I think the optimal solution to the hiring problem requires trying out the actual relationship. It's similar to dating. Predicting the long-term success of a relationship based on a first date is sub-optimal.
A service that provides this "trial relationship" could work. When I'm looking for a new job, I could do one hour per day of real work for a few companies. After five days, both employer and prospective employee will have a better understanding of each other than a single day of interviews allows.
There's practical concerns. Companies certainly wouldn't give prospective employees full access to internal codebases or data. Companies would have to break off small tasks which could devolve into throw-away take-home assignments. Employees at the company would have to endure the annoyance of dealing with prospective hires. It might be worth it for everyone.
This is sadly rife for abuse. Why hire anyone? You can just string enough candidates along to possibly not work a full solution but it could be a first line or give you a fair number of prototypes. Granted I don't know that this could ever be viable but companies would sure try because free work > paying any amount. I think most of us understand the phrase 'you get what you pay for' and yet I've personally seen many individuals and companies believe they're getting a steal.
I feel like there are a few good ideas. I personally love the idea of work related assignments but only if the result is actually measured. If I don't get the job I know I've wasted my time and I can handle that. What I can't handle is giving me a task and completely ignoring the results. What will that signal to me about day to day operations? That you'll likely ignore the very real value I bring to your organization on a consistent basis. That's a big enough red flag for me to stop everything and walk right out the door. If I'm supposed to extend the courtesy of not wasting the interviewers time I expect at least some attempt at that same courtesy.
What's the best way to have the OnStar, Car-net, etc hardware removed from the vehicle? I don't want my car connected to the fucking internet. I'm tempted to just pry out the hardware myself, but am curious if the dealer or mechanics will do it for you.
I don't think scarcity indicates anything more than a supply-demand imbalance. Some people buy products in this area just to resell even if they don't actually want it. It's tough to make an apples to apples comparison when one company artificially limited the early supply while the others didn't.
Serious question: are the growth numbers scrutinized? How exactly are they calculated? It seems like down-playing growth numbers pre-IPO could leave more room for "awesome growth" in the first few post-IPO years. Maybe switch the way the numbers are calculated at the appropriate times.
None of those companies are start-ups. Companies that are truly start-ups have little to zero revenue and little to zero name recognition. The companies you mentioned have passed the start-up phase but have yet to reach the Goliath phase (Amazon, Google, etc). They all have/had escape velocity and are/were on the upwards trajectory.
Well yeah, but they were at least more of a "startup" a few years ago when I wanted to work there. My main point was: look how they turned out despite the hype or industry experts predictions.
I found the initial experience very compelling, too. Unfortunately, that initial thrill wears off fast. I challenge you to buy a Vive and report back in a few months with your daily usage level.
My daily usage level has dropped, but mostly it is due to the lack of new interesting software. When you read this thread, or /r/Vive or anywhere else, it's always the same story: people talking enthusiastically about games that came out months ago. The same ones, over and over. Space Pirate Trainer. Holopoint. H3VR. Job Simulator.
Have had the Vive since 1 month after launch, use it almost every day for a few hours. Just got Elite Dangerous set up as well so I expect to be using it even more. Other games I usually play are smashbox arena, and Onward, as well as Holopoint, Space Pirate Trainer, Audio Shield and Audio Beats. Tilt brush is also amazing for drawing in. There is so much content to play its great.
The current VR/AR situation is nowhere near the iTunes app store situation when it was taking off in 2008-2010. The most notable difference is visible adoption of the technology. By 2009, non-tech peers and relatives were spending more time consuming content on their iPhones and iPod Touches than I was as a developer. You'd see more smartphones everyday just walking around.
I work in San Francisco in an office with multiple tech companies. VR/AR is about 99.9% invisible. It's occasionally mentioned by developers/gamers upon returning from GDC. Otherwise, it's completely off peoples' radars. I think the technology has potential, but claiming it's "the next iPhone" is inaccurate. It remains to be seen.
Indeed, I think AR glasses will replace at least the display portion of smartphones. If I had to guess, the progression would go something like this: Initially, it will be glasses connected to the smartphone. Then, glasses connected to a watch-like device. Finally, just the glasses.
I touched on this before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12104656. Imagine waiting in an airport and browsing instagram or watching videos on a relatively large, private display via glasses. The tiny, visible-by-others smartphone display would look very primitive in comparison.
If the actual work is going well, you can try working under someone else, in a different department, etc. Of course, no one should be treated like this in the workplace. However, it happens because the workplace can really suck.
A service that provides this "trial relationship" could work. When I'm looking for a new job, I could do one hour per day of real work for a few companies. After five days, both employer and prospective employee will have a better understanding of each other than a single day of interviews allows.
There's practical concerns. Companies certainly wouldn't give prospective employees full access to internal codebases or data. Companies would have to break off small tasks which could devolve into throw-away take-home assignments. Employees at the company would have to endure the annoyance of dealing with prospective hires. It might be worth it for everyone.