Recent submissions

Comment · 2 years ago
Key paragraph (from the original FT article):

> The issue has arisen from idle cash sitting in customer accounts at brokerage firms and large banks, which “sweep” otherwise uninvested funds into interest-bearing alternatives in order to generate income. The SEC is looking into whether the firms steered those clients into sweep accounts that paid little or no interest, and whether the financial advisers at those groups had a fiduciary duty to advise clients they could make higher returns if they moved their cash into other accounts.

Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 5 years ago
I’m not sure where you’re starting from, but this seems like a reasonable progression to start with:

(1) A video about how the immune system works: https://youtu.be/fSEFXl2XQpc

(2) An infographic from FDA explaining the EUA process: https://www.fda.gov/media/143890/download

(3) Reports from the Advisory Committee on Immunization describing evidence of effectiveness for the various vaccines. For example, Moderna’s: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm695152e1.htm

(Important caveats: I have family and friends who work in healthcare and drug discovery, so I’ve got a tiny bit of layperson background on this, but this is far from my field and I’m far from an expert)

Comment · 5 years ago
Comment · 6 years ago
Comment · 7 years ago
The author doesn’t spend much time on _why_ re-orgs “almost always make some people unhappy, cause employee departures, and stifle productivity,” but I’d claim it’s organizational politics. Every re-org has winners and losers, almost by definition: there can only be so many people in charge, and likewise not everyone can work on that cool new feature. This is particularly true in relatively stagnant organizations: your best chance to move up the hierarchy as a manager might be during the once-in-a-blue-moon re-org. _Of course_ zero-sum shifts in organizational status of a bunch of imperfect human beings are going to be political.

The central thesis seems to be that by “involving the team members that would be effected from the beginning and making it their decision,” the discomfort around re-orgs will be avoided.

I might be missing something obvious from the article, but I have a hard time believing that adding more imperfect humans (in fact, all of the imperfect humans the organization has!) into the mix and letting teams self-organize would reduce awkward politics rather than making them worse.

Comment · 7 years ago
Comment · 8 years ago
That does not match my experience (but n=1 and all).

In my case, the result of the sleep study where I didn't really sleep was, "hmm ... it looks like you might have insomnia." (No kidding). No drugs were offered -- or forced -- during the study.

Comment · 8 years ago
Comment · 8 years ago

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton