bsuvc

> or stuff I need long periods of time without interruption.

This is every day for a developer though.

Many smaller companies are what you describe.

The pay will probably be less, but it is a trade-off.

I stand corrected.

It looks like web workers is the way for JavaScript to do multi-threading.

Async has always been enough for what I need to do in the front end, as most of my long running processes are just calling a back end.

Edit to add: for context, I am a full stack developer and know what threads are... I just never have needed them in the browser.

> many webdevs just have no clue what a thread is, because generally, they don't need it, so it isn't taught

JavaScript doesn't have threads.

Do you mean corn?

Most American food has High Fructose Corn Syrup instead of Sugar.

> During this time I hopefully remember to take my medication.

I have a recurring reminder on my phone and find that it helps keep me on track for this.

I'm not used to taking medicine and only started a couple months ago, so found that I can easily forget without it.

It's not about you.

Exactly. It's a classic magician's trick (and featured in a Columbo episode!)

Maybe if there is a way to see all predictions made by someone, it would be more compelling.

Very fun. I played all the levels. Thanks for sharing.

100% agree.

The people making the decision to switch to Teams don't "get" slack.

They think the features are the same, so what's the problem?

Ironically, Microsoft Teams is terrible for teams.

It's a Frankenstein cross between instant messanger and SharePoint.

I think you're missing the point.

CI solves it because it proves that it can build in the pipeline, using a well defined environment.

No guessing at which node version you need or any other dependencies that may be required.

Having CI would have avoided this problem.

It doesn't matter. It was enough for me.

I haven't used Notepad++ since they were exposed for having a CIA backdoor, which they "fixed" after it came to light.

https://notepad-plus-plus.org/news/v733-fix-cia-hacking-npp-...

That's just why he hated it.

Another example of how weasley Zendesk can be:

They created a fake band called "Zendesk Alternative" just in an attempt to pollute the Google results if you search for an alternative to Zendesk.

http://zendeskalternative.com/

While not illegal, it shows the way they think, a sort of manipulative pettiness.

It sounds like the author got stiffed by Zendesk on this bug, $0 due to email spoofing being out of scope.

The $50k was from other bug bounties he was awarded on hackerone.

It's too bad Zendesk basically said "thanks" but then refused to pay anything. That's a good way to get people not to bother with your big bounty program. It is often better to build goodwill than to be a stickler for rules and technicalities.

Side note: I'm not too surprised, as I had one of the worst experiences ever interviewing with Zendesk a few years back. I have never come away from an interview hating a company, except for Zendesk.

I haven't read the book, but does it really say this?

> He also tells of how he can back out of contracts by inserting a clause “subject to the approval of my partner”, where said partner was actually his cat. That is called “fraud”.

How can you take anyone seriously who does a thing like this?

> I realized that I couldn’t restrict my search for evidence to the familiar authoritative sources without ignoring a near-infinite number of new sources

This happens because the so-called "authoritative sources" have lost their trustworthiness, creating a vacuum that is filled by new sources, some good and some bad.

The problem is, people are bad at thinking for themselves, and basically outsource their beliefs to third parties. Are we worse at this than we used to be, or has it always been like this?

We need more primary sources of information, and less filters trying to persuade us, who often have unseen agendas and different motivations.

If open source is not a requirement, Jetbrains IDEs are very good.

It's not a fork, but there is VSCodium

https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium

WSL seems like a variation of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish tactic Microsoft has used in the past. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extingu...

> Don't do this. This pattern is easy to spot and you instantly lose all credibility.

The difference is, I don't go around telling you what to do. Be a nice guy if you want.

I simply stated my way of thinking, but it angers the "nice guys" and I get attacked for it.

Oh, and you're not the gatekeeper of credibility, nor do I care how "credible" my opinion is to you (what does that even mean?). Credibility of opinions is just more "nice guy speak".

Typical nice guy response.

I never said any of those things, that it was better to be a jerk or toxic, but you assume that I did.

Ah yes, someone else who has read it.

You're right, it is more in the context of romantic relationships, but I have since noticed nice guys can be a problem everywhere.

I certainly had some "nice guy" tendencies in the past, and maybe still do sometimes, bit I try to be aware and strive to be more direct in my words and behavior.

It's been a few years since I read it... I may read it again actually.

> nice

I'm reminded of a book I read once called "No More Mr Nice Guy" where it explains that "nice guys" are actually kind of jerks because they behave certain ways to try to manipulate people and they expect reciprocation.

They live by a sort of unspoken code that they believe exists but which other people may or may not be aware of.

When a "nice guy" doesn't get his way, he can become bitter and resentful.

(I am using the term "guy" to fit the name, but it could be a woman too)

I'm not sure if you intended to describe your manager as "nice" in this way, but niceness has become a huge red flag to me ever since reading that book. I much prefer someone who is good (in competence and/or in behavior) than someone who is nice.

> I knew that the VCs’ interest in my life’s work wasn’t quite as genuine: they were juggling billions of dollars and wooing me with a script perfected on hundreds of souls who came before me.

Not everyone has to care as much about the same things as you do.

It's ok for some things to just be a business transaction.

I'm a maintainer (one of many) of an open source project, and this topic has been on my mind a lot lately as I review PRs.

I am more suspicious of PRs from new contributors by default now. Of course I keep these suspicions to myself, but besides simply reviewing code for all the regular things, I now ask myself "what sort of sneaky thing could they be doing that appears benign on the surface?"

> but oddly enough melanoma is negatively correlated: sun exposure protects you from melanoma.

I hate to be that guy, but: citation needed.

I did a quick search and the best I could find was speculation that sun might be protective, but the majority of what I found said sun exposure increased your risk of melanoma.

While the link itself is not political, it seems to be inviting the people who want to turn HN into a place where they can say why their preferred candidate is the best, or more typically why the other candidate is just about the worst person in human history.

HN is better when politics are discussed elsewhere.

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity.