As a former driver for the Gig Economy, I can can repeat what most of you probably already know. These companies are focused on driving profits and pushing the limits of what's legal or what the government is not paying attention to. I knew way back that the so called "Safe Rides" fee, was nothing more than an running up profits much like a football team might do to make themselves look good. The rider and driver apps for Lyft and Uber have lacked severely in ease of use or contacting someone for help. Maybe they are better today, although I couldn't tell you without logging in and taking a ride.

I used to attempt to take advantage of bonuses meant to be nearly unattainable, such as using Geo fences for drivers to pick up "x" number of rides in a given geo fence to achieve a bonus for that hour. Problem is, that if a rider pulled you out of the bonus area or Geo-Fence, you're not likely to meet the required quota for a bonus. Many drivers would sign up for these and be sorely dis-appointed.

When I hear someone respond to driver complaints with, "if you don't like it, then quit," I must respond with with utter disgust. Drivers signed agreements, some more favorable than others. Theses on demand providers know that they don't have a viable service unless they have the drivers. If we we delivering newspapers, that's pretty cut and dry. Newspapers delivery has an expected route with x number of subscriptions and the pay is dependent on a set amount of cash from subscriptions and advertisements. Being an employee for an ride share, when there's not a perfect predictability for rides, means the companies need to be prepared for busier than expected.

By the way, that $1 safe rides thing, is to cover the unexpected and soaring costs that the company is unable to manage. Just think about how competitive ride sharing was when it began. These companies had to pay salaries, legal fees, background checks, and who knows how many back door deals. We'll probably never know that last one. So it stands to reason that when there are exorbitant costs, outrageous fees must accompany the regular fare.

These companies don't care a bit about safety, they care about the money going into executive's pockets. I feel bad for the riders too, because aside from all these crap fees, the riders are being conditioned for what to pay at peak times. They should be able to switch from one service to another to get the best rate, which doesn't always happen. This is in conflict with drivers and the employers, because they would both like to make more money.

I'm not sure what the right answer is to solve all of the problems, however, there is definitely a problem. The gig economy will never be fair to anyone, simply because everyone has a different view of what "Fair" is.

People are afraid of change. And with Desktop Environments lacking some key features or usability that society has come to love about windows, why would they switch. The effort should be to focus to teaching kids about Linux, so they understand that they have a choice. Or maybe, tech folks could help introduce Linux distros to their friends. If there was a single Linux Distro usable in mostly the same way as Windows, this wouldn't be of concern. It's important to educate, as well as provide familiar tools that feel natural. I don't agree with most user choices, but people like what they like and tend to learn and use software that makes life easier.

There are two distros that I like for these purposes, and they are Kubuntu, and PureOS. Yes, I'm partial to KDE, don't judge me! A few people I know have chosen Gnome Unity, but very few.

Not sure what the right answer is.

Ok, while there are many issues with the YouTube algorithm's and monetization of videos, this article is very skewed and doesn't seem to address the core issues of social media self regulation, and paying for good content that's in demand. The "Golden Age", as it's been dubbed here, is not well define. I get plenty of content from YouTube and find it quite helpful. If a content creator provides videos that I like, then watching a few ads is no big deal to me. The problem, for many, is watching so many ads gets old, when I simply want to learn about something. I believe that the educational value in YouTube is there best selling point. That said however, I get what I'd like to call, Ad Burnout: watching so many Ads, my head explodes. I constantly hit the skip button for those dumb surveys, and mute until most video ads have ended; have you noticed the ads getting shorter? Another problem is the demand for content. There so much content, and the demands are always changing. Could one of the big colleges or universities perform a study on content and demand trends have gone for the lest ten years? I think that would help both YouTube, creators, and viewers to get the most out of the platform. Finally, YouTube, doesn't answer to anyone really, except maybe the advertisers and viewers. We need competition is what I'm saying here. Without competition, you end up with Skynet. And no one is going to tell Skynet what to do. While I agree, there are some issues with the algorithms, and favoritism; There's also plenty of good content beginning to emerge. That said, Alternatives drive innovation. My guess is that this article was put together from someone terribly upset with the platform. Could this have been written by some folks over at the verge? Hell, the first link point to a damning article, longer the most people want to take time to read. Perhaps this is fallout from all of the bad press that the Verge has received over the past six months or so? Are you guys still bitter about the Bad PC Build? Get over it, and provide some better videos. And maybe do some better research about the things you're complaining about, with studies to back your claims. Not claiming that YouTube is problem free, but the Author could do a better job at organizing key data points about trends in content, Ads, and monetization in order to paint a picture, rather that regurgitating frustrations. Just my two cents.

