• 4 milliards d’euros
      attends, je réessaye
      4 milliards d’euros
      fastoche

      attends, je teste
      4 millions de masques
      arf
      4 millions de masques
      décidément, non, ça passe pas
      4 millions de masques
      ha ben non, y’a décidément pas

      5000 respirateurs ?
      arrête d’y penser stp

      un test ?
      t’es député j’espère

  • La #mythologie #CAME (#Compétitivité, #Attractivité, #Métropolisation, #Excellence) : comment s’en désintoxiquer ?

    La période récente se caractérise par l’émergence d’une mythologie séduisante dans le champ du #développement_économique : l’approfondissement de la #mondialisation plongerait l’ensemble des #territoires face à un impératif de compétitivité, seules quelques métropoles pouvant rivaliser pour attirer les talents et les leaders de demain, métropoles qu’il conviendrait donc de soutenir en concentrant les efforts sur l’excellence. Nous la résumons par l’acronyme CAME pour Compétitivité, Attractivité, Métropolisation et Excellence. Une analyse attentive des différents composants de la CAME montre cependant qu’aussi séduisante —voire addictive—qu’elle soit, elle ne résiste pas à l’épreuve des faits. Malgré cela, portée de manière plus ou moins marquée par certains chercheurs et organismes privés ou publics d’analyse et de conseil, elle sous-tend tout un ensemble de #politiques_publiques ; elle a même structuré une partie des débats autour des résultats des élections dans différents pays. Non seulement la CAME ne produit pas les effets attendus, mais elle provoque des #effets_indésirables. Les #ressources_publiques étant limitées, les dédier fortement à quelques acteurs (#startups, chercheurs jugés « excellents »...) ou à quelques lieux (métropoles) conduit à renforcer les #inégalités_socio-spatiales. Quelques éléments de réflexion sur des #alternatives envisageables, qui nous semblent plus saines, seront présentés afin d’aider à s’en désintoxiquer.

    https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01724699v2/document

  • Travail de nuit en maison de retraite
    https://droit-finances.commentcamarche.com/forum/affich-6396069-travail-de-nuit-en-maison-de-retraite

    J’aimerai savoir si c est normal de travailler seule en ehpad la nuit avec 29 résidents ?

    Je prends mon poste a 20h80 jusqu’à 7h du matin avec une charge de travail qui ne me laisse pas le temps de prendre ma pause d’un demi heure.

    distribution des médocs, ronde, ménage de la cuisine, sdb, toilettes du personnel, infirmerie, salle a manger, lessive, sèche linge ,6 bassines de linge toutes les nuits a plier ou repasser, petits dj a préparer, chariots de soins a préparer an nombre de 3, changes a minuit, 1 heure du matin être changes a partir de 4h30 jusqu’à 6h30, sans oublier les rondes normalement toutes les 2h .....et les résidents réveilles et levés a gérer en plein milieu de la nuit. Merci a vous de me répondre, car j’ai l impression d être bien seule

    (...)
    Excusez pour l erreur de frappe, c est bien 20h30 et je termine a 7h. Je suis aide soignante et il est vrai que j ai plus l impression d être agent de service, j’ai été embauchée en tant qu’ aide soignante de nuit , mon salaire est de 1450 net par mois ,les week-end n’étant pas payes puisque c’est un travail de nuit, c’est un établissement prive

    #ehpad

  • How Dating Became a ’Market’ - The Atlantic
    https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2020/02/modern-dating-odds-economy-apps-tinder-math/606982

    February 25, 2020 by Ashley Fetters and Kaitlyn Tiffany - The ‘Dating Market’ Is Getting Worse

    The old but newly popular notion that one’s love life can be analyzed like an economy is flawed—and it’s ruining romance.

    Ever since her last relationship ended this past August, Liz has been consciously trying not to treatThe ‘Dating Market’ Is Getting Worse

    The old but newly popular notion that one’s love life can be analyzed like an economy is flawed—and it’s ruining romance.
    Ashley FettersKaitlyn Tiffany
    February 25, 2020 dating as a “numbers game.” By the 30-year-old Alaskan’s own admission, however, it hasn’t been going great.

    Liz has been going on Tinder dates frequently, sometimes multiple times a week—one of her New Year’s resolutions was to go on every date she was invited on. But Liz, who asked to be identified only by her first name in order to avoid harassment, can’t escape a feeling of impersonal, businesslike detachment from the whole pursuit.

    “It’s like, ‘If this doesn’t go well, there are 20 other guys who look like you in my inbox.’ And I’m sure they feel the same way—that there are 20 other girls who are willing to hang out, or whatever,” she said. “People are seen as commodities, as opposed to individuals.”

    It’s understandable that someone like Liz might internalize the idea that dating is a game of probabilities or ratios, or a marketplace in which single people just have to keep shopping until they find “the one.” The idea that a dating pool can be analyzed as a marketplace or an economy is both recently popular and very old: For generations, people have been describing newly single people as “back on the market” and analyzing dating in terms of supply and demand. In 1960, the Motown act the Miracles recorded “Shop Around,” a jaunty ode to the idea of checking out and trying on a bunch of new partners before making a “deal.” The economist Gary Becker, who would later go on to win the Nobel Prize, began applying economic principles to marriage and divorce rates in the early 1970s. More recently, a plethora of market-minded dating books are coaching singles on how to seal a romantic deal, and dating apps, which have rapidly become the mode du jour for single people to meet each other, make sex and romance even more like shopping.

    The unfortunate coincidence is that the fine-tuned analysis of dating’s numbers game and the streamlining of its trial-and-error process of shopping around have taken place as dating’s definition has expanded from “the search for a suitable marriage partner” into something decidedly more ambiguous. Meanwhile, technologies have emerged that make the market more visible than ever to the average person, encouraging a ruthless mind-set of assigning “objective” values to potential partners and to ourselves—with little regard for the ways that framework might be weaponized. The idea that a population of single people can be analyzed like a market might be useful to some extent to sociologists or economists, but the widespread adoption of it by single people themselves can result in a warped outlook on love.

    Moira Weigel, the author of Labor of Love: The Invention of Dating, argues that dating as we know it—single people going out together to restaurants, bars, movies, and other commercial or semicommercial spaces—came about in the late 19th century. “Almost everywhere, for most of human history, courtship was supervised. And it was taking place in noncommercial spaces: in homes, at the synagogue,” she said in an interview. “Somewhere where other people were watching. What dating does is it takes that process out of the home, out of supervised and mostly noncommercial spaces, to movie theaters and dance halls.” Modern dating, she noted, has always situated the process of finding love within the realm of commerce—making it possible for economic concepts to seep in.

    The application of the supply-and-demand concept, Weigel said, may have come into the picture in the late 19th century, when American cities were exploding in population. “There were probably, like, five people your age in [your hometown],” she told me. “Then you move to the city because you need to make more money and help support your family, and you’d see hundreds of people every day.” When there are bigger numbers of potential partners in play, she said, it’s much more likely that people will begin to think about dating in terms of probabilities and odds.

    Eva Illouz, directrice d’etudes (director of studies) at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris, who has written about the the application of economic principles to romance, agrees that dating started to be understood as a marketplace as courtship rituals left private spheres, but she thinks the analogy fully crystallized when the sexual revolution of the mid-20th century helped dissolve many lingering traditions and taboos around who could or should date whom. People began assessing for themselves what the costs or benefits of certain partnerships might be—a decision that used to be a family’s rather than an individual’s. “What you have is people meeting each other directly, which is exactly the situation of a market,” she said. “Everybody’s looking at everybody, in a way.”

    In the modern era, it seems probable that the way people now shop online for goods—in virtual marketplaces, where they can easily filter out features they do and don’t want—has influenced the way people “shop” for partners, especially on dating apps, which often allow that same kind of filtering. The behavioral economics researcher and dating coach Logan Ury said in an interview that many single people she works with engage in what she calls “relationshopping.”

    Read: The rise of dating-app fatigue

    “People, especially as they get older, really know their preferences. So they think that they know what they want,” Ury said—and retroactively added quotation marks around the words “know what they want.” “Those are things like ‘I want a redhead who’s over 5’7”,’ or ‘I want a Jewish man who at least has a graduate degree.’” So they log in to a digital marketplace and start narrowing down their options. “They shop for a partner the way that they would shop for a camera or Bluetooth headphones,” she said.

    But, Ury went on, there’s a fatal flaw in this logic: No one knows what they want so much as they believe they know what they want. Actual romantic chemistry is volatile and hard to predict; it can crackle between two people with nothing in common and fail to materialize in what looks on paper like a perfect match. Ury often finds herself coaching her clients to broaden their searches and detach themselves from their meticulously crafted “checklists.”

    The fact that human-to-human matches are less predictable than consumer-to-good matches is just one problem with the market metaphor; another is that dating is not a one-time transaction. Let’s say you’re on the market for a vacuum cleaner—another endeavor in which you might invest considerable time learning about and weighing your options, in search of the best fit for your needs. You shop around a bit, then you choose one, buy it, and, unless it breaks, that’s your vacuum cleaner for the foreseeable future. You likely will not continue trying out new vacuums, or acquire a second and third as your “non-primary” vacuums. In dating, especially in recent years, the point isn’t always exclusivity, permanence, or even the sort of long-term relationship one might have with a vacuum. With the rise of “hookup culture” and the normalization of polyamory and open relationships, it’s perfectly common for people to seek partnerships that won’t necessarily preclude them from seeking other partnerships, later on or in addition. This makes supply and demand a bit harder to parse. Given that marriage is much more commonly understood to mean a relationship involving one-to-one exclusivity and permanence, the idea of a marketplace or economy maps much more cleanly onto matrimony than dating.

    The marketplace metaphor also fails to account for what many daters know intuitively: that being on the market for a long time—or being off the market, and then back on, and then off again—can change how a person interacts with the marketplace. Obviously, this wouldn’t affect a material good in the same way. Families repeatedly moving out of houses, for example, wouldn’t affect the houses’ feelings, but being dumped over and over by a series of girlfriends might change a person’s attitude toward finding a new partner. Basically, ideas about markets that are repurposed from the economy of material goods don’t work so well when applied to sentient beings who have emotions. Or, as Moira Weigel put it, “It’s almost like humans aren’t actually commodities.”

