Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | snapetom's commentslogin

I worked at a hospital in that timeframe and they rolled out Teams. Up until they, shadow IT teams were running Slack just fine.

Man, what a horrendous pile of crap Teams was back then. The Slack teams were griping that they should just buy Slack, but Teams was the "enterprise solution." The problems were amplified during remote COVID work. Teams is fine now, but how many corporations went through years of frustration just because some IT decision maker said "Teams. Because it's enterprise."


Yeah that's the thing. Management who made the deals are never put into that frustration, or very rarely, and I always wonder, at least for the big corporations, if there is any greasy palms...

Manager humans will sell out your workflow,

and indeed your entire workplace,

for as little as a steak dinner.


Man, at least make a few dinners…

Teams is still a horrendous pile of crap. It's just that you've gotten used to the stench. It has few redeeming qualities other than, "we don't have to pay for another subscription" and that's not even the case in the EU.

Yeah but today you can at least have a video call more or less normally. Back then it was a hiccup after a hiccup, it was impossible to work normally, and yet orgs pushed it down everybody's throats as it was bundled.

Definitely. Besides the performance issues, back then, Teams barely had any features. One example was that it wouldn't show you who was talking. First time we had a call was with 30 people and I remember a manager calling out a director responsible for this decision jokingly saying, "and you don't know who I am because Team doesn't show you who's talking."

The UI is an overengineered mess and I'd rather use literally anything else, but to say it's still unusable is disingenuous.


I'd imagine it's not just the research quests, but it's submissions for new stops, too.

My friend did this. He always took pictures of his feet. He was banned from submitting scans and Wayfarer for a few years. He just got access back.

We joke that maybe PoGo didn't get any benefit from his data, but someone did.


They introduced user-created communities a few months ago. They had problems with squatting and splintering, which might have played a role in their annoucement.

Argh. Also quite irritated. I had 50/50 transitioned over to it despite the lower traffic because it was a calm oasis. The thing about bots is believable, though, because you could already see it happening. Dead Internet has been real for a while, and I'd love to seem Kevin and Alex do a followup on this.

Yeah. Sadly the default communities were flooded with blog spam, and that's just the part I noticed. A couple days ago a bunch of smaller communities also got a noticeable bump in members. That didn't change anything in my own community, but others apparently weren't so lucky.

I can see why the team got overwhelmed. I wouldn't want to have to deal with that.


This is good stuff, thanks. We all know that Amazon, Google, Meta, etc. did a ridiculous amount of hiring these past 10 years. Non-tech people don't understand how absurd this all was. Now that AI is being blamed for these layoffs, they're buying into the "AI will replace all of us" hype.

I'm not going to speak for OP, but I definitely remember it also being a rallying cry for Bluesky too. "No one person can control the network blah blah blah"

That's not at all incompatible with Bluesky having a funded company with a CEO.

The term they use for this is "credible exit" - designing the entire protocol such that if the company itself misbehaves the affected users can leave to a separate instance without losing their relationships or data.


Bluesky's claims of being decentralised were always way way ahead of the de-facto reality of it. That's not the same as Mastodon.

It has been a "rallying cry" but it doesn't stand up to much scrutiny of how Bluesky actually functions: an "open protocol" with one central server means little. Maybe this will change at some point in the future, and maybe it is changing, see https://blacksky.community/ . But this is not the same as Mastodon, where it's been that way for a while.


> Assignments that require original thinking and regular engagement can reduce incentives to cheat and improve learning outcomes.

At some point in college when I was thinking about law school, I learned about the Socratic Method. It was weird because up to that point in college, I just pretty much flew under the radar and took exams. It was far different than high school, and I realized my high school did pretty much use the Socratic Method. It wasn't as intense as law school, but every class, maybe 4-5 people would we grilled by teachers. This was called "participation."

Shy? Anxiety? Yeah, that didn't matter. Your number would eventually be up a few times a month. You had to prepare and know the assignments, otherwise your grade would suffer and public humiliation was a real thing.


In vet med, case studies are still pretty important, but that's because vet med is in its infancy compared to human medicine. At least one case study, usually two, are required to be eligible to take boards. Future board renewals, I think for most boards, are "published one original piece of research or two case studies" among a slew of other requirements.


Original HN discussion about the case:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46789205


Thank you, this really adds the missing context to this update about fictional case studies. The original read was compelling and also alarming.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: