It's so easy to make a specification which can't be implemented (or shouldn't be). Very often, I go back and tweak the specification, after I start the implementation and figure out which assumptions are wrong ...
Interesting - how do you solve disputes? Say a farmer claims the work is done (e.g. the app is tested), but the company disagrees and doesn't want to pay?
Great question, and actually one of the first things I designed around! We only allow missions where completion can be objectively (or publicly) verified, no gray areas. In your example, if the app requires a registration or is restricted to beta users, the farmer must use the same email address linked to their Reward.Farm account. The brand can request screenshots or any other proof, but honestly most of the time it won't even be necessary as app creators often already see every user action on their end.
On top of that, our reputation and level system lets brands restrict missions to experienced farmers only (e.g. Level 5+). Bad actors get flagged early and never really become a problem. Since most starting missions come with modest rewards, there's simply no incentive to cheat. Try to game the system and your reputation takes the hit, meaning bigger, higher-paying missions stay out of reach.
Also, once we have a solid base of trusted users, disputes could be resolved through a community jury system: a random selection of verified members anonymously reviews both sides' submitted appeal/evidence and votes on a verdict. No central judge, just trusted peers. Would you agree to that kind of process as part of our Terms of Service?
That said, I'm not claiming this will be perfect, where there's money, there will always be people trying to exploit it.
I haven't found one, like I mention in the article; I'll edit it if someone proves me wrong.
I'm starting to get a feel for a pattern - the books tend to be more expensive, and also take longer on average to deliver (a few weeks, instead of a few days). The latter would be normal for rare editions and some third-party sellers, but if I'm ordering a popular book and it takes longer than usual to deliver I can kinda smell the dead rat. But the only way to know for sure is to open the box in disappointment.
I've ordered books that were print-on-demand and had them arrive in 3 days. Some of the Amazon ones will have the exact date in the back, and I can see they were printed the day I ordered it.
For what it's worth, I think print-on-demand is a win overall, while there are lots of low quality stuff out there, the ability of small authors to get published and readers to find rarer stuff out weighs that.
I can't necessarily speak for that specific book, but a youtuber I follow (who has POD books as one of her particular bugbears) has stopped recommending bookshop.org after personally getting POD copies from there.
A few reasons I can think of:
- Many wired headsets don't have batteries. You can't forget to charge it ...
- They don't auto-connect, when you don't expect. It's clear if it's connected to the phone or the laptop.
For open source, this has been the practice for many projects. The docs is often in README.md or in a separate folder "docs". For larger projects, there could be a separate repo from where a docs site is built.
However, in corporations, docs are often in Confluence or MS Sharepoint, separate from the code. Tech specs often require comments, discussion, or estimate/budget approvals from non-tech staff. Hence, some corporate AI coding tools can refer to docs in such corporate sites. That doesn't work too well yet, IMHO ... time will show.
reply