    When market logic is applied to the pursuit of a partner and fails, people can start to feel cheated. This can cause bitterness and disillusionment, or worse. “They have a phrase here where they say the odds are good but the goods are odd,” Liz said, because in Alaska on the whole there are already more men than women, and on the apps the disparity is even sharper. She estimates that she gets 10 times as many messages as the average man in her town. “It sort of skews the odds in my favor,” she said. “But, oh my gosh, I’ve also received a lot of abuse.”

    Recently, Liz matched with a man on Tinder who invited her over to his house at 11 p.m. When she declined, she said, he called her 83 times later that night, between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. And when she finally answered and asked him to stop, he called her a “bitch” and said he was “teaching her a lesson.” It was scary, but Liz said she wasn’t shocked, as she has had plenty of interactions with men who have “bubbling, latent anger” about the way things are going for them on the dating market. Despite having received 83 phone calls in four hours, Liz was sympathetic toward the man. “At a certain point,” she said, “it becomes exhausting to cast your net over and over and receive so little.”

    Read: Tinder’s most notorious men

    This violent reaction to failure is also present in conversations about “sexual market value”—a term so popular on Reddit that it is sometimes abbreviated as “SMV”—which usually involve complaints that women are objectively overvaluing themselves in the marketplace and belittling the men they should be trying to date.

    The logic is upsetting but clear: The (shaky) foundational idea of capitalism is that the market is unfailingly impartial and correct, and that its mechanisms of supply and demand and value exchange guarantee that everything is fair. It’s a dangerous metaphor to apply to human relationships, because introducing the idea that dating should be “fair” subsequently introduces the idea that there is someone who is responsible when it is unfair. When the market’s logic breaks down, it must mean someone is overriding the laws. And in online spaces populated by heterosexual men, heterosexual women have been charged with the bulk of these crimes.

    “The typical clean-cut, well-spoken, hard-working, respectful, male” who makes six figures should be a “magnet for women,” someone asserted recently in a thread posted in the tech-centric forum Hacker News. But instead, the poster claimed, this hypothetical man is actually cursed because the Bay Area has one of the worst “male-female ratios among the single.” The responses are similarly disaffected and analytical, some arguing that the gender ratio doesn’t matter, because women only date tall men who are “high earners,” and they are “much more selective” than men. “This can be verified on practically any dating app with a few hours of data,” one commenter wrote.

    Economic metaphors provide the language for conversations on Reddit with titles like “thoughts on what could be done to regulate the dating market,” and for a subreddit named sarcastically “Where Are All The Good Men?” with the stated purpose of “exposing” all the women who have “unreasonable standards” and offer “little to no value themselves.” (On the really extremist end, some suggest that the government should assign girlfriends to any man who wants one.) Which is not at all to say that heterosexual men are the only ones thinking this way: In the 54,000-member subreddit r/FemaleDatingStrategy, the first “principle” listed in its official ideology is “be a high value woman.” The group’s handbook is thousands of words long, and also emphasizes that “as women, we have the responsibility to be ruthless in our evaluation of men.”

    The design and marketing of dating apps further encourage a cold, odds-based approach to love. While they have surely created, at this point, thousands if not millions of successful relationships, they have also aggravated, for some men, their feeling that they are unjustly invisible to women.

    Men outnumber women dramatically on dating apps; this is a fact. A 2016 literature review also found that men are more active users of these apps—both in the amount of time they spend on them and the number of interactions they attempt. Their experience of not getting as many matches or messages, the numbers say, is real.

    But data sets made available by the apps can themselves be wielded in unsettling ways by people who believe the numbers are working against them. A since-deleted 2017 blog post on the dating app Hinge’s official website explained an experiment conducted by a Hinge engineer, Aviv Goldgeier. Using the Gini coefficient, a common measure of income inequality within a country, and counting “likes” as income, Goldgeier determined that men had a much higher (that is, worse) Gini coefficient than women. With these results, Goldgeier compared the “female dating economy” to Western Europe and the “male dating economy” to South Africa. This is, obviously, an absurd thing to publish on a company blog, but not just because its analysis is so plainly accusatory and weakly reasoned. It’s also a bald-faced admission that the author—and possibly the company he speaks for—is thinking about people as sets of numbers.

    In a since-deleted 2009 official blog post, an OkCupid employee’s data analysis showed women rating men as “worse-looking than medium” 80 percent of the time, and concluded, “Females of OkCupid, we site founders say to you: ouch! Paradoxically, it seems it’s women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the opposite sex.” This post, more than a decade later, is referenced in men’s-rights or men’s-interest subreddits as “infamous” and “we all know it.”

    Even without these creepy blog posts, dating apps can amplify a feeling of frustration with dating by making it seem as if it should be much easier. The Stanford economist Alvin Roth has argued that Tinder is, like the New York Stock Exchange, a “thick” market where lots of people are trying to complete transactions, and that the main problem with dating apps is simply congestion. To him, the idea of a dating market is not new at all. “Have you ever read any of the novels of Jane Austen?” he asked. “Pride and Prejudice is a very market-oriented novel. Balls were the internet of the day. You went and showed yourself off.”

