a LOT of the people who love benchmarks are middle management hard-selling GenAI/LLM as magic tech sauce to vaguely technical executives who only want to know about the money aka headcount savings they so desperately desire.
their collective butts are already glued to the hype train as they chase numbers they (often) manufactured to justify the latest round of tech spend.
lots of good use cases out there - like the incredible progress with medical imaging analysis or complex system models for construction - and lots of crap use cases that need benchmarks to cosplay relevance.
in case this is not sarcasm... tech managers != tech leaders.
most are one, some are neither, and a small minority are both. i have works for more than 20 tech managers in 30+ years, have managed technologists (ops, app-dev, network, infra, etc.) multiple times, and have hired and fired tech managers. i can count the genuine tech leaders+managers i've met on one hand. fewer around than ever nowadays.
> in case this is not sarcasm... tech managers != tech leaders.
I agree that being management doesn't make one a leader. Anyone who has been in the industry for five, ten years knows that a leader may or may not have a management title.
However. It has been the fad for many, many years now for Management to call itself Leadership. [0] This makes it slightly ambiguous, but not at all incorrect to refer to the "management class" as the "leadership class".
[0] I guess their little, tiny, incredibly fragile egos got overly bruised by the years of derogatory commentary aimed at clueless managers, and they -because of their tiny, inadequate brains- decided that A Big Rebrand would change the nature of reality.
i understood that reference... and, like Wash, feel like i'm "flying" a stone at gravity's whim while i pretend to be in control. tech leadership at a lot of corps do the exact same thing most days. a good reason to find your tribe asap, get out of corp, and assert some control.
constantcrying's comment may be meant with sarcasm because Airbus leads Boeing in market share in addition to having fewer models with explosive decompression issues...
> FINRA 2360 provides disclosure and tax requirements to any organization
Nitpick: FINRA rules only apply to FINRA members. For the general versions, you want the SEC rule. (FINRA copies a lot of SEC rules so they can enforce them without the restrictions of a government.)
too bad this country can't seem to leave essential services like health care in the hands of medical specialists instead of capitalists. no matter how Amazon tries to spin this one out, it's unlikely to end well:
"By taking a large portion of healthy, well-educated patients who require less-complex care out of the usual primary care system, tech companies such as Amazon will leave primary care, a specialty essential to the future of health in the U.S. that is already on life support, even more desolate."
>>If urgent care can reduce unnecessary strain on their thin ranks, so much the better.
You are not completely wrong, but it is not that simple - the problem most PCPs have is that 'doc in a box' places tend to soak up all the quick and easy visits, that pay just as much as the long and complicated ones that can takes hours for a typical PCP to resolve - but they often pay the same - so urgent care clinics see you, look at your throat, write you a prescription and send you on the way - "treat'em and street'em"
Meanwhile the 82 year old 400lb diabetic, pre-dementia patient on 12 different medicines with 7 different things they want to talk about during the visit, takes a doctor and team of nurses and medical assistants a hugely disproportionate amount of time to diagnose and treat - and they can't bill all that much more than the doc-in-the-box got for writing a script for a sore throat.
In other words, these places are skimming all the profitable and easy to resolve cases, and the PCP now only has complicated patients that proportionally pay less, further eroding the finances of most primary care facilities, which then means they can't pay as much, so then they have an even harder time attracting talent.
It is also difficult to ask a PCP to see 16-20 complicated cases in a typical day - they need a few easy ones thrown in that they can quickly resolve and move on. Nobody can go 100% all day long on hard problems.
I was referred to a “dermatologist” recently that turned out to be a PA with a background in nutrition. She had virtually no experience with actual dermatology. I was forced to wait over an hour after my appointment was set to begin, and my insurance was billed $500 for a 15-minute visit. She did not improve my situation one iota, so that was a complete waste of time and money.
Our health system is failing spectacularly at every level.
the overwhelming amount of things that patients come into a dr's office with do not required an actual MD to diagnose and treat - NP's and PA's do just fine in most cases.
Heck, even regular nurses with a few years experience could probably look at your sore throat, check your blood sugars and adjust your meds.
Everybody thinks whatever they have wrong with them is something unique and special that requires a full blown MD - usually it is not.
If I need a transplant, I am going to want a full blown MD to do it - for most run of the mill things, I am happy to see a NP or PA.
Yes, PCPs are in short supply. Much of this is artificial due to the limits accrediting organizations have placed on the number of new doctors per year.
their collective butts are already glued to the hype train as they chase numbers they (often) manufactured to justify the latest round of tech spend.
lots of good use cases out there - like the incredible progress with medical imaging analysis or complex system models for construction - and lots of crap use cases that need benchmarks to cosplay relevance.
reply