aanm1988

Inconceivable.

Roommates?

No you can't you liar. Seattle is the worst city on the planet. You will live in a crime riddled suburb and pay outrageous rents with awful commutes.

Don't come to Seattle. Stay in wonderful sunny california. It's so much better than Seattle.

;)

I'm probably gonna end up moving out of Seattle because of the rent. It's affordable on my salary, but I want to start really saving up so I can have more freedom.

I don't know if I agree with what you are saying, butI am awfully tired of reading stories glorifying these weirdos for living in a car.

Gonna go ahead and (once again) be the naysayer when it comes to google. This just makes google a very effective new form of patent troll.

Must these posts always devolve into bashing young people?

Every thread there is some old guy going on about how stupid young people are.

Principal isn't a level most people reach, and has better salary.

Didn't sanders tax plan involve closing loopholes used by big companies and taxing the wealthy more heavily?

Neither of which would hurt your precious small businesses.

They would hurt the corporate overlords though.

How many businesses fail that could have succeeded with lower taxes?

And I can support corporate tax cuts on the idea of helping small/medium businesses because it does just leave them with more money.

Where you lose me is all the trickle down voodoo economics ideas about how slashing taxes on big corporations and he wealthy is going to help me.

People let the marketers use hoverboard without raising a stink and this is what we get now. /s

If you are a leader and you aren't looking out for the people under you then you are a shit leader. Applies to the Marines, applies to Amazon.

My manager there largely did what you are talking about and it did nothing good for anyone involved. It's pretty much the reason why one of the guys who worked for him as an engineer is now moving up to senior manager well my former manager is still stuck at the same place.

Acting the way you describe just leads to poor performance from your subordinates, up to them just leaving. That reflects poorly on you.

NOt really. My mom worked in a warehouse for years and enjoyed it. It's hard labour but it was a good job and she liked it.

It was also a union job with decent pay/benefits and seemingly less of a grind than the Amazon FCs.

They slap "unless you know better ones" on everything, so if you have go ahead and bring it up.

OH absolutely.

They are contradictory enough that you can get dinged on one for following another at review time.

Frugality means putting up with lousy hardware and cramming people into working environments to the point where people start bringing up OHSA w.r.t. number of toilets.

Customer obsession means getting an email about a feature used by a couple percent of users and having to spend a week scrambling because the strategic decision you made (to drop the feature in a major release because you need to get it out) has now been declared wrong. Sev-S was a popular term (S-team being Jeff and his directs).

Bias for action means break extremely important OS features that support multiple products because of pure incompetence. Note that this should really conflict with customer obsession and are right a lot, but oh well.

One thing I found odd was that are right a lot/disagree and commit don't seem to matter if the opposing argument is your manager wanting to do other stuff.

My less snarky response would be that they do spread this stuff around. It has some positive impacts around things like customer obsession, which Amazon is great at. Bias for action can be a good motivator for the right type of person, see something wrong and you go fix it. That said it's not problem free. Frugality is made fun of a lot, because it often goes from sensibly frugal to just cheap.

It's not a realistic assessment of skills though. You don't write code on a whiteboard for work, you do it in an environment you have setup to let you work most efficiently. You have the option to look up things you can't quite remember, do some research to see if there is anything you missed, take a quick break to clear your head, etc...

Plus, too often it devolves into a game of algorithm trivia with the interviewer. Gotta prove how smart* you are.

"So what have you been working on?" "Oh I was the lead engineer on our new backend system. Built it on top of X, built a custom foobar because we needed to scale Y functionality blah blah blah" "Oh cool, cool. We actually are looking at building something similar. Well anyway enough of this obviously useless information exchange, here's a question about graph searches".

*smart may be substituted for grinding out leetcode questions for weeks beforehand, at the interviewees discretion.

> The big companies that use them have started to finally admit this

I didn't get as much whiteboard coding as I thought in my recent interview with a big company. Last 2 actually.

But of course facebook and google was still all coding. Google is still obsessed with their overwrought process, and still try to sell a poor false positive rate as a feature.

I still haven't really heard a better idea. Some of them sound incredibly hostile to the applicant (e.g. lets try it for X days). Do this work, bring it in and discuss is a pretty decent idea.

I'd like to see more of "here's what we want, lets code it on this computer however you want.". Lets talk about while we work.

or just talk about what you have done.

They toss out one advantage to gain flexibility to try to improve in other areas.

For a site that has people who go on and on and on about the innovators dilemma this argument seems pretty shortsighted.

Alternative, is it worth it to try to cater to users like "you" vs just leaving them behind?

Java and Silverlight I get, but not upgrading certs I consider to be pushing it. When we cater to users who have no interest in upgrading technology we hold everyone else back.

I prefer the technique of saying "It's done on this date. Ignore us at your peril". The view that technology can just be bought and then never maintained is ridiculous and should die. Nothing else operates like this. You buy a machine and you know it's going to include ongoing maintenance costs. Software is no different and trying to pretend it is just ends up with you paying stupid amounts of money and resources to maintain an ancient tech stack decades later. Or worse you have a stack where the people you are paying big money to maintain it are starting to retire or die.

Professional association of security researchers?

Come up with a good set of guiding principles for members. This would help avoid waiting 7 years and then sticking it online. Not criticising, I'm saying the situation here is pretty screwed up.

Members pay dues, the association provides backing. Company threatens to call the FBI and the association is the one they can deal with.

An organized group can help to provide the needed political pressure so that a properly disclosed vulnerability doesn't ever lead to the FBI and trumped up charges.

A respected group can lend credibility to a researcher. A bank may not give 2 shits about even a well respected member of the community. They will care if it's a group well known for finding and disclosing vulnerabilities.

This seems like an easier problem than the general case of software engineers because the community is smaller and you don't have the conflicting interests of "I can negotiate better on my own". Plus things like membership can be handled more easily, start with a small group of people who absolutely should be members. Extend via application and invite.

That's fine. I still want them to pay more.

I think the democracy one might have been a shot at Trump and the broken process that allowed for his election.

US politics are pretty terrible.

It's a tool to use.

Like others have said, it makes working with generated code easier.

and amazingly despite all these apparently horribly complex choices that programmers won't understand, it's a great language to work in.

Maybe guys like Gosling and Pike should take note. A touch more complexity in the right places can make a huge difference.

The entire article is about the gang and their history which goes back decades. They open the section specifically about Obama with

> Mr Trump and Mr Sessions have pointed the finger at former President Barack Obama over the spread of MS-13, alleging that his open-door immigration policies fuelled its growth. But the gang formed and flourished in the US long before Mr Obama came to power. MS-13 was identified as a significant threat in the 1990s, and a special FBI taskforce was convened against the gang in 1994.

Then strengthen that argument with a quote taken from politifacts article.

Anyway, unless you have reasons to try to distrust politifact I don't see the problem.

You mean like they did in the preceding paragraphs?

I support background checks. I know a woman who had a driver try to grope her when she was getting out. The ones in MA just sound ridiculous. Unlimited look back periods for some crimes. Robbery is a serious offense, but if someone has been a law abiding citizen for a decade afterwards they might actually be rehabilitated.

You mean people who have lived with that weather all their lives aren't moving to another country (will all the associated pain) just to avoid it?

But that theory made so much sense!

This article reads like someone who doesn't give 2 shits about Canada decided to crack open wikipedia.

> but many countries of similar stature — G7 nations, for example — dismiss the Great White North as nothing more than America’s top hat

Canada is one of the G7 nations. Or did you mean the other 6 don't care about Canada?

Can you please just not bother writing about my country anymore.

Many green card holders started out on h-1Blocker visas.