    Read: The five years that changed dating

    Daters have—or appear to have—a lot more choices on a dating app in 2020 than they would have at a provincial dance party in rural England in the 1790s, which is good, until it’s bad. The human brain is not equipped to process and respond individually to thousands of profiles, but it takes only a few hours on a dating app to develop a mental heuristic for sorting people into broad categories. In this way, people can easily become seen as commodities—interchangeable products available for acquisition or trade. “What the internet apps do is that they enable you to see, for the first time ever in history, the market of possible partners,” Illouz, the Hebrew University sociology professor, said. Or, it makes a dater think they can see the market, when really all they can see is what an algorithm shows them.

    The idea of the dating market is appealing because a market is something a person can understand and try to manipulate. But fiddling with the inputs—by sending more messages, going on more dates, toggling and re-toggling search parameters, or even moving to a city with a better ratio—isn’t necessarily going to help anybody succeed on that market in a way that’s meaningful to them.

    Last year, researchers at Ohio State University examined the link between loneliness and compulsive use of dating apps—interviewing college students who spent above-average time swiping—and found a terrible feedback loop: The lonelier you are, the more doggedly you will seek out a partner, and the more negative outcomes you’re likely to be faced with, and the more alienated from other people you will feel. This happens to men and women in the same way.

    “We found no statistically significant differences for gender at all,” the lead author, Katy Coduto, said in an email. “Like, not even marginally significant.”

    There may always have been a dating market, but today people’s belief that they can see it and describe it and control their place in it is much stronger. And the way we speak becomes the way we think, as well as a glaze to disguise the way we feel. Someone who refers to looking for a partner as a numbers game will sound coolly aware and pragmatic, and guide themselves to a more odds-based approach to dating. But they may also suppress any honest expression of the unbearably human loneliness or desire that makes them keep doing the math.

    #startups #société #mariage #etremmeteurs

  • App : IRMGARD - KOPF, HAND + FUSS
    https://www.kopfhandundfuss.de/projekte/app-irmgard

    7,5 Millionen Erwachsene in Deutschland können weder die Anzeigetafel am Bahnhof noch einen Beipackzettel lesen – sie gelten als Analphabeten.
    Auch vielen Geflüchteten fehlt es an dieser für die Teilhabe an der Gesellschaft so wichtigen Lese- und Schreibkompetenz in deutscher Sprache – entweder, weil sie auch in ihrer Muttersprache nicht alphabetisiert wurden, oder aber weil sie die lateinische Schrift nicht beherrschen.

    7,5 Millionen Analphabeten, das bedeutet auch: 7,5 Millionen Menschen, die kaum Möglichkeiten haben, aktiv an unserer Gesellschaft zu partizipieren. Wir finden: Daran muss sich etwas ändern. Analphabeten müssen Bildungsangebote wahrnehmen können – ohne jede Scham.

    Hier setzen wir mit IRMGARD an: Mithilfe der App können Jugendliche und Erwachsene lesen und schreiben lernen.

    Mit IRMGARD können die Nutzer in neun Leveln mit mehr als 100 Übungen ihre Lese- und Schreibkompetenz trainieren. Vorkenntnisse sind dafür nicht erforderlich.

    #analphabetisme #Allemagne #startup #microsoft #app

  • Bénévalibre : libérez vos bénévoles de la #StartupNation – Framablog
    https://framablog.org/2019/10/31/benevalibre-liberez-vos-benevoles-de-la-startupnation/#2019/10/29

    Information préalable : cet article est plus long que la moyenne des articles du Framablog, et pas nécessairement hyper-funky. D’une part parce que nous souhaitions exposer le contexte réglementaire et politique de la valorisation du bénévolat (ce qui ne peut pas se faire en trois paragraphes), et d’autre part parce que nous avons souhaité donner la parole dans une seconde partie de l’article à la personne qui a été la clé de voûte de la réalisation du logiciel. Pour vous aider, nous vous proposons un résumé des points principaux tout en bas de cette page.

  • Bénévalibre : libérez vos bénévoles de la #StartupNation – Framablog
    https://framablog.org/2019/10/31/benevalibre-liberez-vos-benevoles-de-la-startupnation/#tldr

    Le #bénévolat d’une association est un des indicateurs de son dynamisme et de sa portée ;
    La « loi travail » prévoit un (futur) Compte d’Engagement Citoyen où l’on peut déclarer et « valoriser » ses activités bénévoles, par exemple pour ouvrir des droits à la formation ;
    Valoriser le bénévolat pose un problème politique :

    Cela induit une vision comptable, marchande et contrôlée d’un don de soi à la société ;
    Cela rend techniquement possible la surveillance étatique dans les actions de la société civile ;
    L’outil utilisé pour compter ses heures est central, il doit émanciper et non soumettre (ni exploiter les données et donc les vies de) les bénévoles ;
    Seul un logiciel libre conçu comme un commun en conscience de sa portée politique peut garantir que la société civile garde le contrôle de l’outil et donc sa puissance d’agir.

