codechicago277

Many of the people pushing for these new rules are Christian Nationalists, and explicitly reject the separation of church and state. Some pastors are getting in trouble with their congregation if they try to remove an American flag from the podium, for example. It also fits in neatly with the Trump Bible that he released recently, which included a copy of the constitution, pretty explicitly rejecting the Christian belief of not adding or removing anything to the Word of God.

But this hypocrisy has been a core part of American culture since its founding, check out the book Money Cult to trace the origins and see more about how church is essentially big business in many of these states.

[1] The Money Cult: Capitalism, Christianity, and the Unmaking of the American Dream

[2] https://www.threads.net/@revjsreeder/post/C8W9cR8O1sg/?xmt=A...

You can use whataboutism to justify anything, but even your example is bad. Twitter admitted they got that wrong and Dorsey apologized: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/16/twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-says...

I don’t see any apologies for any of the bad actions Twitter has taken since the purchase, and the hypocrisy of doing this while claiming to be a center of free speech is astounding.

Of course Twitter had bias before because every group of people has a bias. But that doesn’t mean that everything they do is wrong or malicious, just because you don’t like them. The real tragedy is letting your own bias blind you to what’s in front of your face.

Tesla has bet the company on robotaxis, but their vision only tech stack doesn’t seem capable of solving it, which is a problem because Tesla has repeatedly promised FSD is right around the corner, or less than a year away. It’s hard to believe Karpathy would step down if he felt they were close to solving the problem anytime soon.

This announcement comes after a 4 month sabbatical where Karpathy said he wanted to take some time off to “sharpen my technical edge,” which makes it sound like this is the result of frustration with the technical approach instead of burnout.

The JavaScript ecosystem is insanely successful, even though the language, node_modules, and the entire process of building a SPA are disorganized and clearly poorly designed. What makes it successful though is those flaws exist because individual developers in aggregate have decided that they’re worth the trade off. All the JavaScript killers seem more precisely designed, but that’s only possible because they haven’t been shoe-horned into thousands of different use cases they weren’t meant to solve. Those edge cases add complexity and rough edges, but make for a more practical toolset in the long run.

See also “The last answer” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Answer

Full text: https://highexistence.com/the-last-answer-short-story/

These 2 are my favorite Asimov stories.

The only mistake the OP made was in acting like they hadn’t seen the question before, but other than that everything was fine. These code screen questions are usually a basic gut check and the real evaluation comes later at the on-site. Honestly the interviewer did a bad job though because the question clearly gives an advantage to someone who has seen it before.

Once I had a candidate struggle with my screening question, flattening an array of nested arrays, and that’s fine because I normally use that as an opportunity to see how they ask questions and work together on finding a solution. But the candidate went silent for about 5 minutes and then came back with a perfect solution, using iterators, which are a pretty obscure JavaScript feature. I later found that exact code block on the MDN site, and I was pretty shocked at how brazen an action it was, because if they had just asked for direction and admitted they were struggling they could have still passed the interview.

Here’s a report linking vehicle age to accident outcome and showing a correlation, I would assume higher incomes are associated with newer vehicles. I only took a quick look so not sure if they compare likelihood of an accident with vehicle age. https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...

If you didn’t look at the balance sheet I don’t see how you can claim to care about fundamentals. The company’s ability to be in business in a few years depends on how much cash they have and how much they can generate. If the market tanks financing dries up, and if they aren’t cash flow positive then it’s game over.

Whether people like the product or not and how they compare to competition only matters if they have cash figured out. Anybody can sell a dollar bill for $0.80 and have a fantastic product, doing it profitably is the trick. WeWork is probably the best example, entering high risk long term leasing commitments and subleasing that space at a loss. They were bid up to an insane $40 billion valuation based on just this, until they tanked pre IPO. Now with the low probability, high impact risk of a global pandemic coming about, they’re struggling to survive and I’m surprised aren’t bankrupt yet. Still have a better product than the competition though.

This quote comes from Blaise Pascal's Pensées, accessible here.

"That is why we like noise and activity so much. That is why imprisonment is such a horrific punishment. That is why the pleasure of being alone is incomprehensible. That is, in fact, the main joy of the condition of kingship, because people are constantly trying to amuse kings and provide them with all sorts of distraction.—The king is surrounded by people whose only thought is to entertain him and prevent him from thinking about himself. King though he may be, he is unhappy if he thinks about it"

https://books.google.com/books?id=KezeDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA45&lpg=P...