They probably did post that link, but HN helpfully rewrote it to point to old Reddit, which is usually better than new Reddit, but also doesn't get updated with new functionality like this.
It's amazing to watch absurdly futuristic tech from 1960's TV become reality. I'm used to seeing that from Star Trek, but this one is from "The Prisoner".
It is because you are looking for remote work. Drop that, and you'll quickly succeed. Linked In reports that remote jobs get double the number of applicants. I'd say most people have no idea how much harder it is to land a remote job.
I understand that remote is a problem. But I am settled in India and I do not have much options at the moment. Unless I decide to leave my family and go somewhere else for the job. That is something that is eating me...
> But I am settled in India and I do not have much options at the moment.
Anecdotally, my last engineering manager (in a mid-sized North American company) was also from India. He was recruited by another Indian colleague in that company, who flew him over for a 3-month or so trial period I think. Once he was official, he was then able to move his entire family over and now they all live with him in Canada. Presumably he gets paid better than he did in India too, though costs of living are also higher here.
Just in case that's something you might be willing to consider? It would probably suck for your family to get uprooted like that though :(
There have been plenty of moments in history where if a country doesn't resort to conscription then it won't continue to exist. If a country exists in a rough neighborhood, then its people must, unfortunately, expect to be enslaved for a few years of their life. In some ways, humanity has made little progress in the last hundred years. It's a shame that some large countries continue to have leaders that are so determined to expand the size of their country no matter the cost. It's also a shame that so many countries continue to trade with such tyrants.
This is why it's so important to have a nuclear deterrent. If Russia were to invade the UK, and there was no hope of a volunteer military defending us, I strongly hope our politicians would have the courage to use our entire nuclear arsenal. Regardless of death toll, this is morally superior to enslaving people.
I understand this, to some extent, but I would rather learn Russian and get along with a new set of completely uncaring oligarchs, not that dissimilar to the ones we have now, than end all life on earth.
It wouldn't even end all life in the involved countries. Submitting to military aggression is also morally wrong. Nuclear retaliation is a heroic sacrifice that does good to the rest of the world by discouraging future wars.
Furthermore, it's no longer medieval times, where the citizens are personally loyal to a king who is expected to be replaced by another king some time. The invention of nationalism guarantees civilian resistance, so the only way to safely rule a subjugated country in modern times is with a brutal North Korean-style regime.
Ukraine seems to be trying to find a middle ground here. Until recently, they only drafted men over the age of 27 (last month it was lowered to 25). Of course, even that age is still going to wreck your demographics. On the other hand, I'm not sure that retired old people have enough stamina to last long on the battlefield. Many of Ukraine's units have been fighting for over a year with no R&R.
All Soviet countries fell into sharp demographic/fertility collapse in the 90s when the USSR collapsed, and most never entirely pulled out of it, including Ukraine. So most have severe demographic issues in the ~20-30 year old range. Conscripting this group is reckless for these nations, because not only are there not many of them, but they're who should be creating the next generations. Here is Ukraine's population pyramid [1]. For contrast this is what an extremely healthy population pyramid looks like. [2]
There's probably no single cause for such a short average tenure length. However, Marcus Lemonis always blames high turnover on bad management. Every time a boss tries to argue with that premise he immediately shuts them down.
Let's try to enumerate possible causes for short tenures:
* Actual job was not the thing promised in the interview
* Hired person and work environment do not "click"
* Got a better paid offer after N months
* Hired person was not up to the task and fired
* Work environment was toxic
* Hired person was toxic
And probably a few more.
In all these cases, IMO there is a much bigger responsibility on the company,because they are the stronger side and the one that has the last word on hiring someone. So, it ends up being manager's fault.
Having been a hiring manager myself, I can only excuse the manager in the case of a really, really, good faker during the interview phase. But those are not the norm.
> and the one that has the last word on hiring someone
False. A lot of times, companies make an offer which are then rejected by a candidate because they have another better offer. Maybe not in 2024, but it was very common until 2022.
If you wanna split hairs - "Hiring" happens only when a contract is signed between a candidate and a company. A candidate can choose not to sign, thus preventing hiring process to complete.
In the spirit of the overall thread, specifically re: your comment "IMO there is a much bigger responsibility on the company,because they are the stronger side and the one that has the last word on hiring someone." - a company is not always on the stronger side. In 2021, a lot of workers had the upper hand.
It still doesn't matter that much when talking about short average tenure. Obviously in a hot market it is going to be more complicated for companies to retain talent, but being a successful company is not an easy task in any case.
Average tenure does not indicate how long someone lasted before leaving the company. If you double the company size in a year you've almost certainly suppressed average tenure to below a year.
You should mention something about your content moderation or "community guidelines". I'm sure you'll (if you haven't already) establish appropriate policies to ensure you don't wind up hosting illegal content. You might even want to consider doling out "blue checkmarks" for trusted video producers.
On what seemed to be the final button click, I got an error message. Perhaps clicking that last button should result in the button somehow indicating the app is processing the results so that people don't click the button again.
You should try to come up with some yardstick for measuring your monthly results. If you can show that you've been delivering value for your subscribers in the past month, and how your paying users could have cashed in using that information, then that might persuade some free users to start paying.
https://store.atariage.com/products/adventure-plus-atari-260...
reply