> The UX was not great... not to mention that it was mostly in Korean. I had a lot of trouble. They didn't strike me as the most professional operation..
What does the seemingly very common-sense fact that a South Korean app was "mostly"(?) in Korean have to do with the UX or with it not being "professional"?
What language were you expecting the South Korean app to be in, French?
Surely there's no obligation to internationalize your app, but taxis are commonly used by tourists so you'd imagine it would be a good business decision.
The common language most often used when people from Japan, China, or South Korea visit each other’s countries is English. All three groups of people are more likely to know English than either of the other two languages. The same can be said for the remaining group that doesn’t include people from those three countries.
> Imagine supporting the 2nd most popular language in the world. CRAZY right?
Why are you fixating on supporting the 2nd most popular language, shouldn't it support the 1st most popular language first? Or why not jump straight to the 3rd?
also, if you add internationalization support for 1 language in your app, it’s trivial (these days) to add other languages. My point is they should just add support for other languages, like chinese, japanese, english, etc.
(X) Positional *tracking* is brittle, equal battalions in range XNUMX it expenditure a time effort per batch on item.
Object is incorrectly threaded return request is here.
[FINE] [Returns] [Add...]
>Still more usable than Google Maps though, which will only give you a not so good train schedule. No walking directions at all.
That's interesting, because Google Maps here in Japan is absolutely fantastic: train schedules are always correct (and updated with delays etc.), walking directions are good, etc. I guess having a big office here in Tokyo is a big part of this.
The translating part is by far the hardest. But there are services to organize a crowd sourced translations of your app / service.
Booth android and iOS app building frameworks will try to force you into using variables for every rendered string (allowing you to change them easily and in one place - f.ex. based on user / device settings).
They don't operate in Korea but they do provide Korean translations which seems to suggest they consider inbound tourists as a target market. It is quite telling the Korean apps do not.
Uber attempted to operate in Korea and failed. At that point keeping a Korean translation would have been a simple matter of maintaining and updating it for the small returns that it brought in, coupled with the knowledge that simply maintaining a Korean translation for their vastly more entrenched service ensured no chance of competition from one of the few non-American firms to succeed in the same space as them.
It seems antithetical to the spirit of releasing a book about Tor and "future of privacy", and to then not only watermark each PDF, but to not explicitly state that this is the case, let alone explain why.
I initially read this as there being tracking pixels in the PDF. I'm hate that I have to ask this, but are tracking pixels a thing in the PDF format? (Execluding embedded js, ofc)
Can PDFs be crafted such that they would ping remote servers when opened in most PDF viewers?
I agree it seems a bit scummy, yet likely unavoidable for the author due to the way MIT Press distributes things.
It's thankfully licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0, which allows for converting the content to other formats (given attribution and non-commercial use, same license, etc etc) [0]. I'd reckon that making a de-fingerprinted version and redistributing it as an epub, md, or pdf again would be allowed, then.
As for getting a clean copy to work from, using Tor would be quite fitting. I plan to convert the version I downloaded to epub for ereader use, maybe downloading it a couple times over different routes and combining to see if that has any impact on the fingerprinting. I'll comment with a download if I get to that and feel it's of a quality worth sharing.
> This discussion is about subscriptions but the general idea applies to so much more – basic budgeting, retirement savings, not paying random fees, not paying interest, moving spare money to investment accounts every month, rebalancing your investments every quarter, negotiating rents, negotiating your salary.
I think it's one of the major failures of the education system. Why is there no class in school which covers taxes, savings, budgeting, etc? People are seemingly just expected to know this on their own.
Most subjects taught in K-12 tend to be ancient: language, math, history, science, music, etc. with occasional modern electives.
Obviously personal finance is also ancient on some level, but I wonder how long it's actually been so complicated and critical as to warrant consideration for being taught in school. I'm no expert, but I think the complexities like payment cards, insanely complex tax code, etc. are quite modern. On the other hand, the same could be said for driver's ed which is pretty common.
When I was in grade school (a very long time ago), personal finance was a huge focus. It was the main thing you learned in Home Economics class. When my kids were in grade school, it was basically not taught at all. Home Ec was more about sewing and cooking than about, you know, economics.
I don't know when that change happened, but it's to the detriment of everyone.
Would the kinds of people who have trouble budgeting and managing their investments be any better at it if the technique was taught at school? Judging from my own experience, I'd say willpower is the bigger barrier. Thankfully I'm not in a situation where I'd need to carefully watch my daily expenses (being semi-concious of them works well for me), but if I had to, I'd have to force myself. Maybe that's too much for some.
Probably because people don't pay attention. I had someone at university that asked the same question, why didn't we have these classes be required. Our school required it and they were in the same class as me. They just didn't bother to pay attention to even know they had taken it.
IF you don't know the basics of math you won't figure out personal finance. If you do know math you can figure it out - that isn't saying you will, but you can.
If you believe this, you presumably also believe that companies should be able to enforce this, yes? Which means what, hiring private investigators (or having an in-house investigations team) to monitor employees after business hours? So you either support surveilling staff after-hours, or you think the policy merits existing but doesn't merit follow-through and enforcement?
> So you either support surveilling staff after-hours, or you think the policy merits existing but doesn't merit follow-through and enforcement?
Or, I believe, pragmatically that it is seldom enforced and is seldom a problem, but is a useful clause for the company when a employee really is taking the piss.
> FWIW most airports I’ve visited have a staff canteen that’s actually open to everyone, albeit hidden.
Could you please list which airports you've been to have this, and where it is located in them?
It's not that I doubt airports have staff canteens, it's more that I have trouble believing anyone can just waltz into them. And a casual web search brings up only results about one airport actually having one open to the public.
I’ve avoided flying like the plague for several years now.