    Bénévalibre est né de la volonté de ne pas laisser la #StartupNation comptabiliser nos heures de bénévolat (et en exploiter nos données) ;
    Il est le fruit de 3 ans de travail collaboratif entre associations, fondations, et chercheur·euses ;
    Ce logiciel laisse, à de multiples niveaux, le choix et le contrôle dans son utilisation ;
    Laurent Costy, alias Provençal le Gaulois, présente comment la contribution collégiale autour d’un Commun a donné naissance à Bénévalibre (à coups de table ronde).

  • Bénévalibre : libérez vos bénévoles de la #StartupNation
    https://framablog.org/2019/10/31/benevalibre-liberez-vos-benevoles-de-la-startupnation

    Vous êtes #bénévole dans une #Association ? Alors sachez qu’un tout nouveau #Logiciel libre peut vous aider à mieux valoriser votre engagement bénévole. Cet article fait partie des « Carnets de voyage de #Contributopia ». D’octobre à décembre 2019, nous y ferons le … Lire la suite­­

    #Carnets #Communs #Interview #Libres_Logiciels #April #BiensCommuns #Commun #Communaute #contributopia #Partenariat

  • WeWork sauvé par Softbank, au prix de son p.-d.g. Luc Olinga - Agence France-Presse à New York - 23 Octobre 2019 - Le devoir
    https://www.ledevoir.com/economie/565364/wework-sauve-par-softbank-au-prix-de-son-p-d-g

    La chute est violente pour WeWork : célébré il y a encore peu comme une des étoiles de l’économie du partage, le géant des espaces de travail partagés a dû se résoudre mardi à accepter l’offre de sauvetage de son actionnaire, au prix du départ définitif de son emblématique p.-d.g..


    Le conseil d’administration de The We company, maison mère de WeWork, a accepté à contrecoeur une offre du groupe japonais SoftBank, prévoyant 5 milliards de dollars d’investissements supplémentaires en échange du contrôle de la société, a indiqué à l’AFP une source proche du dossier. SoftBank, qui détient actuellement 29 % du capital, en prendra le contrôle avec une participation d’environ 80 %, a précisé cette source.

    Le plan de sauvetage de SoftBank, propriété du milliardaire nippon Masayoshi Son, implique le départ définitif de l’ancien p.-d.g. Adam Neumann, dont les frasques ont fini par lasser les milieux d’affaires et étaient devenues un repoussoir pour de potentiels investisseurs. L’extravagant patron ne conservera plus qu’une petite participation au capital et abandonnera sa casquette de président du conseil d’administration, a-t-on précisé. Pour autant, il ne part pas les mains vides : une partie des 5 milliards, soit 1,7 milliard, lui sera reversée.

    Cette prise de contrôle par le groupe japonais est destinée à enrayer la chute spectaculaire de WeWork, dont la valorisation a fondu de près de 39 milliards de dollars en l’espace de quelques semaines. Sans cet apport financier, WeWork, relégué dans la catégorie des investissements spéculatifs par les agences de notation, se serait retrouvé à court de liquidités d’ici la fin novembre, estiment les analystes financiers.

    WeWork, qui n’a pas souhaité faire de commentaires, devrait officialiser ces changements à l’issue d’un conseil d’administration mardi au cours duquel l’entreprise devait décider entre deux offres de sauvetage, dont l’une émanant de la banque JPMorgan Chase.

    Le sauvetage de WeWork illustre la déchéance d’une entreprise qui a vu trop vite les choses en grand, confortée par des investisseurs prêts à passer beaucoup de choses aux « stars » de la nouvelle économie. Mais, comme avec Uber et Lyft, les interrogations se sont multipliées ces derniers mois sur la capacité de WeWork à être rentable et à faire face au ralentissement économique mondial, l’immobilier étant souvent l’un des premiers secteurs touchés.

    WeWork, dont les bureaux ultramodernes sont souvent situés au coeur des mégalopoles comme Londres ou encore New York, a ainsi été contraint de renoncer en septembre à ce qui devait être l’une des introductions en Bourse les plus attendues de l’année. L’entrée à Wall Street aurait pu lui permettre de lever au moins 3 milliards et de bénéficier en plus d’une ligne de crédit de 6 milliards auprès de grandes banques.

    En y renonçant, la société doit également sabrer les dépenses, notamment celles, luxueuses, de M. Neumann. Réputé pour dépenser beaucoup d’argent afin d’alimenter sa rapide expansion, le groupe a encore accusé en 2018 une perte de 2 milliards pour un chiffre d’affaires de 1,82 milliard.

    WeWork devrait en outre lancer une grande restructuration comprenant la vente d’actifs non stratégiques et des suppressions d’emplois, selon des sources proches du dossier. Au fil des ans, et des intérêts de son ancien patron, le groupe avait notamment investi dans l’activité de colocation avec WeLive, dans l’éducation avec WeGrow, et dans le réseau social Meetup.

    Adam Neumann a réinventé le concept de bureaux partagés et a donné à WeWork une image d’entreprise à la fine pointe et hipster qui lui a valu un succès fulgurant en seulement quelques années. Mais son style de gestion, ses méthodes comptables controversées et d’apparents conflits d’intérêts ont entamé l’enthousiasme des investisseurs.

