage providers (better, rocket mortgage, etc.)
ENGINEERING MANAGER: Looking for multiple EMs as we scale our team
SENIOR FRONTEND/FULL STACK/BACKEND ENGINEERS: We are scaling our team aggressively and are looking for engineers with significant experience building for the modern web.
