NetStrikeForce

That's the summer I decided I didn't want to be a programmer.

I'm not saying is the right or wrong thing to do, I'm just saying the message is clear.

But it always saddens my heart that we insist on these stereotypes and hardly mention how other countries are "legally" siphoning taxpayer's money out to corporations by becoming tax havens and they're supposed to be a good example on how to handle taxpayer's money. The thing is, they're actually just better at stealing for their friends :)

Netherlands, I'm looking at you.

Thanks for sharing!

Why is it better to know the local culture? E.g. would a local 65 year old be a better or worse culture fit than a 25 year from Canada?

> That's not saying choose the local candidate solely because he is local. I fail to see how it's contradictory. I think we're talking about two subtlety different things. I'm talking about where someone currently resides, not where that person was born or raised.

The problem is you haven't given a pragmatic reason why it's better to hire a local person. Well, in fall fairness that's not fully true, you might have implied less hassle during the hiring process (the remote person has to move locally, find a place, might need more time to settle due to that).

> I'm pretty sure you meant "increases diversity" because that's the popular trend.

I meant decreases, then I've meant that diversity is an advantage as per several studies. I'm sorry it was not clear.

I am the one referencing objective reasons, not sure why would you precisely call me out as a trend follower though.

> I've never comprehended why the "diversity" attribute magically makes a candidate superior. Typically, "diversity" superficially targets ethnic diversity rather than diversity in expertise, experience, or thought. Granted, those aren't mutually exclusive but they're not mutually inclusive either.

It's interesting that I keep seeing this "diversity of thought" mantra more and more often. I am seriously asking: Where did you get it from? I mean, it starts to look like a meme, so I wonder if it's on purpose.

Anyway, back to the point: What do you think diversity brings? And what do you think we refer to with "diversity"? For me it is:

- Different age

- Different gender

- Different socioeconomic background

- And any other thing that would've exposed you to different challenges in life: Your skin colour, your country of origin, your native language, where did you study, your level of studies, etc

Bringing e.g. more women or people from a different ethnic background to the team is a sure way to increase your so-called "diversity of thought". These people have probably faced different challenges than you did. Now if you want to hire someone that looks like you, grew in the same part of town, studied at the same place, had a similar socioeconomic background while growing up... Your chances of getting very similar points of view are very high.

And again, please spend some time researching the different studies, there are several by reputable sources. Apparently it is a fact that diversity is an advantage.

Ah, fair enough, I guess the reason is to "avoid the process of bringing someone from abroad". Sounds pragmatic enough to me.

> One objective reason to favor hiring a candidate living locally over one abroad is effective communication. The less local a candidate is, the greater the chance of poor communication due to increasingly diverging dialects and cultures and a lack of knowledge about the local culture.

You have just contradicted yourself; but let's bite: Even if this looks reasonable to you, it's nowhere near the problem you think it is and most of the times far outweighed by the other reasons you had to choose a non-locally-born-or-raised candidate.

It also decreases diversity, which studies show is an advantage and not just a nicety.

You can sell your shit to me and I can't sell my labour to you. Ok, at least pay taxes locally and fund my universities, roads and infrastructures to pump up the local market.

I will share this with some developers I know... :-)

I think people are focusing too much on the name/branding because they don't have an interest on the troubleshooting that led to this discovery, which I found very interesting as I can totally relate to that sort of work.

I do think all that extra money we paid in the EU was easily recovered.

It's going to be ironic when we have less money around than before paying into the EU :(

But people can democratically vote for it. You can elect your MEPs directly and you can elect the rest (council, etc) by voting in your national elections. Don't want the United States of Europe? Fair enough, vote for parties that oppose it. People are doing it.

> But its an assault on freedom to try to accumulate central power while decimating local democratic processes, especially for all the member states who did not join under such pretences.

That would be an assault on freedom if it was true, but it's not. If any, the EU reinforces democracy and enhances personal freedom. People rule the EU.

> It makes the affronts even more egregious when you realize EU citizens have little democratic control over the the European Commission and European Council which accounts for 2/3 of the European legislative body.

People have full control of it. Vote in your country for a party that will support your ideals in the EU:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission - Formed by one member of each state (each Commissioner is first nominated by their member state in consultation with the Commission President, although the President holds little practical power to force a change in candidate).

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/european-council/ - The members of the European Council are the heads of state or government of the 28 EU member states, the European Council President and the President of the European Commission.

> Whether you're for a United States of Europe or not these are issues we need to address if we want to make real progress in the EU.

Happy to see people bringing up these topics, I however think you might be misinformed. The EU is one of the most democratic organisations out there and, if actions speak louder than words, the EU has got a very decent track of upholding people's rights against lobbies and big corps.

> IMHO attempting to punish the UK by refusing to cooperate with them when its mutually beneficial to both parties is not a route I'd like to see us take. In general economic terms, it will almost always be in the EUs interest to work with the UK and not against them. The EU enjoys the benefits of many laws in the USA and elsewhere, for instance that a subscriber to a service in California can use that service in Georgia. Still, it would be absurd to assume the EU should pay a price to help enforce that law.

No one is trying to punish the UK, but I think op might have worded his point rather confusingly.

The UK is of course free to copy and paste the EU law. Anyone can do it (and I hope they do) - there is however a problem: How do you enforce it?

Is the UK strong enough of a market to force Netflix or Amazon to change?

Should the EU press Netflix to include the UK in the no-borders streaming zone? If you think the answer to this latest question is yes, then the UK has to contribute.

And, by the way, how different is your "refusing to cooperate" than op's "refusing to contribute to the recurring enforcement costs" - should contribution with the UK be free? Can you have your cake and eat it?