How will FOSS Make Oracle Money? 1) Close ZFS, but leave it useable for OpenSolaris with optional Subscription or paid future improvements 2) Utilize and Maximize use of vm Technologies and offer a propriety, but corporately supported option 4) Implement Linux from within the company to lower TCO 5) Improve StarOffice and sell patching and compatibility updates, but offer security updates free And continue to use OpenOffice to figure out which features are being used, and how to improve. 6) Build a Training and Educational environment to tech users how to use your core products along with the open source products in order to send a knock punch to the Borg (Billy Boy) 7) Relicense Java, with a BSD-Like license and make it relevent again, or drop it completely. 8) Add Kernel modules for improved performance of the proprietary Oracle Database. 10) Profit.

Not quite, but I've been able to use the registry in XP well enough to control USB devices by vendor ID, device class, and permissions etc, among a few more not to mentions. All it would take is a well written root kit, by oh say, Sony? and bingo, no detection. Further, I've done the proof of concept in setting the device as keyboard led, or some type of robotic device. And I'm not even a Sys Admin! I just read a book.

Doc Brown "Great Scott Marty! Can you imagine what this will do for Pron?"
Marty - "I've got MS, who gives a ****?, Wait, is Rachel Hunter going to appear in a Delorean?"

Isn't it more like: "Use their stuff - We wont sue you for using their stuff! Promise!" Despite they want to stop everyone else from "using their stuff"? You're Welcome!

Cost of seeing your Boss' face when he realizes how much you save the company on the new spam platform? Priceless. Oops, that's not a happy face!

I wonder how many people will think it's ok to have unprotected sex because they've either had the Vaccine or they figure they can have a Marrow Transplant from a donor that has the CCR5 receptor mutation. The CCR5 mutation is soo rare however that very few people could even consider it. One has to wonder if this can be introduced via artificial insemination thus creating a baby who might have natural resistance to HIV. The Vaccine would only be interesting to those doing Drugs, those sleeping around, and those afraid of their partners doing the first two. I jest, however as this is not only important to these groups, but you'd think adults could handle sexual responsibility, wait.... So my question then becomes, Do parents rely on gene therapy whic could have fewer side effects or just say F--- it, let the Wedlock child take the cheap vaccine. This is the cultural reality, is it not?

In some organizations, the suits view open source like gambling. This isn't because itis truly gambling, but rather they've never considered paying for support from open source vendors,
many of which would be glad to work for a buck. Oh Wait, they kinda do to some extent! What a novel thought! Paying for Support or Lifecycle support... Obviously this doesn't mean
that they have to hire someone from a project, but rather pay a retainer for support in a similar way that M$ gets paid for LTS. Finally, if someone can't ADAPT, then dare I say it? They
may not know what they're doing. If this company has hired competent individuals with the ability to be creative and organized, then open source should thrive here.

This seems to be a common issue in Tech Support as there are so many variations of what tech support really means in IT Language.

Take myself for example. I work in a more corporate position during the day providing technical support on a wide variety of products from
internal apps to Windows Products to networking. There's no development done here but the opportunity is available as the employer is
attempting to increase performance at a minimal cost. This means that Tier support has the opportunity to shine with new roles added
responsibilties which may include light development or preparation/training projects.

In another posistion, I'm responsible for setting up network communications on client pc's.

No script is involved in either position, but you can appreciate the difference in skill levels needed. For all purposes I'm Tier one at both positions at rebputable companies, but clearly one overshadows the other with regard to skill level. If I was to move on to a development job, I would work at honing my skills where the opportunities are frequent and more challenging. My other position is basically to hang out and wait for people to swing by for a few minor issues. Not the reference material I want for a more advanced technical position. What you could take from this is that, you want to find positions where your skill level is tapped in a stressful environment and you fly through it with ease. You may find this within your current company or, dare I say, another help desk/desk side position defined with more of a leadership/advanced skills roles. Basically, prospective employers want you to prove to them that you're qualified.

Noting the degree, you're going to have to word it differently based on what little you've told us. Basically you need to mix salesmen with
tech guru in a balanced way and only talk to the points where you're interviews become challenging. You could explain to your
interviewers that you're being considered for other positions to create a sense of urgency but this is looked down upon in the tech field.
People who use this tactic to get hired usually can't back up their work, so you'd better know your stuff from the get go.