Salaries don't tend to be strongly correlated with bad working conditions or stress. In most industries (like software development) it's just supply and demand, and I imagine there are more people willing and able to work for £65k as a train driver than as a software developer. It's a bit different for train drivers because of the strong unions; my guess is that explains their high salaries more than lack of supply.
Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking. Saying "it's low stress therefore shouldn't attract a high salary" doesn't add up to me.
I don't necessarily know what the right salary is but it's shift work (and you don't get to choose your hours), you're in charge of a lot of people's safety, there's a non zero chance you'll watch someone die in front of you (if they jump on the tracks). It's... not nothing. And if we're looking at how much economic benefit a given job provides a country a train driver is surely a large multiplier.
Is that true? My understanding is they command very high wages because their unions are strong and they have a lot of leverage: by striking they can impose extremely high costs on the wider economy (not to mention bad press for politicians).
Yes. This was literally a case study for my Sociology degree in the '90s.
(I would also mindfully say that there is a lot of subtle political propaganda in the UK around this issue- the powers that be want the public to blame train drivers for the failures of privatisation)
That doesn't convince me. Companies commonly handle situations like this just fine. I know because I have seen it. I think you are the one who fell for the propaganda here.
Companies may or may not handle strikes properly. If it were that easy, industrial interests (and their emissaries, like Reagan and Thatcher) would not have spent more than a century trying to break unions.
But you haven't made an argument, so you're in no position to criticize. You asserted that "train drivers became rarer due to shareholder reluctance to train and recruit them" and then didn't back this strange claim up, just said "I'm right" in different words. A sociology degree isn't convincing btw.
Our ports in the US, which affects the cost of endless goods, are still running with 1950's level tech because the unions are so strong (and have heavy mob ties).
> You try it, you get a visit. Same way it's always been.
In that case, there's no obstacle. This is exactly what happened with containerization, and guess what? The ports that did containerize, including some ports constructed from scratch specifically because existing unionized ports blocked containerization, replaced the ports that didn't.
My understanding is that the mob extracted large payments in order for containerization to be permitted. Some half of the time they just live on container royalties which are exactly the mechanism the mob used for extraction.
So sure, there's no big deal, just pay the mob. People do argue for that.
Any evidence mob lives off container royalties? And what are container royalties to begin with???? (I had no idea when I borrowed a container for moving I was paying royalties.)
My problem with people asking for evidence is that they often are expecting me to do a lot of work to give them a better world model, when they nonetheless have no intention of accepting any evidence.
So I have a guideline of good faith: you can hire me and I don’t mind doing it for you; or you can go read up on the subject, reach some understanding of what these things are, and we can discuss; or you can go do some research of equivalent value to me and bring that to me as a barter[0].
Otherwise, it’s really not a big deal to me if you don’t believe something that’s true.
0: for the moment, I’m willing to trade for the DNA height model that some people claim exists. If you can find it for me, I’ll find you some sources for container royalties.
I'm arguing that if you are someone who tries to bring change to the ports, like the developer contracted by the government to do an assessment, you will get a visit, most likely at your home.
They won't kill you or rough you up, but they will tell you what your assessment will find. And reiterate that they are at your house, where your family lives.
I want someone who cares to be driving the train I'm on. They also require in person participation which make outsourcing hard. I'm fine with self driving when the line is designed for it. It will be a very long time before existing lines are self driving, and its not because on unions.
Not really sure why people like moaning about train drivers. Are they jealous a train driver is making more than them? While in the case of tech workers they sit quietly and watch their £65k jobs go to India.
In the UK, you can go on an agile tariff that does exactly this. I'm on one.
It's quite fun (and educational) with the kids to work out when to put the car on to charge, when to run the dryer etc, looking at the few days ahead forecasts.
Last month, we paid 11p per kWh on average, which is less than half what you'd pay on a standard tariff, and it's nice to be doing something good for the environment too. It's particularly satisfying to charge up the car when tariffs go negative.
What, do you expect the energy companies to use their own money to invest in infrastructure for net zero and the AI boom? Oops too late it's been paid as dividends. No, just create a levy and make the public be unwilling investors except without getting the shares nor dividends
Don't forget it's also a tax for bailing out the failed energy companies
> It's quite fun (and educational) with the kids to work out when to put the car on to charge, when to run the dryer etc, looking at the few days ahead forecasts.
