[speeder]

I have a 2 month old baby, and got fired from my last job after 6 months of unpaid overtime...

I am currently trying (again) to get into embedded development. I would gladly take the job of the guy that refused to make shitty software, if that means I can keep feeding my baby. Unless it would be too unethical. (I refuse to do work that will kill people, for example I won't work for Palantir, companies that make sketchy software related to flight controls or medicine or other critical applications and so on... but the car media player? yeah, I am willing to make a crappy one if I get the job, I prefer to make a good one, but if my boss want a crappy one... then what I can do? overtime to get a promotion, clearly doesn't work ;) )

[vocram]

> I refuse to do work that will kill people

Isn’t a crappy UI on a car something that could kill people?

[emodendroket]

In some abstract sense, like how you could say that you should absolutely not drive a car as you could accidentally kill a pedestrian.

[Lio]

I don't think it's all that abstract.

We know that phone using drivers perform worse than drink drivers. They regularly kill people because they're not concentrating on what's in front of them.

If you change the car's UI from something with low latency[1] to something with much greater latency[2] then you are definitely putting others at higher risk because drivers spend longer not concentrating on driving.

--

1. See button, move hand, feel large physical button, look back at road, press button, feel feedback click.

2. See screen, move hand, see screen pops up menu on hand proximity, see menu item, click menu item, miss-press try again, wait for animation, attempt to select feature but hand moves due to bump in the road, move hand again, try to select feature again, miss-press try again, wait for feedback animation, look back at road.

[emodendroket]

Then why is anyone skating for the decision to abandon buttons in the first place? The driver is responsible for paying attention to the road rather than fiddling with the radio.

[Lio]

> Then why is anyone skating for the decision to abandon buttons in the first place?

Cost.

My guess would be that manufacturers want touchscreens because they're cheaper to develop and implement than an inventory of individual physical controls.

Adding a new touchscreen widget to a car that's already in production is just an over the air software upgrade vs a very expensive redesign/recall for physical controls.

Drivers don't think through the consequences of the control system at the time of purchase or have it as a low priority compared to things like purchase price.

I think it's pretty easy to tell yourself that your not going to mess with a screen while driving but in reality it's much harder to fight that compulsion. If it wasn't then we wouldn't need the "I'm Not Driving" feature on phones.

[emodendroket]

I don't find it hard to resist the compulsion. If I'm driving, I don't look at my phone. Seems like a pretty simple rule to follow.

Anyway, I understand that they're doing it because of cost, but if you're going to start saying the guy who worked on the infotainment system has blood on his hands because he implemented some animation that takes half a second then surely the person who put a touch screen in the first place is more culpable.

[lifeisstillgood]

We completely understand - and we would all make the same decision.

Which is why (in the UK) I view the rise of strikes and unions positively - workers need to hang together - set standards that they won't go below, and also ensure the spoils are fairly shared out.

Recently the deputy governor of the bank of england said "inflation has made everyone poorer - get used to it not ask for wage increases". Which tone deafness misses the point that this is not about wanting a 10% pay increase - it's about how is society structured and how do we share the vast wealth.

The question is not how do I get more, it's how do I build a fair system that inwill be part of.

we are playing the sociopaths game as if it's the only game in town. There should be no game we all play where the rules include not feeding babies. That's a bad game

[ChuckNorris89]

>"inflation has made everyone poorer - get used to it not ask for wage increases"

Which is absolutely horseshit, because the European countries that had the least amount of inflation (besides the super wealthy Switzerland and Luxembourg), were the countries where salaries are automatically indexed with inflation, like Belgium.

So it turns out that forcing companies to increase wages by inflation is a very effective deterrent against price gouging and inflation, yet those in charge try to convince us otherwise, that we should accept lower wages for our own sake lol.

Can you believe the nerve of these people? It's disgusting, but we get what we vote for. You want better, then vote better.

[lifeisstillgood]

I did not realise there were any countries doing index linked salaries.

Nice idea

[jocaal]

> You want better, then vote better.

This doesn't help. Even if you were the guy that read all policies or whatever a candidate pushes, the vast majority if people are still just gonna vote with their emotions.