87 karma · joined November 19, 2018
persecuted by government and persecuted by State-sanction(Constitution) are different. One government could decide it hates X group and persecute them, it doesn't mean the constitution of that country supports it.
as human beings, we are expected to behave differently when others are watching us, than when we are alone e.g. why lock doors before changing dress, or why cover mouth when yawning, or why not swear in an office etc. Naturally, we don't speak everything we think, lest we air the dirty laundry.
Do you judge a building during construction ? Do you judge an author by his first drafts ?
Either judge the final product, or only judge the process, or only judge speed of execution. And if you want to judge all three, then leave the candidate alone and let them think in their underpants and smoke if that's what gets their brain juices flowing.
As it is, they want to judge your thought process, your final result, your speed, and your ability to perform when someone is standing over your shoulder. It's a bit silly, mainly because it's not representative of any real-life scenario. Candidates who are introverted (exactly the IT geek types they want to hire) would have a major anxiety issue with the scrutiny part of it.
as human beings, we are expected to behave differently when others are watching us, than when we are alone e.g. why lock doors before changing dress, or why cover mouth when yawning, or why not swear in an office etc. Naturally, we don't speak everything we think, lest we air the dirty laundry.
Do you judge a building during construction ? Do you judge an author by his first drafts ?
Either judge the final product, or only judge the process, or only judge speed of execution. And if you want to judge all three, then leave the candidate alone and let them think in their underpants and smoke if that's what gets their brain juices flowing.
As it is, they want to judge your thought process, your final result, your speed, and your ability to perform when someone is standing over your shoulder. It's a bit silly, mainly because it's not representative of any real-life scenario. Candidates who are introverted (exactly the IT geek types they want to hire) would have a major anxiety issue with the scrutiny part of it.
However, 10,000 other people are ready to.
It's just a game of supply and demand.
Exactly. The only successes or failures we care about are our own. Very rarely do we even think of someone else's embarrassing moments. We are all pretty self-centered and that's liberating in a way.
But the issue is that they're not just judging you by the approach, they are also judging you by your results.
Some people, especially those with social anxiety (not some fancy psychological term, just someone who feels uncomfortable when someone is watching over their shoulder), can only achieve results if they are not judged during the journey.
The ideal scenario would be - give a problem, leave the room, and come back after 15 minutes - give the candidate some breathing room.. to make mistakes, to try out few methods, to collect their thoughts.
This concept of 'We want you to think aloud, We want to see your approach', doesn't match reality.
In reality, the only time that happens is when both parties are trying to figure out a solution collaboratively. Not when one party already knows the answer and is 'testing' the other party.
An author's first draft, or a speaker's demo, has a million corrections before it gets to print/stage. Can RR Martin write freely if the NYTimes reviewed his every draft version ? Can Steve Jobs go on stage and give a demo if he has not already rehearsed the entire saga ?
It's like judging a person at their vulnerable stage. Unless they are a saint who can completely block out the existence of another human being sitting a few feet away, it's hard to concentrate.
You're more worried about how your thought process looks than you are about solving the problem at hand.
Then comes the adage 'under promise over deliver'.
If you send out an update saying you're working on cool X module/technology/idea to solve a problem, and then it turns out you couldn't, it's a bummer across the table.
Even if it succeeds, you don't get much credit for it because everyone 'pitched in' with their ideas/tweaks at the beginning, so now the entire team feels like you were just the implementer of the team's design/strategy.
Call me a lone-wolf cowboy if you will, but it's a plain truth that no amount of 'team-players' can deny.
And if companies do not want to work with such under-communicators, no big deal. Not everyone meshes with everyone else. There's plenty of other candidates in the sea, and plenty of other companies in the sea.
A lot of communication (what I'm going to work on next week) falls under promise. So I don't tell what I'm doing until I've already done it. Or when I'm unable to do it.
In other words, I let success or failure be known only after I've made sure of either using my best efforts. This usually takes ~2 weeks of isolated/concentrated effort to find out.
Then as a consultant at Big Tech working with different customers, I found out they are not big fans.
'promise. deliver or not' - is what they seem to prefer.
Obviously none likes shocks. But they also don't like surprises.
Source - got fired despite extra-mile technical achievements.
It's an interview room. Don't provide laptops. I can leave my phone & bag outside the room.