As if we aren't busy enough. I see this as just yet _another_ job the government/business is making us do instead of them.
Is it too much to ask for my government to provide sensibly and simply priced energy so we can get on with our day, working, studying, raising kids etc?
IMO this is just setting us up for insane surge pricing for those people who don't do the good citizen thing of becoming nocturnal
I think it's best to view this from an economics point of view - in a nutshell price signals are usually the most powerful way to create behavioural change; in this case, we want people to shift demand away from peak times. Nobody is being forced to, they just have to pay more for the convenience of not bothering.
> IMO this is just setting us up for insane surge pricing for those people who don't do the good citizen thing of becoming nocturnal
It actually costs a lot more to produce marginal energy at peak times, the cost just reflects the cost of production. It doesn't seem unreasonable for me for the consumer to bear the cost, and also get the benfit if they choose to put their car to charge overnight rather than at peak time.
This also has a nice secondary benefit: anyone on agile tariffs who shifts demand away from peak time actually benefits those who don't want to bother, because the peak price/cost goes down, and so the overall average price of electricity goes down.
> I see this as just yet _another_ job the government/business is making us do instead of them
In most other market, people are expected to respond to price incentives. When local apples are cheap relative to imported cherries, people don't complain that government/business is making us do a job to push demand in the direction of apples.
> Is it too much to ask for my government to provide sensibly and simply priced energy so we can get on with our day, working, studying, raising kids etc?
The free market price _is_ the agile price. The government intervention is actually in the direction of fixing prices (e.g. by the energy price cap, which is sometimes below the free market price at peak times). In general, markets do not work very well when the government fixes the market
When you let the market clear and send out price signals, markets almost always become more efficient (which means that consumers benefit overall)
> we want people to shift demand away from peak times
Because governments have let energy companies fail to invest in necessary infrastructure for decades.
And who is the "we"? Definitely not me
I think a much larger conversation needs to happen about people's schedules, commitments and whether it's fair to say those who have less time and less flexibility due to work, children etc are somehow actively choosing to not be a good eco citizen. It's incredibly unfair.
I'd rather go back to root causes and re-evaluate private companies failing to provide the necessary infrastructure
Yes - OLAP database are built with a completely different performance tradeoff. The way data is stored and the query planner are optimised for exactly these types of queries.
If you're working in an oltp system, you're not necessarily doing it wrong, but you may wish to consider exporting the data to use in an OLAP tool if you're frequently doing big queries. And nowadays there's ways to 'do both ' e.g. you can run the duckdb query engine within a postgres instance
I'm generally pro nuclear and think it should be a significant part of the energy mix. But an interesting point is that the floor price of nuclear is the cost of the turbines, which are surprisingly expensive, and aren't really getting cheaper. Solar can go much cheaper than that, potentially at least. More on this point in the recent Casey Handmer interview of Dwarkesh.
I largely agree. As a counterpoint, today I delivered a significant PR that was accepted easily by the lead dev with the following approach:
1. Create a branch and vibe code a solution until it works (I'm using codex cli)
2. Open new PR and slowly write the real PR myself using the vibe code as a reference, but cross referencing against existing code.
This involved a fair few concepts that were new to me, but had precedent in the existing code. Overall I think my solution was delivered faster and of at least the same quality as if I'd written it all by hand.
I think its disrespectful to PR a solution you don't understand yourself. But this process feels similar to my previous non-AI assisted approach where I would often code spaghetti until the feature worked, and then start again and do it 'properly' once I knew the rough shape of the solution
The best way I’ve found to use LLM’s for writing anything that matters is, after feeding it the right context, take its output and then retype it in your own words. Then the LLM has helped capture your brain dump and organize it but by forcing yourself to write it rather than copy and paste… you get to make it your own. This technique has worked quite well with domains I’m not the best at yet like marketing copy. I want my shit to have my own voice but I’m not sure what to cover… so let the LLM help me with what to cover and then I can rewrite its work.
(Median total reward for TOC train drivers is £66,043) https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2022-10/review-of...