I believe that's what https://www.riot.im is?

I have the exact opposite feeling towards this feature. It's completely changed the game at my design studio, made me a better designer, and makes us all more productive. We've gotten to the point where we'd probably turn down work if it meant we couldn't use Figma to do it.

That said, we are all producers at my studio and we also respect each other's space. Everyone designs in some capacity and we're all very comfortable in our skin. We don't really "snoop" on each others work if we know it's not time for feedback or we're not co-designing. The only time I'd pop into someones file or artboard I know they are actively working in is if I need to quickly copy/paste something I know they have (little things like this are amazing). Speaking of co-design, this is my favorite part of Figma. A few days per week we dedicate time to co-design with another person, kind of like pair-programming. Generally we both already have a base level of work complete and we talk through it, then riff on each others ideas and work to come up with something new or solve problems in different ways. Working this way at least a few days per week has really paid off for us and it's quite fun. I also feel like I learn new design tricks or skills I wouldn't have if I wasn't working this way.

I feel like between using this feature in a pre-planned way and also having some unspoken rules/constraints around how we review each others work is all you need to do to make this less of an issue. Honestly I look at it the same as literally standing over someones shoulder. I would never do that unless invited, and even then I'd prefer to sit next to them and it be more collaborative. There is also the trick, which some people do at our studio, of simply working in a private file until you're ready to paste everything into the collaborate projects. It's as simple as a copy/paste and you have complete privacy if that's what you want. We purposely do this with most of our clients so they are not tempted to leave feedback before we're ready.

I haven't considered myself a front-end developer in quite some time (at least 7-8 years), but it used to be what I'd put on my business card. Since then I've focused almost entirely on PM and Design. I have a decent front-end background, but I'm by no means pushing production code.

I recently decided to give Webflow a try after a good friend, who does happen to be a front-end dev (and quite good), told me how cool he thought it was.

He wasn't wrong. Yes, you have to pay to really do anything with your creation, but I think it might be worth it (if you're a designer who doesn't want to learn to code). I was extremely impressed with how quickly I could export my assets and various measurements from Sketch and lay everything out in Webflow, especially when it was time to build the various breakpoints and add some animations.

What would have normally taken me a few days (over the course of a few sessions), instead took me 2-3 hours, tops.

More importantly I used flexbox for much of the page, which is something I hadn't touched before. I've of course read about it and have a basic understand of how it works, but I'd have spent A LOT of time getting that aspect of it right had I been coding from scratch.

The best part was, at least from what I could tell and based on their claims, all of this would have exported to clean code worthy of a production site. Pretty cool.

So, as the author mentions, Webflow is very interesting. It's just not exactly practical because of the way it's tied to their CMS and hosting platform. If you're only really building marketing sites for clients who need basic hosting anyway, it might be perfect for you, but outside of that I can't imagine where I'd use it. Certainly not on a product team, but it's still worth playing around with on the free plan.

I think you are being down-voted because others have pointed out this is a venture by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, so it will most definitely not be Secular humanism or anything close to it.

Well then it's doomed to fail, frankly, because 1) it's an extra limitation on the behavior of people in their target market of "free thinking, creative individuals" (who will not appreciate arbitrary constraints on their behavior that are not based on secular ethical established facts), and 2) there is no rational evidence that living that way is somehow superior to something like secular humanism, in fact the evidence seems to indicate the opposite

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-secular-life/201410...

But I was not here to argue that. If this new "nation" wishes to be forward-thinking and open-mind-inviting, it needs to shake off the religion requirement.

In what way is Flash still important?

I have had Flash disabled via a browser extension for what feels like years now.

Good luck taking online training from any government agency. FEMA, e.g.

Bluetooth is slow and unreliable unless you're using Airpods (due to the W1 chip), which I think is the more subtle move by Apple in this case. I was not a happy camper when I first read about Apple removing the headphone jack, but I won't lie, I'm an Airpod convert. They work flawlessly for me and I haven't traveled with or used normal headphones since I got them (other than a nicer pair of over-the-ears when I'm working on my desktop).

I'm not saying this excuses the removal of the headphone jack, but from a business perspective it does add up.

I've said it multiple times now but I was exactly the same way. I was a little bit annoyed at the removal of the headphone jack but then ended up getting the iPhone 7 because I wanted the newer features. I didn't have wireless headphones, so I went all in and got the AirPods along with it and, holy hell, this is the closest that any technology has come to really feeling like magic to me. The pairing process was awesome, the range is great, the sound quality is great (after breaking them in hard for a week or two), and I literally forget that I'm wearing them sometimes to the point where it feels like the music is coming from inside my head. They're just so convenient and nice that I'm ok with doubting Apple initially but relieved that they proved me wrong. Forget the headphone jack. If this works the way these AirPods do going forward, I'm a convert.

> the sound quality is great

Really? I use AirPods when I'm out and about but when I'm at my desk I plug in a pair of $20 wired Sony earbuds that sound way better...

Personally I really do find the sound quality to be quite good on the AirPods. When I'm at home I'm often using a much more expensive pair of open Beyerdynamic headphones so it's not like I haven't experienced high quality sound, though I wouldn't consider myself an audiophile.

This is another good point. Quality headphones are rarely bluetooth. I have a nice pair of Sennheisers. They do not come in bluetooth. And yes, I use them with my phone at work.

I thought the AirPods sounded like ass when I first started using them but after 2 weeks of using them every day for hours on end, they've really broken in and they have great range and separation. They don't have a great seal but I don't consider that a negative for what I use them for.

This is exactly what I feel: music coming from inside my head. The AirPod is a very under-hyped product. Its beauty is that you can wear it and completely forget about it and focus on whatever the hell you want to do. You actually feel that rare freedom. This freedom and focus it gives you is the most precious quality that 99.9% gadgets lack these days.

Well said. They're the only reason that I actually think a wireless future is possible without a headphone jack.

> I literally forget that I'm wearing them sometimes to the point where it feels like the music is coming from inside my head.

I see I'm not the only one :D I've also noticed other people and their wires hanging out more and more. I'm thinking wires are probably going to go out of fashion in the future and will look weird.

In addition to it being magical, it's really incredibly useful and handy for driving and for work. Great to be on a phone call in a crowded server room, without extra wires being in the way. Great for commuting. And super-extra-great at the gym.

Even on the treadmill? Even going hard?

I'm not trying to push buttons. I use Jaybird X3s and feel comfort from the corded nature of the headphones. Here on the streets of NYC, I see AirPods more as fashion statements over an actual audio solution.

The instantaneous pairing sounds lovely, but I'm concerned most concerned with audio quality, bluetooth connection in a busy city, and general practical logistics both in and out of the gym.

I play basketball in AirPods. That should tell you all you need to know. Running, jumping, trick shots, drills, 1:1, and they've never fallen out even once.

I used to have JayBird X2s. They were fine but they definitely fell out from time to time and I'd always have to subconsciously "manage" the cord.

AirPods are my primary gym headphones and I'm never going back. I will pay double or even triple to replace them if I had to. That's how much value they deliver in my day to day life.

Yes, even going hard. I can't dislodge AirPods even if I shake my head around as hard as I can and try to dislodge them. My wife is on the treadmill almost every day with hers, running fast; she has no issues with them falling out, either. I do get that the security of a cord is preferable for some, but I've had a really great user experience. I don't wear them because they are fashionable; I think they look rather dorky, to be honest. But I love how they work.

I tried wearing them at the gym, but I sweat too much.

I've also had one fall out when I was out shopping. I was on an escalator and managed to pick it up, but now I'm super paranoid whenever I walk near a sewer grating.

I guess physiological variations are inevitable but for me I have to be a newly showered Labrador to shake it off my head.

Wearing in-ear headphones while biking is a bad idea anyway. I've switched to bone conducting headphones for my daily commute by bicycle and they're great for listening to podcasts while still hearing the surrounding traffic.

> Wearing in-ear headphones while biking is a bad idea anyway.

On roads? Yes. Mountain biking? Depends on where I am.

> I've switched to bone conducting headphones for my daily commute by bicycle and they're great for listening to podcasts while still hearing the surrounding traffic.

Any brand/model you would suggest?

You should try it if you can. Yes, helmet removal can and likely will dislodge, but it's not obvious that just the act of using them with a helmet on will cause problems.

Maybe it won't work, but worth trying.

I've worn them with a helmet and they only fell out when I tried to take the helmet off. As long as I look for them when taking the helmet off, they're no different from checking my regular headphones.

Most things I bring mountaineering - especially - most especially electronics are tethered in some ways. It may be too risky to buy an iPhone just to try this out, and I'm doubting anyone's gonna let me borrow a phone and a pair of these. regular earbuds are inexpensive, and if you lose/break them, it's not the end of the world. Airbuds are... $150. For something that can be easily lost.. yikes.

I had Jaybird X3's before I had AirPods.

The X3s were not terrible, but, the AirPods are more comfortable and stay in my ears more firmly. I can wear them for hours and hours without them bothering me and I only dislodge them if I physically knock them out of my ear.

I own AirPods and Jaybird X3s, and the sound quality of AirPods crushes that of the Jaybirds. I completely switched over to AirPods a few months ago and have never looked back.

Then the X3s must sound really bad because AirPod sound quality is decidedly mediocre, especially for $160 in-ears.

I disagree completely. You either don't own a pair or you only tried a fresh pair. You gotta break those bad boys in. It took me 2 weeks before they broke in and I noticed a huge difference.

Bluetooth audio quality is subpar to a wired port in my experience. A good example is the Q35, when paired via bluetooth the audio quality is worse than when plugged directly into the headphone port.

IIRC there are multiple audio codecs in the standard (and of course different versions of standard), some of them really old. So with certain device combinations you may get better result than with others.

I once looked into these and got the impression that main goal is to make it possible to produce standard compliant devices as cheaply as possible.

Edit: I had written down some of the stuff I found: http://juhap.iki.fi/misc/qc35-windows-bluetooth-audio/

Just wanted to note that listening to music through earbuds while driving is illegal.

I generally believe that laws only need to be enforced when reasonable. But this law actually sounds reasonable...

In California, to my knowledge, it’s only against the law of both earbuds are in.

The legality depends on what state you are in.

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/10/31/is-it-legal-to-w...

Apple has had a series of truly revolutionary products over the years.

The complete list, as far as I'm concerned: Original Macintosh OSX/macOS iPod iPhone AirPods

AirPods really are amazing, my singular complaint is that they're not waterproof.

Waterproof AirPods would be the one thing I would pay stupid amounts of money for. My biggest complaint with the AirPods (and it's a really tiny one) is that they don't have a great seal. Waterproof AirPods would have to have a good seal to the ear.

And that’s exactly why Apple is so often so great at innovation: they make bold trade-off decisions on behalf of the users knowing the public will beat them initially, but that it’ll pay off in the long run - for everyone. Which other company does that?

I don't see what AirPods do that any other, more affordable, Bluetooth headsets don't. I get the wireless appeal, I like using my cheap 20€ Bluetooth headphones with build in microphone/remote. I mostly got them for the remote, their 7 hour running time lasts me for like 3 days of commuting.

But I also still carry around my wired UE triple.fi because I like having the option for going wired, better sound quality, less latency and especially less drain on my iPhone SE's battery due to disabled Bluetooth.

Even when nothing is paired/active just having Bluetooth enabled seems to drain phones batteries so much faster.

The thing AirPods do is work better than other, more affordable, Bluetooth headsets. There’s no lag, you painlessly pair once and can use on all your Apple devices, they’re so light you can easily forget they’re in your ears, etc etc. I have a Plus which has a much bigger battery, but I don’t notice any difference with Bluetooth on or off.

There is no latency or battery drain with the AirPods. That's exactly why I can't compare them to any of the other Bluetooth headphones I've tried. They are significantly better.

How often do you have to charge airpods ?

I never pay attention to the absolute time, but when they need a charge they make a sound to indicate it and then you can easily put one in the case/charger and then put it back in your ear when it’s charged and then charge the other one, all without pausing your call. This duty cycling means you are effectively limited by the case battery size not the bud battery size.

I agree with the others upthread that I’m not going back to wires after getting my AirPods.

If you're on a call (and I do some marathon calls), I get a small ding in my ear and pop out one airpod, charge it, in 10-15m put it back in and charge the other one and with ~30m of completely uninterrupted conversation (swapping airpods does not cause drops) I'm good for another 2 hours.

For music, I get ~4 hours easily.

Mine last about 4 hours, and are up and running again for at about another 2 hours in as little as 15 minutes.

Apple's quoted battery life and charging times seem accurate to me.

Amazing how factual statements in response to questions about same are getting downvoted. C'mon people.

If it makes you feel better, AirPod users rarely talk about their bluetooth stuttering issues, but it does occur.

Bluetooth is lossy. Replacements must keep quality of predecessor as a minimum.

Do you mean in this case, or in general?

I think it's very often the reverse – a disruptive replacement has to really blow past the incumbent in some respect, but it's quite hard for something new to be up to par with the old, polished thing in all respects.

PCs were less powerful than mainframes, MP3 is lower quality than CD, etc. etc.

The problem Bluetooth is solving is wires. It’s really something you don’t recognize how annoying it is until you don’t have to deal with it anymore. With aptX the audio quality isn’t bad either. Over time all of those issues (price, build quality, audio quality, battery life, etc.) will only get better, while wired headphones will by definition always have that wire...

Wires are better imo. Anyways they could and do easily offer both to keep everyone happy. No need to remove the wired option.

On a side note I found this analysis of aptX very illuminating. I found it after the salesperson in my local B&W store tried tell me it was completely lossless http://www.sereneaudio.com/blog/how-good-is-bluetooth-audio-...

I should add that the portable Bluetooth speaker he was demoing sounded great compared to other offerings in the market that I have heard. I wasn't sure if this was more due to the codec or the general quality of the components. The speaker in question is the Dali Kaitch https://www.dali-speakers.com/loudspeakers/active/dali-katch... for those who are curious.

Apple doesn't support aptX so it's irrelevant to cableless iPhone users.

> It’s really something you don’t recognize how annoying it is until you don’t have to deal with it anymore.

I definitely recognised it while still using them! When I'm not wearing the headphones, the wires are always getting tangled. When I am wearing the headphones, the wires are always getting caught on things.

> The problem Bluetooth is solving is wires. It’s really something you don’t recognize how annoying it is until you don’t have to deal with it anymore.

I bought an iP6S instead of a 7 just for the jack because I wasn't a fan at all. Then in the span of four months, three jacks died on me in a row. I had a spare cable for my over-ear Momentum but the two intras are dead, and having to look for a replacement suddenly brought back to my mind the whole OMTP vs CTIA mess, if they have remote volume control at all. I'm seriously considering wireless for the next ones without even having used any.

With aptX-HD you get lossless.

It's actually "near" lossless however one could successfully argue that it's good enough. Check out the wikipedia for details.

That is something you have to enable, if you need to respect some bandwidth restriction.

> The codec optionally permits a "hybrid" coding scheme for applications where average and/or peak compressed data rates must be capped at a constrained level. This involves the dynamic application of a form of "near lossless" coding – but only for those short sections of audio where completely lossless coding cannot respect the bandwidth constraints. Even for those short periods while the "near lossless" coding is active, high-definition audio quality is maintained, retaining audio frequencies up to 20 kHz and a dynamic range of at least 120 dB.

> Bluetooth is lossy.

And 99% of people don't care.

...which is how you slowly erode standards for both twisted fun and massive profit.

It's sad and pathetic watching this mission creep of audio degradation at the greed-fueled discretion of corporate profiteering.

Phone DACs aren't very good. I use a very expensive DAC when I listen to music at home because I actually care. I also own a pair of AirPods because in a noisy city environment walking around it doesn't actually matter that I'm losing fidelity.

Simply incorrect, at least on the Apple side of things. Android DACs and onboard amps are hit and miss.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/iphone-6s-plus-audio-qualit...

He's done similar measurements on other Apple audio devices, including their $9 Lightning-to-headphone adapter and they all fare well.

As I commented elsewhere the problem with Bluetooth is fatigue related not listening pleasure related.

Edit: As a side note the only positive I can see out of removing the headphone jack is the potential proliferation of quality DAC/preamp dongles. Still annoying though.

My Sennheiser HD25s are still going strong after ~18 years service. You cannot find Bluetooth anything that sound remotely as good. Not even for 3 times the price and I can guarantee you that each and every Bluetooth headphone in circulation today will be in landfill in 18 years.

> You cannot find Bluetooth anything that sound remotely as good.

In absolute terms, you are certainly right. However, for most people, Bluetooth headphones sound good enough. I'll gladly give up some fidelity if it means I can lose wires.

Yes, usage longevity is another factor to consider besides sound quality. However, I was replying to OP, who specifically was talking about the signal loss due to BT encoding. I countered with the fact that analog lines also experience loss, and only the latter has little chance of improving moving forward.

Bluetooth was never designed for audio usage. Revisions over the years have shoehorned functionality into what is effectively an FTP protocol. There's also the compression and audio mangling that bluetooth does. You do not get this with a straight through audio cable (or some other wireless technologies that don't compress)

How easy is it to move your Airpods from your phone to your tablet to your desktop to your non-Apple work PC? Don't get me wrong, I think Airpods are pretty amazing for what they are. But they're still hampered by what they are. For someone whose primary concern is "I hate wires" they're great. They sound 'pretty good for earbuds' as multiple friends, some of whom bought them, can attest.

Personally, I can't stand the sound quality of earbuds. My closed-back Audio Technica over-ear headphones can be unplugged from one device and plugged into another in seconds (no pairing/unpairing, turning bluetooth on and off, etc) and are always 'charged'. Plus they sound lightyears better than any bluetooth anything.

my airpods are unreliable. I could not connect them to my MacBook Pro the other night. tried changing rooms thinking maybe there is interference. tried re-pairing from scratch. they'd pair but not connect. after 15 minutes of trying various things I switched to wired headphones.

I haven't tried again since then. Had to re-pair them to get them to connect to my iPhone.

this is the first time I haven't been able to get them to connect but I've had several times where they won't say connected for more than 30 seconds

As with troubleshooting most hardware issues - experiment, restart, reset. It can either be an issue with the driver in which case a simple restart (maybe a “hard” smc reset as well) fixes the problem, or a hardware problem with the bluetooth antenna which would require a swap of the chip itself, but is usually on the macbook/iphone side, not the airpods and would affect all of your bluetooth connectivity. I’ve had both types of issues and it sure sucks. Had to replace an antenna cable in an iphone 6 to be able to connect to my airpods again.

Moving the airpods between devices is still a huge pain. Even just switching from my iPhone to my iPad sometimes requires turning bluetooth off and on, and other superstitious pairing rituals.

If I only use them with my phone (which I do almost all of the time), they will connect automatically quickly. But pairing between devices will probably always be more painful than a simple wire.

I noticed this thing with my old acer transformer 2-in-1 laptop if you enable bluetooth for audio streaming and have wifi running it slows to a crawl (watching youtube for example) actually won't buffer. I'm wondering if the bluetooth/wifi is on the same chip and can't run simultaneously.

> I'm wondering if the bluetooth/wifi is on the same chip and can't run simultaneously.

Worse, they're close to the same frequency band, and can interfere with each other. Wifi channel 14 is 2.484 ghz. Bluetooth is 2.4835 ghz.

Not just 'close to'. The wifi channels are very fat, and every channel extends .01GHz in either direction from its center. But more importantly bluetooth uses the exact same 2.40-2.48 range. It tries to minimize interference by frequency-hopping, but it's guaranteed to overlap 2.4GHz wifi.

So it's probably okay to use for a wireless mouse/keyboard but continuous sound output is a no go? Just seems like a bad design I mean the computer doesn't even have an ethernet port so to have wifi + bluetooth as a suggested combo/function and it doesn't work... haha

Same here. I have a pair of AirPods and the whole setup is so much more elegant now. I really don't miss them wired headphones, or the headphone jack. Now, I just pull the AirPods case out of my pocket, pop up the lid, insert the headphones in my ears, and everything just works.

Don't Bluetooth devices start lossily compressing audio when either the sender or receiver can't keep up? I listen to flac files, so I'm not interested in that, no matter how much space you lose with a 3.5mm socket.

convert.

Which makes everyone else's decision to drop the audio jack that much more stupid. Virtually all other OEMs tend to do things so much more superficially than Apple. Like face authentication for instance. It's been and still is a joke for years in the Android world. Perhaps Apple's will be a joke, too, but at least it looks like they put a good amount of effort into making it secure even if they had to add some extra hardware components in there.

Another reason why it's stupid for everyone else to follow Apple on this like sheep is because Apple also did it to sell their expensive Beats Bluetooth headphones. The other OEMs don't have a billion-dollar headphone division...

This is very surprising, as last time I did research on this subject I remember seeing that Starbucks alone owned 40%+ of the "single cup" coffee market share. The runner up was the McDonalds/Duncan "lower end" group of coffee sales.

Specialty coffee was great for the margins, but the market-share was not even close to the numbers being reported in this article.

I've taken quite a few overnight buses during a 6 month trip through South America. Even when paying for the luxury option (which is literally $10-$15 more, totally worth it) and having fully reclining comfortable seats, it all comes down to one thing, the drivers.

If the drivers are maximizing for time you're not going to sleep very well because they are driving like a maniac. Sudden halts, near misses, and sharp corners make for a particularly terrifying experience when you're attempting to sleep.

The fact that this endeavor is focusing on drivers that go slow is 100% a positive for me and I would now consider trying it.

This is an issue that really just exists with overnight buses, as trains don't make sudden stops and they are not competing with other trains for a lane.

Buses like this should be fitted with accelerometers, and drivers be rewarded for good driving. Actually the same applies to ordinary buses, a careful driver makes the journey much more comfortable.

While I agree with the sentiment, it does nothing to account for all the other drivers on the road. I don't really see how this is fair to the bus driver.

That's true, but a lot can be avoided with conservative driving. Anticipating what other drivers might do is major part of the skill. Also, stopping suddenly can be a serious health risk if you're expecting the elderly to use the buses.

But I do take the point, I'm not a big fan of the overbearing tracking that you read about, for instance, in the Amazon warehouses. Especially when you're asking for skilled performance but paying unskilled wages.

Perhaps it could just be asking a percentage of drivers to take extra training, but I do think it should happen to some degree.

In Mexico at least, if the driver goes over the speed limit a semi-loud buzzer goes off. Which really encourages them to slow down under the limit.

Same in Chile. The speed limit is 120km but the buzzer on the bus sounds at 100km.

Do we really want to measure drivers by smoothness only, ignoring other factors like safety?

When a difficult situation on the road arises, the drivers may be less likely to hit breaks, knowing they are being constantly watched.

A better option would be to allow passengers to rate the drivers easily, Uber style. Such system would count in more factors, and (I guess) would be less likely to optimise for just one factor.

This is the part I'm slightly confused by. Obviously it makes more sense to hold in your own wallet (which I do), but what happens to the BTC people decide to keep on Coinbase when a separate fork is created? If those people are not getting the BCC for "free", who is? Coinbase?

If it ends up having value, and they keep/use/sell it in any material way, there will probably be a class action lawsuit.

Yes, they basically keep it, though it may turn out like ETC and eventually allow withdrawals.

The title is, of course, misleading. They are offering employees a microchip implant. It's not required.

Still crazy that anyone would opt-in to do this, but a misleading headline all the same.

I don't see any immediate problem with that assuming taking it out is relatively painless and there's no cost associated.

I'd like to have one so I wouldn't have to worry if I have office keys with me, instead I could just scan my arm at the door. I've never left my hand at home.

Its still a medical procedure and has anyone done an analysis of the risks ok we do it to pets but fido isn't going to sue you if bad stuff happens.

Maybe this is different since I'm coming from non-US point of view so health care is quite different. To me it's obvious that employer's insurance covers implanting, removal, and any issues that it might cause.

The employer might no longer exist (IMO, the probability that a company that does these kinds of experiments goes bankrupt is far from negligible), deny responsibility ("you should have let us take it out when you left the company"), or not pay for all costs (say, you moved state; will they pay travel costs to their appointed expert? Pay for time lost?)

your country of origin shouldn't matter. I'm pretty sure he/she was concerned about health related medical risks, and just because the insurance 'covers' it, provides little solace

What's the worst thing that can happen? It gets infected and needs to be removed and I have to take up to few months of paid sick leave?

Maybe I'm missing something, but all in all this is convenience vs pain value comparison. Does the pain the implant might inflict outweigh the possible benefits.

I bet there is something I'm not considering or I'm misunderstanding something. To me this is pretty straight forward for now.

If you get sepsis or rare complications it can be fatal we had a intern who broke his leg at a company cricket match and he was dead before morning.

If it is my time to die then I will die. I don't think we should steer away from something because it is not 100% safe. Like I drive my car each day which is by no means 100% safe.

its a matter of trade-offs and choice. to me, a .000001 chance of a complication is not worth it vs 'just carry a card in your wallet'.

driving a car has many risks, and if I could opt for a card in my wallet as an alternative I certainly would.

I am curious to how old are you roughly? it seems like you are stating you can get a medical complication, take a few weeks sick leave and return to your life, which makes me think you are <25

It really depends what you mean by "medical complication". If we are assuming that we are getting the implant at hospital by a qualified physician risks are already at minimum.

Most likely "complications" would be body rejecting the implant or the wound getting infected. I've had foreign objects in my body (not by choice), they were removed because the wound got infected. I was monitoring the wound, once I thought it didn't look/feel normal I went to clinic and got it checked. Over all I wasn't out of commission for even full four weeks.

even minor complications can result in life changing injuries and in the USA a massive hospital bill

You can not control everything. Obviously everyone would prefer to be healthy to being sick or crippled, but getting implant like this is hardly the most dangerous thing people do.

Since I'm not American I can't obviously speak for you. For me money wouldn't be an issue since it would be obvious in this case that the company would bare all the medical costs involved caused by the implant.

I dunno, I'm surprised you thought it was mandatory. Pretty confident in the state of Wisconsin you cannot force someone who does not have life threatening ailments surgery.

The original title is "Wisconsin Company To Implant Microchips In Employees", which is different from the current "Wisconsin Company To Offer To Implant Microchips In Employees".

The difference is not so subtle; atfirst I assumed too that it was mandatory.

Obviously you cannot physically force them, but that doesn't mean it can't be a condition for employment. No being familiar with Wisconsin law, I wouldn't know if that's allowed.

If there's no law that disallows employers to ask for this, it will be mandatory in a matter of years.

It's illegal to require employees to have microchip implants in several states, including Wisconsin.

That's a little extreme...

See also: mandatory arbitration clauses, non-competes for blue collar jobs, and "opt-out" data collection.