But I don’t remember having trouble doing this in Europe or Canada.
It’s not publicly advertised because airports prefer you go to the overpriced airside concessions they can charge obscene rents for, and airport workers just know where it is; they don’t look it up.
Next time you fly, ask a janitor or other airport employee (the ones in the shops don’t always know and/or eat at the concessions because they have discounts) and see for yourself. It was typically ground staff, janitors, security guards, baggage throwers, public transit employees eating there.
But I guess this is outside the check-in area, isn't it? Beyond the whole check-in, passport check etc point, everything is pretty thoroughly locked in and regulated. The only place I could accidentally leave that area was in Casablanca. I doubt it'd work at Schiphol or Frankfurt.
> Why does a plastic-wrapped turkey sandwich cost $15
Because people keep paying for them.
The fault of price gouging lies firmly with consumers. If consumers are willing to tolerate ridiculous prices, then guess what, vendors are going to keep charging ever-higher ridiculous prices. Why in the world would they not?
If no one, or at least much fewer, people were willing to shell out $15 for a sandwich, then that sandwich would not cost $15.
If you're going to be hungry, bring food with you to the airport. If you don't want to deal with being hassled while going through security about it, then eat it before you go through security. It's very simple.
Sure there are always going to be exceptions--flight delays, you're running late, your kids' blood sugar is dipping, etc, but if you adhere to this very basic principle more often than not, sandwich prices will go down.
I agree with all of your points, but in cases of monopoly or oligopoly you can't place all of the blame on the consumer. It seems like a simple way for this problem to fix itself is for the Port Authority to allow more competition among concessionaires in the terminals; the article doesn't make it clear how much competition there really is.
As noted elsewhere in this thread, the Port Authority is one of the most corrupt government organizations you could find, so it would be unsurprising if it ended up being that there were two or three parent companies behind all the concessionaires.
Why are you advocating sensitivity to the giant corporation here? If there's a defense its "we don't allow random employees to access these records, and anytime an access is performed we audit the access including interviewing the responsible employee and reviewing call recordings. If the access was for anything other than an approved reason we fire the employee."
I feel conflicted whenever I see a comment like this.
On the one hand, let's assume it's true: a Paytm employee acted negligently.
But on the other hand, what if it's not true? What if you happen to have a friend or family member who works for a Paytm competitor, or you have some grudge against Paytm for whatever reason, and are instead spreading low-key FUD about the company to make it seem like they have lax data controls and staff disregard for sensitive data?
The issue is that there doesn't really seem to be a way to substantiate your anecdote.
Let's assume it's true: a Paytm employee acted negligently.
Not negligently - maliciously.
The employee knew exactly what they're doing, that it was "wrong" in any conventional sense -- and most likely a huge liability to their career and reputation if it got found out.
most people can't handle it as a career and it has low barriers to entry, so many people do it as an early job. I have met several 10x call center people, and it can be an incredibly lucrative career. It's effectively low level social engineering. It requires extraordinary levels of grit.
From personal experience, people will do anything they are physically capable of doing and think they can get away with. Almost nobody I know has the slightest amount of respect for any private data to which they have access. This extends from people in healthcare breaking HIPAA to tell me about how Jane Doe is an idiot who got a mayo jar stuck in her vagina to IT workers showing me John Doe's cringey nude selfies. Trust absolutely no one. If it's possible, it's happening. The goal should be able to make it not possible to the best extent and when it is, create accountability.
> Almost nobody I know has the slightest amount of respect for any private data to which they have access.
Really? You need to run with a better set of people. It's true that there are plenty of corrupt, terrible people out there -- but it's also true that there are plenty who aren't.
This is what makes the lie more potent. It’s based on a kernel of truth, and because it reinforces beliefs, you can easily believe a Paytm employee acted negligently, with no more evidence than an anecdote.
Oh please. The comment was less about PayTM and more about tech companies being blasé about data privacy in general.
If I had a friend or family member who was an employee of such a publicly facing tech company, I’d be grilling them about their data security and privacy practices. I’ve been burned enough times by Indian companies so ridiculously free with their data sharing that I’ve stopped giving out my contact info to everything but the most essential of services.
Most Indians will lean towards believing the GP because they know how aggressively their personal data is being abused, unless Paytm comes out with concrete details of how they protect privacy inside and outside the firm.
I didn’t even realize Paytm was a real company when reading OP. It sounded like a generic name made up for purpose, like “Jane Doe” for payment companies.
This is why rule of law is important. India has weak rule of law... there's no confidence from anyone that wrongdoing will be punished and there's no confidence that making up stuff to hurt a competitor will be punished.
Given what I've seen I have absolutely no problem believing this. If you don't then that's fine but that simply means you've been living a sheltered life. Have a look at the GDPR enforcement tables for some choice violations.
So you trust a for-profit more then an aneedote by a customer of them? I am sure you'd also forcefully vaccinate your loved ones if $authority told you to do so, right?
In my experience, everything bad you can imagine, a for-profit has already done.
> But nope, they pretty much say: "We know you're skilled because we have requirement of 90k/year, but we don't want skilled workers to be able to stay here, because go somewhere else". Well, ok, Iceland..
Correct. It's not a difficult concept to grasp, especially as they are being very overt about it. They don't want foreigners settling into their country. They want foreigners coming in for a short time, pumping money into it, then buggering off.
Correct. It is very explicitly targeting tourists who want to stay for more than 90 days, up to 180 days. Basically this is a convoluted method of extending tourism to rich tourists for a longer (specifically, a double) period of time to have them pump more of their money into the country. That's all.
What does the seemingly very common-sense fact that a South Korean app was "mostly"(?) in Korean have to do with the UX or with it not being "professional"?
What language were you expecting the South Korean app to be in, French?