Well, I do think the potential salary difference is not worth it; and the reasons are what I've stated in my reply.

> I think it's safe to say tech workers are well compensated in both places, which was my point.

They are, agreed.

> The OP was acting very arrogant as if American tech workers didn't have healthcare, vacations, etc.

Well, they rarely have healthcare at the same level you can get in Canada, Spain, UK, etc - which is given to any worker in those countries. That is my point :)

They rarely have paid vacation, too.

> I think you're deluding yourself. No offense, but I don't need to justify my gun ownership through the guise of "hunting" like you do in Germany or other European countries. I don't shoot animals, only paper and steel. I like guns so I own them. Also you would be outmatched in gun competitions such as 3 gun races simply because you are not allowed to purchase modern firearms like AR15s. You will just tire out faster than the guy carrying a 5LB AR15.

You play gun sports, I told you can play gun sports in Europe too. It's a thing - not just "hunting" (seriously?:)). Good for you if you like to shoot AR15s.

> Agreed. Let's see how well your system copes with the refugee crisis.

Funnily enough, the US is not part of the refugee crisis yet your government is freaking out more than anyone. Food for thought.

> I'm eager to see if "those who can" can really feed the mouths of all the refugees.

It is possible. It has been proven in Germany of all places.

Funnily enough, the US used to be the receiver of refugees. Germans, Italians, Irish, Polish, Hungarians, Cubans, ... And it worked well.

> A number of important litmus tests for our modern society are taking place in Europe as we speak. A positive outcome might tip the scales here in America.

And we will prevail.

Heck, if even getting checked up might be a big spending for low earners I wonder how many people die without being correctly diagnosed.

This is what they are talking about; not terrorist attacks which are sporadic.

It's on purpose, part of the plan.

I do have it too, albeit the only one I pay for is the dental one - but more importantly, the barista at my favourite coffee shop has them too. At the same quality level.

> Free routine health checkups such as physicals,

My doctor calls me to get those done. They chase me! for free! but more importantly, they also chase the barista guy :)

> heck I even get a free gym membership.

Incidentally I do. I don't think the barista does. Gym fees are between £10 and £30 around here. Of course you an always splash out for David Lloyd's and pay 12x that...

> I drive a 350HP luxury sedan.

I either cycle 10 minutes or take a bus for 15 minutes. Why would I need a 350HP luxury sedan? I am already wasting money having a 170BHP Alfa Romeo hatchback parked in front of my house 24x7.

> Oh and I've never shot anyone, had to shoot anyone, or been the victim of a crime other than petty theft where my car was broken into one time.

Same here. Even better, I don't even think about it. Even better, as anyone is allowed to free healthcare there is less desperate people.

> But I do have the freedom to participate in shooting sports (and I do) whenever the heck I want

You can play shooting sports. My uncle does it regularly. Part of my family are actually hunters.

> and I don't need to ask mommy for permission.

Please, don't be disrespectful.

> If that's not high quality living standards, you must make 500k a year and be rich because I don't know what is.

Those are everyone's quality standards in great part of Europe. You are missing the point.

> I think your media has drastically altered your perception of what America is and is not.

Oh, our media - and I thought we all read TechCrunch, Gizmodo, CNN, BBC, ...

Luckily we have you to open your eyes. THANK GOD.

> Tech workers are well compensated and I'd rather be making six figures in America.

Good for you, but I am making six figures in Europe. Anecdotal data is anecdotal.

But even better, the guy not making six figures has free healthcare too.

> I'm sure your country is very nice as well, but there is not enough freedom.

I guess your freedom to play shooting sports (which you can in Europe too) is more important that your freedom to get free or affordable healthcare should you be in a rough spot.

You are privileged, I am privileged. However, I might not be who I am without free healthcare, cheap public nurseries, free quality schools, almost free universities, ... All paid by taxes of those who can, for those who can't. Remember you can be in one of those groups today and in the other tomorrow.

It might have not been her sole idea or even her idea, I'll give you that. However there's no evidence it was not her idea of partly her idea.

> Read the article

Please, this is the kind of comment not welcomed here. I did read the article before commenting. You are trying very hard to read between the lines, when Google is claiming once and again that her work saved 1.5PB/day - I'm not sure why will you try so hard to read a hidden message in Google's words and dismiss what's written in plain English.

> it's clear that it was her "project".

So what? See my previous paragraph.

> She's an intern at Google, they're generally on a short leash.

Generally or always? In the US or in Europe? It was the second time she was interning at Google (it's in the article).

Again, you are trying very hard to read between the lines and guess.

This engineer did something that saved users 1.5PB/day. She did, no one else did. Other people did other stuff. To each their own - I'm not sure why do we have to downplay her achievement though.

P.S.: This is the kind of shit women have to put up with constantly. It might look like it's not important, but when you have to go through this every day it takes a toll on you. The worst part is that we don't even want to acknowledge it.

She did it, no one else did. You didn't, I didn't.

If other intern would have did it, then we would be having the same conversation about that other intern.

How much of that is paid?

Yes.

> So what?

So she saved 1.5PB per day - which no other Googler did. Nor you or me. She did.

> Don't get me wrong, I'm sure she did a lot of work for it, but looks like a lot of people would have been able to do that, there is nothing innovative in what she did, right?

If it was that easy, why wasn't done already? Why did she have to come along to do it?

You are confusing easy to implement with easy to come up with the idea. In hindsight it is a no-brainer, but somehow the almighty Google didn't do in years of Play Store.

Go figure, right?

P.S.: Please support your downvotes with a reply.