    WeWork gère aujourd’hui plus de 500 sites répartis dans une trentaine de pays, et emploie 12 500 salariés.

    #WeWork #espaces de #travail partagés #bureaux #startup #colocation #éducation #réseau_social #WeLive #WeGrow #Meetup.

  • So hebeln Mobility-Startups die strengen deutschen Gesetze aus | NGIN Mobility
    https://ngin-mobility.com/artikel/mobilitaet-gesetz

    Jürgen Stüber – 14. Dezember 2018

    Mobiltätsstartups haben es in Deutschland schwer. Denn das Personenbeförderungsgesetz zementiert das Privileg für Taxen. Doch es gibt Gesetzeslücken. Eine Übersicht.

    Das restriktive Personenbeförderungsgesetz (PBefG) hindert Startups in Deutschland daran, neue Mobilitätsdienste auf den Markt zu bringen. Das Gesetz stammt aus einer Zeit, als nahezu ausschließlich Taxis, Busse und Bahnen Transportdienstleistungen anboten. Einzig privatwirtschaftlich geführte Mietwagenunternehmen durften ihre Gewerbe betreiben. Doch der Gesetzgeber hatte ihnen sehr enge Schranken gesetzt, damit sie nicht zu Konkurrenten des öffentlichen Personennahverkehrs (ÖPNV) werden konnten.
    Anzeige

    Die skurrilste Regelung aus dieser Zeit ist die sogenannte Rückkehrpflicht. Mietwagen müssen am Betriebssitz des Unternehmers bestellt werden. Nach der Fahrt müssen sie dorthin zurückkehren. Einzige Ausnahme: Der Fahrer hat während der Fahrt „fernmündlich“ einen neuen Beförderungsauftrages erhalten. Taxen dagegen dürfen überall und spontan Fahrgäste aufnehmen.

    Die Fahrerlaubnis-Verordnung (FeV) schreibt vor, dass Taxi- und Mietwagenfahrer eine umgangssprachlich „P-Schein“ genannte Lizenz besitzen. Sie erfordert ein Führungszeugnis und einen Sehtest. Bis August 2017 umfasste sie auch eine Ortskundeprüfung.
    Wie Startups die Restriktion umgehen konnten

    Startups, die wie Clevershuttle in Berlin Carpooling anbieten, behelfen sich mit einer Gesetzesklausel (PBefG §2 Absatz 7), wonach die Erprobung von neuen Mobilitätsdienstleistungen für eine Zeit von längstens vier Jahren genehmigungsfähig ist, sofern „öffentliche Verkehrsinteressen nicht entgegenstehen“.

    Uber dagegen setzt nach mehreren juristischen Schlappen mit dem Service UberX auf die Vermittlung von Mietwagen (PBefG §47 Absatz 4) mit konzessionierten Fahrern und versicherten Fahrgästen. Auch Chauffeurservices wie Blacklane berufen sich auf diesen Paragraphen.

    Den Mietwagen-Paragraphen nutzt auch Clevershuttle in den Städten, in denen das Startup nicht die Erprobungsklausel nutzt – zum Beispiel Dresden und Leipzig. Das geschieht allerdings in Verbindung mit §2 Absatz 6, der die Genehmigung von Mischformen zulässt.

    Die dritte Möglichkeit, das Personenbeförderungsgesetz im Sinne der Mobilitätswende auszulegen, nutzen Dienste wie Moia (Volkswagen) in Hamburg und BerlKönig (ViaVan, Daimler) in Berlin. Sie docken ihre Dienste als Ergänzung an den öffentlichen Nahverkehr an, wobei physische und „virtuelle“ Haltestellen angefahren werden.

    Update, 16. Dezember 2018:

    Moia wünscht sich mehr Rechtssicherheit für Startups. „Die neuen Mobilitätsdienste brauchen einen eigenen Paragraphen im Personenbeförderungsgesetz“, erklärt Sprecher Michael Fischer. „Denn sie sind weder Taxi- noch öffentlicher Nahverkehr.“ Die Zulassung von Sharing-, Hailing- und Poolingdiensten hängt bislang vom Wohlwollen der Genehmigungsbehörde und vom Verhandlungsgeschick des jeweiligen Startups ab. Und: Die Experimentierklausel des § 2 Absatz 7, auf die sich auch Moia in Hamburg und Hannover beruft, ist auf vier Jahre befristet.

    #disruption #ÖPNV #startups

  • Olga Dubey, à fond sur le champignon pour protéger fruits et légumes - Le Temps
    https://www.letemps.ch/sciences/olga-dubey-fond-champignon-proteger-fruits-legumes

    Retarder le pourrissement des fruits et légumes. Pourquoi ? Impossible de le comprendre dans cet article du Temps, journal suisse des libéraux conservateurs francophones. Ce qui en ressort surtout c’est la nécessité de créer une start-up, aussi inutile que soit le produit. On habillera toujours la chose de préoccupations écologiques et on profitera du soutien de la recherche publique.

