Cribl | https://cribl.io/careers | REMOTE We have a lot of positions open. Backend, Frontend, SRE. Mostly a node.js shop. Hiring from senior to principal roles.
Cribl | https://cribl.io/careers | REMOTE
We have a lot of positions open. Backend, Frontend, SRE. Mostly a node.js shop. Hiring from senior to principal roles.
SNCF was one of the early bidders for this project, proposing the I5 route. They later pulled out from the politics of the Central Valley line in 2011, and went on to successfully implement high speed rail in Morocco instead - which went live in 2018.
Here we are 8 years after they finished a different project with nothing. American infrastructure at its finest.
I had a chuckle at these two subsequent paragraphs.
> One regular snipe is that it’s “easier to build rail in Morocco than in California.”
> Al Boraq had full funding lined up before the project began. CAHSR did not. This led to delays that reduced support and encouraged critics, which starved it of funding commitments and thus led to further delays. California undermined CAHSR from the start.
So, uh... it is easier to build rail in Morocco than in California. And California is part of the cause. It's not even a "snipe", it's just the truth.
Insurance companies are for profit. They run the analysis of how much they need to charge to break even, and aim to charge above that. If they charge too high, customers will look at the alternatives and switch to a competitor.
You can replace "insurance" with any other business, the whole of capitalism is built upon this. Every stock on the stock market is trying to "provide returns to their investors" - each one is as guilty as the next - theres nothing special about insurance companies.
If the argument is that insurance should be a federally provided service, then we must have a different conversation. Look at the FAIR plan. They are government created, and will get wiped out because of these fires, possibly because they weren't charging enough to begin with (and taxpayers will now need to bail them out). The math doesn't change whether its state backed or privately backed. If a home, on average, gets burned down every X years, then the insurance premium needs to be adjusted to be able to cover that.
And here is the crux of the problem - if you take away the free market aspect of being able to adjust prices, and get forced to sell a product/service for less than what you need to, there will be a loss somewhere, in this order of operations:
1. loss at the insurance company --> insurance company goes broke or leaves the state
2. loss at the FAIR plan --> FAIR plan reserves get wiped out
3. loss at the state level --> taxpayers need to bail the situation out.
Id argue that letting the free market work (at layer 1 above) is the proper way about it. If a house burns down every 10 years, let insurance charge 10% of that cost, because that is the actual risk involved in the system. House prices will naturally come down to reflect that reality of risk.
He fell off the rails when Trump was running for office. I remember being really disappointed to see the trading observations (and his own product advertisement) replaced by political rants.
Backend, Frontend, SRE. Mostly a node.js shop.
I'm hiring for a Senior Staff Engineer https://cribl.io/job-detail/5596071004/
Node.js, big data, streaming, distributed systems architectures, AWS.
We also have a lot of other roles open
https://cribl.io/careers/engineering/?department=Engineering