I can't think freely when someone is watching me.
> Nobody's going to let you have 15 minutes undisturbed
Is that how the real world works as well ?
I don't mean the technical knowledge aspect. I mean the social anxiety aspect.
To draw a gender-parallel, if it occurs at the level of head of household, it's called male-chauvinism. If it occurs at level of religion, it is called patriarchy.
To draw a leader-parallel, if it occurs at level of subreddit, it's called mod-abuse. If it occurs at level of government, it's called fascism.
They all represent the same thing - power/control gone to head.
And it is ironically hilarious how a subreddit that bans/censors/tramples opposing/minority views constantly criticizes the government of the same.
Check out r/indiaspeaks where dissenting opinions are not banned.
I'd love to get the odds on this one.
Facsism yesterday : Persecute minorities
Fascism today : Help persecuted minorities
Sounds good to me.
1. Those who value privacy over security
2. Those who value security over privacy
No matter which side any government tilts towards, even if its a reasonably balanced approach, the other side will complain about it.
I left a strongly worded feedback on their form
Working mothers is a modern anomaly.
Prior to industrialization, most women were home-makers.
And home-making was no slacking off either. Managing expenses, food (storage & cooking), raising children (feeding, teaching, playing), social bonding (neighbors, communities) etc. It kept their hands full.
In reality, like always, it's a mix of both - meeting delivery deadlines, and meeting nature-call deadlines.
This is a common new-age trout. Hinduism is the oldest religion in the world, with an extensive set of scriptures, rituals, rules, and culture.
It's like a banyan tree with many roots. Just because it doesn't enforce a particular branch (sect) with the rigor that other religions do, it doesn't mean the tree doesn't exist. It exists old and strong.
If you are new to this issue, and want to understand the CAA/CAB in simple words - https://old.reddit.com/r/IndiaSpeaks/comments/e9qhvb/cab_in_...
For example
CAA does not differentiate within Hindu castes saying 'Only Dalits are oppressed, Brahmins are not oppressed, so we won't give citizenship to Brahmins'. It speeds up process for all Hindus.
CAA do not differentiate within Christian sects saying 'Only Protestants are persecuted, Catholics are not persecuted, so we won't give citizenship to Catholics'. It speeds up process for all Christians.
Similarly, CAA does not differentiate within Muslims saying 'Only Shias are persecuted, Sunnis are not persecuted, so we will give citizenship to Shias'. It keeps speed same for all Muslims.
> Sri Lankan Hindu Tamils being prosecuted in Shri Lanka.
And 4 lakh Hindu Tamils were given asylum in India in past 40 years. Proof - https://twitter.com/PIBHomeAffairs/status/120730426394626867... Currently there is no persecution going on there as civil war is over. If in future, they get ill-treated again, a new version of CAB might be brought.
There have been many instances of citizenship granting based on particular cases throughout India's 70 year post-independence history. This CAB is just one of them. It's neither the first, nor last.
Both 'Pakistans' had a responsibility to protect minorities as per Nehru - Liaqat pact, and they both failed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_discrimination_in_Pa...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Banglad...
"Bangladesh Constitution establishes Islam as the state religion" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Banglad...
Persecution of religious Minorities in Bangladesh - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Banglad...
Citizenship Amendment Act is a law to fast-track citizenship of 'persecuted religious minorities' in 3 neighboring countries Afghanistan/Pakistan/Bangladesh.
It is a case of positive discrimination (affirmative action for the Americans) towards Hindu/Christian/Sikh/Buddhist/Parsi refugees.
Here is the reddit thread explaining the Act in simple language - https://old.reddit.com/r/IndiaSpeaks/comments/e9qhvb/cab_in_...
It does not affect normal citizens of India. It is also NOT a case of negative discrimination against Muslim refugees, like most detractors claim it to be. Official tweet from India's Home Ministry clarifies this - https://twitter.com/PIBHomeAffairs/status/120730412196068556.... The usual waiting period of 11 years stays as it is for them. For minority refugees, it is reduced to 5 years. That's all.
Every country has a database of its citizens. India was lagging far behind in this. Due to enormous population, porous borders and poor living conditions, there are a lot more undocumented immigrants in India than probably any other country on earth. The National Register of Citizens is an attempt to set that right.