    #agriculture #smart_agriculture #startup #pourrissement #alimentation

  • #WiStand : achetez des manifestants et disruptez la démocratie

    Fake ou promo, je ne savais pas trop quoi penser de cette « nouveauté » jusqu’à ce que je tombe sur cet article qui renvoie vers de d’importants questionnements après avoir farfouillé les entrailles du « projet » qui, semble-t-il, serait bien réel. Au final ça me fait penser à la très maline opération de la #startup-nation « #Cap_Collectif » qui a réussi le tour, habile, de se proposer bénévolement aux #gilets_jaunes de La Réunion qui en avaient assuré la promotion avant de se vendre #en-même-temps au gouvernement et au mouvement global des gilets jaunes pour assurer et le support du « Grand Débat » et celui du « Vrai débat » : jackpot !

    Côté Pitch, c’est plutôt bien senti, le site avance que « Wistand est un véritable outil démocratique : nous nous interdisons de mobiliser plus de messagers lors d’une manifestation qu’il n’y a de contributeurs à celle-ci. Chaque messager représente au minimum une personne réelle. » Ouf, c’est rassurant, on comprend au moins qu’un milliardaire ne pourra pas monter sa propre manifestation en achetant quelques milliers de chômeurs aux aboies. Ce qui l’est nettement moins, c’est qu’un « messager » puisse représenter à lui seul plusieurs « personnes réelles » à la fois… Ce n’est pas ça qui va réconcilier la place Beauvau avec les chiffres, mais cessons d’être mauvaise langue : Wistand permet aussi de constituer des cagnottes et de mettre en place des banderoles et autres accessoires de mode utiles pendant une manifestation (masques anti-lacrymo, collyre, et autres battes de base-ball, bon, ok, là je m’avance un peu). Quoiqu’il en soit, la totalité des fonds perçus par la société sert apparemment à payer ce kit du manifestant, ainsi que les entrepreneurs qui iraient manifester à votre place. On se demande donc où est le business model. Cela étant dit, on sait que dans le digital, il est possible vivre très longtemps sans gagner d’argent (n’est-ce pas #Uber, n’est-ce pas #Skype, etc.)

    Irénée Régnauld : http://maisouvaleweb.fr/wistand-achetez-manifestants-disruptez-democratie

    Tout tient, je crois, dans cette dernière phrase, le fait que le but ne soit pas de gagner de l’argent ou réussir immédiatement mais plutôt acquérir des sortes de points de notoriété, voir d’initiative « révolutionnaire », dans le sens macroniste ou nieliste du terme. Et quand #Olivier_Ertzscheid évoque la série #Black_Mirror dans un échange twitter avec Calimaq, y’a clairement de ça (https://twitter.com/Affordanceinfo2/status/1120726902849851393)

    Pour rappel, Cap Collectif c’est ça :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/754050
    https://seenthis.net/messages/756614
    Hé oui, ça renvoie à la précédente tentative de marchandisation par la société #Raiz de la tentative de « #révolution » de #Nuit_Debout, qu’on avait déjà bien analysé en profondeur suite au signalement de @gastlag : https://seenthis.net/messages/481963 ... sauf qu’au fur et à mesure que ces projets dignes des élèves des écoles 42 de #Xavier_Niel ou #Google il y a de moins en moins de gens pour les contrer et la dystopie devient réalité !

    Reste à se positionner aussi sur le dilemme « en parler ou pas » : en parler et participer à l’opération de #communication, ou ne pas en parler et ne pas participer à l’élaboration d’un esprit critique à même de le contrer ?

  • Why I Hate The Idea Of The “Side Hustle”
    https://hackernoon.com/why-i-hate-the-idea-of-the-side-hustle-347f6f0deb2e?source=rss----3a8144

    Originally Posted HereI hate the idea of the side hustle.Let me explain.Since I was 16 I had a knack for picking up 2–3 jobs at one time. Sometimes I did it on purpose, other times it honestly just happened.It started first when I was working as a cook in fine dining and one of the Chefs went to another restaurant and asked me to come along. Rather than quit my current gig, I decided to keep both jobs. Soon, that very same Chef asked me to deliver some micro greens (like micro beets, micro basil, etc) for 20 dollars an hour, which at the time (and even now) was amazing! So of course, I took him up on that offer as well. When I graduated from college I began working as a data engineer and this pattern continuedQuickly after entering the corporate world, I had a director who left come to me (...)

    #leadership #business #startup #self-improvement #development

  • How Machine Learning Can Revolutionize Subscription Billing
    https://hackernoon.com/how-machine-learning-can-revolutionize-subscription-billing-178a301238f3

    A subscription business gives the predictability of a stable cash flow, which helps a company grow and make plans for the future. Some organizations base their entire business on subscriptions, for example, cable TV or SaaS providers, while others have this only as one of the product licensing options.Since this is a successful business model, managers are trying to identify new ways to prevent customer churn, decrease the cost of customer acquisition and find the best ways to structure prices and plans. Until now, marketing research was the primary tool to answer these questions, but machine learning (ML) is becoming more effective.How Does Machine Learning Work?Machine learning is all about making a system recognize patterns by using vast amounts of training data. Once the system (...)

    #analytics #subscription-billing #machine-learning #startup #big-data

  • Free Trial or #freemium? Going From 0 to 100,000 Users In Six Months With Wes Bush
    https://hackernoon.com/free-trial-or-freemium-going-from-0-to-100-000-users-in-six-months-with-

    Wes Bush is a #saas marketer who has quickly developed a reputation as “the free trial vs. freemium guy.” He helps SaaS leaders launch and optimize free trial and freemium models via his consultancy, Traffic is Currency, and is also the founder of the Product-Led Summit.I caught up with Wes to talk about his free trial vs. freemium framework, our own customer acquisition process, and the start-up scene in Waterloo, Canada.Geoff Roberts: All right, so first thing’s first — before just a moment ago we’d never met, but I have come to know you in online circles as the free trial vs. freemium guy. Tell me about your early career path and how you decided to zoom in and focus on this one particular problem.Wes Bush: I feel like I really stumbled into this space and I’ve been doing marketing and (...)

    #startup #free-trial #pricing-strategy

  • How Not To Kill Your Software Project
    https://hackernoon.com/how-not-to-kill-your-software-project-a42b8ca1ae86?source=rss----3a8144e

    Tons of software development projects tend to fail after launch for various reasons, of which the primary one is the lack of clear goals. Another almost equally significant but underestimated cause of failure is that a considerable number of these startups were solving the wrong problem.This situation is like a case of going a hundred miles per hour in the wrong direction and is quite common in the software development industry, but often binned under the ‘incompetence’ category (although, admittedly, that does play a role in some cases). It is an issue of poor communication between the parties involved.An ideal project would mean that all the organization’s staff at every level, as well as the target users, would be utterly convinced about the need to product and its ability to solve the (...)

    #software-engineering #technology #startup #software-development #agile

  • 10 Proven Strategies to Market Startups on #linkedin
    https://hackernoon.com/10-proven-strategies-to-market-startups-on-linkedin-378fd5485369?source=

    Do you see LinkedIn as just a professional networking site or a prolific social media platform?Are you aware of the potential of using a LinkedIn #marketing strategy for your business?Do you know how to use LinkedIn for marketing your startup?To know all this and more, this LinkedIn marketing tutorial blog for your #startup is a great way to begin!LinkedIn is more than just a social networking site that serves to connect job aspirants with employers or fosters strategic business partnerships.In fact, LinkedIn is widely used across the globe to seek employment. It is home to several recruiters. But it’s a whole lot more than that.With over 450 million professionals available on this network, it’s also an impactful marketing tool. LinkedIn connects individuals and adds tremendous value for (...)

    #social-media #marketing-strategies

  • How I got Rejected by 30+ Startups Before Landing a “Dream” Job
    https://hackernoon.com/how-i-got-rejected-by-30-startups-before-landing-a-dream-job-6582e42aca7

    I recently went through a job change and would like to post my experience. My post got a lot of people interested on reddit.TL;DR: Lot of companies do not focus on good engineering. Prepare. The algorithm rounds were a hit-or-miss for me.Always negotiate.Some facts:I resigned and decided to take a 2 month break to completely focus on job-huntingInterviewed (i.e. at least 1 online round) with 35+ companies. Mostly startups (seed to series A).Mostly in India. ~10 in EU, Japan, and other overseas countries through stack overflow careers. I don’t think my then 8k SO reputation helped out.I had linked to my medium profile in my CV and in 3 or 4 interviews (after initial screening rounds), we talked about my (somewhat controversial) blog Can’t hack your way to the topI practiced mostly using (...)

    #interview #job-rejection #startup-job-rejection #startup-rejection #algorithms

  • How to launch an #sto: Complete Guide to Marketing
    https://hackernoon.com/how-to-launch-an-sto-complete-guide-to-marketing-9e42b18c15d0?source=rss

    In the first article, we understood what’s the difference between STO and #ico campaigns for projects and investors.Today let’s talk about launching an STO and marketing campaign for STO projects.STO Launch GuidePreparing for any STO, like the ICO, should be divided into major steps, each of which directly or indirectly affects the marketing campaign as a whole.1. Preparatory stage.Here we shall place all necessary preparations before STO:– Private Placement Memorandum and White PaperFirst, the formation and writing of Private Placement Memorandum and White Paper, which includes both a general and technical description of the project, as well as a detailed description of the token model and tokenomics, the financial model of the project, business-plan, market research, project risks, roadmap (...)

    #blockchain #bitcoin #startup

  • The Mindset Of The #startup Founders
    https://hackernoon.com/the-mindset-of-the-startup-founders-4b22c0b0d1d7?source=rss----3a8144eab

    What Goes Into The Mind Of Startup Founders?Idea is powerful but not until it becomes actionable and get the validation by real user.We are living in the era where the word impossible seems to be challenged by young dare-devils. For them every problem seems to be like an opportunity to make an impact. They are not limited by their thoughts, they want to fight, they want to try, failures are no more stopping them, they have all the courage to stand up and face and grow up.That is the spirit which is shaping the current world of today, fostering new energy and giving birth to new kind of innovation. I have been fortunate enough to meet many startup founders and also being a startup founder myself, this topic very close to my heart. It very relevant in the current dynamics to understand (...)

    #business #technology #entrepreneurship #leadership