hn_go_brrrrr

Sounds like a pretty typical junior engineer to me.

It's not "Open Source", to use the capitalized term the OSI attempts to gatekeep. It fits most non-zealots' definition, though.

Sounds like you need a different manager.

Even if the shares are his collateral, they're still his for now, which means he still has outsized influence on the company. The GP is arguing that if he were to sell a bunch, that might be better for the health of the company.

Given the piles of spammy shit on Google these days, I'm wondering if "doesn't have its own index of the full web" is actually a competitive advantage.

> We'll never figure out how to do it because it's unethical to experiment on humans.

I don't think jails have to go through an IRB before they make changes.

I think GP was repsonding to this:

> I find the notion of supporting this level of harm to others to be no more moral if you vote for it than if you commit a violent crime.

I likewise find it pretty ridiculous to equate voting for retributive punishment for murder and actual murder.

> Quick, how many blocks will 4096 bytes use on my storage device?

1 or 8, depending.

Google has 12B shares outstanding. A 1 cent hit to share price is already far more than $100K.

I have no idea what complaints you could possibly have about Boq. It makes you more productive, haven't you heard?

Nothing at Google is that easy. It is a large and slow-moving bureaucracy.

Any home with an ACH nat of 1 that's attempting to condition the air (heating or cooling) is wasting a mind boggling percentage of the energy. Surely that's not the natural ventilation rate of the _typical_ home? That would imply that 50% of homes are worse.

Also they had no functional targeting computer or gun sights.

Probably a "fun safe math" compiler flags joke.

Thanks, that's an interesting restriction. Where does it come from?

What review can any part of the judiciary do of a constitutional amendment? Even if the amendment authors explicitly say "we're doing this to enrich ourselves and screw over everyone else", once it's part of the Constitution...isn't it a done deal?

While we're being overly reductionist: it's just moving bits around, what harm could that possibly do?

Gotta love the "What idiot wrote this code? Oh. It was me." moments.

I heard a joke recently that the 'G' in GPU should now be considered to mean "general".

What you're observing is that companies lie, not that there aren't differences between the two.

It signals they're pandering even more to Wall St.

There's a meaningful difference between the two. You're fired for doing something wrong. You're laid off if the company wants to cut costs.

More elegant, but far less fun.

Or Rainbow Six

Heh, a lot of comments here make it clear they don't understand working at a megacorp, but I can actually believe this one.

You started off with

> I mean, if you did a good job, then this is no extra work for you.

And now we're at

> What of it? Comes with the size and money.

which is quite the difference. It no longer matters if you did a good job, suck it up and take the audit?

It also wholly misses what the root-comment Googler was complaining about. You may feel that Google as a whole "deserves" this somehow, but the engineer was saying it feels like a slap in the face to everyone who was working hard on DMA compliance.

> Why should trillion dollar companies get a pass? Because some engineer will feel bad about a probe that is a mile over their head?

No, but this is a remarkably unsympathetic take to someone who is venting. You're looking to Google-bash, and that's fine, I'm usually happy to join you in that, but look past the megacorp to the person who is pissed that their hard work and that of their team seems pointless.

You're again assuming remediation work. Just the work required for an audit that you end up passing can take weeks.

You've very clearly never participated in an audit if you believe this. Audits are a ton of work, to prove in excruciating detail that things actually work the way you claim they do.

The NOC folks I've worked with have been incredibly sharp. No one with half a brain would talk down to them.

My dog is twice as trustworthy as tech businesses.