"Dear McMoo corporate or regional management, I've noticed an operations issue at a McMoo location, which I think probably affects many of your locations. I think the issue might be denying your management accurate data signals, while adversely affecting customer experience and brand, and unnecessarily increasing stress to your workers. [...]"

Sometimes it's worth writing such a letter. If I were in corporate, I'd want that serendipitous letter, about something important I didn't know. (Well, unless my promotion was riding on the worker metrics program I proposed being seen as a success, and my bosses believe more in perfect winning success with the very first shot, than they do in iterative refinement and learning.)

It's more uplifting to write letters of praise for an employee/location. I wrote one recently, to a big national chain. The only tricky part I've found is that I try to imagine corporate rules that might've been violated. For example, I might not want to say, "I told your employee my special-needs child loves your multinational chain ketchup, and the employee immediately fashioned a toy dog out of a dozen ketchup packets, and handed it to my delighted child, all while singing a song from a Disney movie." (In my imagination, that could get the employee written up 6 different ways.)

In one kind of scenario, the freeing up of the seat has to be more discreet/subtle, and if there's a likely sense you did it intentionally, then an unspoken tone of "hey, I'm getting off the train, and this seat is free" or "I got your back, buddy", and maybe a hint of deferential respect if they're significant older than you (but not like you're calling them "old").

I'm sympathetic to criticisms of car-centric infrastructure and regulations, but the human/motor-powered bikes and scooters in just 2 years have lost any political high ground, by en masse behaving like the historically worst car drivers.

And you can no longer separate bicyclists from the motorized regulation-circumventing bikes and scooters, when (in my thousands of hours of anecdotal observations) human-powered bikes are mimicking the behaviors of the motorized.

Regarding injuries, I don't think we will have good stats yet, but random data point I happened to bookmark, from this company's town:

https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/08/07/e-bike-rider-inflict...

A couple other relevant non-HN links:

https://macleans.ca/longforms/menace-on-the-streets/

https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1v0mboz/er_do...

1. For over a year, the rate of bicyclists and motorized bikes/scooters I see running red lights has escalated to the point where it is highly unusual that I see one not run a red. Yesterday, for example, a bike, at speed, aimed through a crowded crosswalk, not missing pedestrians by much. Also yesterday, while I was crossing in crosswalk after waiting for light, one of those heavy motorized bikes with the huge fat tires larger than some motorcyles plowed through long after the red.

2. Some (not the majority, unlike running reds) bikes and motorized treating busy sidewalks as special highways, which they use at speed. You can see this, for example, on Mass. Ave., especially between Harvard and Porter, when they can't always run reds on the street. (Incidentally, having Blue Bike rental stations on the sidewalk might encourage this among the riders of those, by desensitizing and confusing about riding on sidewalk.) I used to walk miles of Mass. Ave. almost daily, but last summer it got to the point that it was normal on a walk to get blown past by at least one bike or motorized bike/scooter on the sidewalk that was going fast enough to cripple or kill me if it hit me.

3. Some of the various kinds of protected bike lanes make it harder for pedestrians to see car traffic, to cross in a crosswalk. (Combine this with the prevalence of parked large SUVs now, blocking the view of both pedestians and moving vehicles further.) A few times a day, I can't even cross the street without leading with my left hand out, because I can't see the traffic, and reckless people on vehicles, are normal now. One of these days, I'm going to either narrowly miss a crippling/lethal crash because of that hand, or injure my left hand/arm first, because too many people are reckless and we have worse visibility than we used to.

As a walker who isn't a huge fan of cars, in a city that earned the term "Massholes" for how they drive, I can tell you that, in the last two years, IME, the car drivers behave much better than the overwhelming majority of people on bikes and motorizes bikes/scooters. There's still some red-running by cars, but it's nowhere near the standard-operating-procedure recklessness of the people who now think they can use the bike lanes, streets, and sidewalks as their personal Autobahn, and that pedestrians can always be dodged safely.

Politically, when walkers in a Masshole city start side with cars, and walkers suddenly feel a lot less solidarity with their bicyclist cousins, then you should suspect there's a big new problem.

It used to be that bicyclists rightly felt they had to look out for themselves, because they were in constant danger from the "I'm a car guy" mayor town drivers, and a lot of people sympathized with bicyclists. Now it looks like bicyclists (and the motorized bikes/scooters who've joined them) are the arrogant/smug, get-yours danger to others.

I speculate the cause is the combination of all the new "bike lane" infrastructure, and all the new motorized regulation-subverting vehicles seeking to take advantage of that infrastructure, followed by traditional bicyclists taking their behavior cues from the prevailing "bike" behavior.

A wave of new students arrives in town over the next 2-3 weeks, many of them with bikes and motorized bike/scooters, and they'll immediately adopt and reinforce the apparent de facto rules for how to operate their vehicle on the streets and sidewalks.

BTW, this LoudBicycle.com "Bike Bureau" seems to be an SEO thing by the makers of a 125 dB horn for bicyclists. If someone uses that horn in the company's own "walking friendly" dense town of Boston, I hope no one without hearing protection is hit by the blast. https://thedailyautomotive.com/how-loud-is-a-car-horn/

And commercially-available data: enterprise salespeople, for example, can buy this intel from data brokers (directly, or with layered services catering to sales funnels specifically).

It's another way that surveillance capitalism can be a national security threat against the US. You have countless US companies collectively mapping out people networks and assembling often intimate dossiers on individuals... and saving international organized crime and geopolitical adversaries a ton of work, which they might not have the resources to otherwise do.

AFAIK, many (most?) people can pick up on subtle cues that something is off in that person's behavior, in their expressions, body language, how and where they look and don't, etc. And the experiment intentionally draws bystanders' attention, so many of those cues will in their sight.

Perhaps this is another "further research".

> If unexpected yet non-threatening events

Culturally, in some cities, some people would wonder whether the person in the Batman costume is mentally ill and a threat (how much, varying partly on how good of actors the two are, and how they play it). This will activate modes of thinking, possibly including thoughts of protecting others. Possibly compounding this, if the photo is during an experiment, then that suggests that, although "Batman" enters "from another door", he ends up standing right next to "pregnant woman", and therefore possibly a threat to the woman.

It would help to know how the person who gave up their seat then positioned themselves, and whether they kept an eye on Batman. Might also help to know how other people visibly reacted to Batman, other then generic unexpected event. Maybe you could get some sense of this with analysis of good video coverage, or, more subjectively, with one or more skilled intuitive observers.

Also, if the photo was obtained with a non-hidden camera, during the experiment, did people noticing someone taking photos affect their behavior?

Or could the prosocial behavior be prompted not by the unexpected merely disrupting one's internal patterns, but by one's awareness of others suddenly paying more attention (not everyone immersed in phones/tablets/books/earbuds) activating more prosocial behavior?

Or the disruption of the social context for others making it culturally easier to offer your seat? More distraction, shared experience in lighthearted moment, whatever.

(If you've been in the usual seat-giving-up situation in a crowded subway car, culturally, you might be almost embarrassed to offer your seat, not wanting the attention, nor to be seen as seeking praise, nor to embarrass anyone else who didn't give up their seat. You might start to get up, in such as way as to block a person who looks like they might grab it, and open up a path to the person you intend to offer it to, as you get their attention, maybe you say something like "ma'am" only loud enough for them to hear, as you gesture, they probably accept and say thank you, "no problem", then you walk away, as well as you can walk away in a subway car.)

That job market era is past, but now I think of LinkedIn as a serendipity lottery ticket. Because you're on LinkedIn, some founder or hiring manager or legitimate recruiter doing a keyword search stumbles upon you, some past colleague can see you're available, etc.

(Though the last recruiter I agreed to a call with there sounded possibly delegated to LLM, then said his colleague would be doing the call. On the recruiting firm's Web site, I saw the colleague's title was Customer Success, so the recruiter wasn't even willing in invest in the call like I was. Also on their site, they had an infographic example placement success... and the featured example was into what might be the most infamous tech company right now. I bowed out of that one last week, but I'm keeping the LinkedIn lottery ticket.)

You could read some general reference/guide/tutorial documentation on CSS, and then probably solve your problem (without searching for "how to center a div", or whatever your exact problem was, and copy&pasting the answer and moving on), also becoming more knowledgeable in the process.

The rest of the short blog post has some good points, but the first sentence sounds like it's targeted at the percentage of developers who did StackOverflow copy&paste to close Jira tickets, never becoming experts.

Delegating to LLM-ish AI is just a natural evolution of that. The question is whether they can still add value if kept in the loop.

The article author suggests that the answer is to be expert, and is addressing people who... "either rely on a skilled colleague or just hope that the answer to your exact problem was out there on the internet."

I sometimes edit OSM, so I'm wondering whether any public bookshelf omissions are intentional, and adding the shelves would be unwelcome by the people running them.

The afterglow isn't confused with feeling good about completing exercise, or accomplishment/confidence. Example of confidence: when on a track, I'd run until I felt like I was out of steam, then sprint the last half-lap, just to know I could do that. (Don't try this if your heart isn't currently conditioned for it.)

I've given up caffeine, and hardly ever miss it.

One problem is caffeine for me seems to shift energy around, not create it. It might make me more energetic right now, but then headachey and ugh later. Also creates a dependence: "I feel like crap; I must need more caffeine".

Can also interfere with sleep many hours later, and sleep is super-important. It upsets GI a bit. And personally it seems to magnify some emotions, and, when caffeinated, I will somehow always find a cause of something that needs someone to fight for it (it's uncanny).

I care enough without chemically boosting things. And I'm fortunate to naturally be energetic and sharp without caffeine.

I don't drink even decaf anymore, because it still has too much.

IIRC, detoxing from caffeeine cold-turkey takes a couple weeks. Or zero-caffeine herbal/fruit teas can help with the warm mug of hot liquids ritual substitute. And exercise, hydration, nutrition, and good sleep.

Sounds like an adtech targeting demographic, not protecting children.

I got one of those a few years ago, from a prominent tech startup CEO (non-YC).

The funniest thing is that I'm pretty sure it's a person who has some kind of recurring episodes of anonymously attacking HN infrastructure and dang.

Who then also attacked me on HN (and elsewhere, it looks like), while seeming to reference that earlier rejection, and emphasizing how much they thought I was unworthy.

> That means there's no record of you ever getting denied for the position.

Or record held in the mind, even years later, of someone who sometimes acts out maliciously.

Apparently, it's a real thing.

(I don't know how many people are using BookWyrm, but Goodreads itself seems half-abandoned. Maybe most of the publisher attention is on TikTok influencing now?)

1. Calling Microsoft Office simply "Office" without qualification treats it like a trademark, rather than a generic term that was in use for this class of product before MS appropriated it.

2. If you're going to treat it like a trademark, don't violate it in the same sentence.

Between all the piracy, and all the AI training and the purchase/visitor-circumventing AI services, the practice of writing and publishing genuinely good work is being wiped out.

We're killing the goose that lays the eggs, for selfish gain.