rkomorn

I feel like this kind of glosses over the fact that a lot of people (I'd say an overwhelming majority) prefer the cashless options anyway.

I don't know if I have any friends who miss carrying coins and cash, or who miss carrying individual bus/subway tickets, but if they do, they're awfully quiet about it compared to the friends who happily say they can't remember using cash.

I'd say that if anything, cashless things are catching up to the general public.

Personally, I'm in favor of keeping things cash-friendly because people shouldn't be forced to be cash-free, but that's only to support a small minority of people.

With the way they're going, I'm less and less convinced there will be much left to buy, unless it's for pennies.

I've only been a JetBrains user for five years but it's felt like it's only getting worse the whole time.

GoStorm?

> Instead, I tend to ask: if I change this code here, will I always also need to change it over there?

IMO, this is the exact (and arguably only) question to ask.

I don't think their comment was meant as a counter-argument.

I read it as a call to action: things only go down the slope if they're pushed that way, so now is the time to try and prevent said push.

Yes, that's why you need to stress test in CI.

On top of 2., new tests should be stress-tested to make sure they aren't flaky so that the odds of merging them go down.

I hope this is just an edit away from making more sense to me.

Yes but it consistently gives you a hot plate of cold food...

Doesn't help when some MLB players also apparently participate in the gambling outcomes, too.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/46906636/guardians-emman...

It's amusing to me how personal all this stuff is.

The XM5s were super uncomfortable to me (to the point I was relieved when they got stolen) and I ended up going back to Bose even though I liked the sound quality on the Sonys better.

> The vast majority of civilian flights could be flown entirely autonomously right now.

This is extremely dependent on your definition of "autonomously" because at the moment they are not at all approaching autonomy.

At best, they'd be automatic, in the most rote way.

I'm French and occasionally like to (re)read about the revolution period and every time I come to the calendar stuff I can't help but think "Really? This was stuff we wanted to spend time on?"

[flagged]

This is a weird "no true Scotsman" take.

Yes, the fact that you don't see a problem with saying "he deserved it" as justification is the signal not to hire.

I think a lot of people (myself included) would just like to not be constantly part of some sort of revenue optimization effort.

I don't care, at all, about the "scale of information" for the company's sake.

> I do think he was entitled to a little embarrassment

This is exactly the kind of signal that would make me not want to hire someone.

Tit-for-tat? Spite? No thanks.

100% agree. I'm currently out of tech (and not all that likely to return) but this is the one thing I feel certain about if I do decide to come back: there will not be a place for me as some sort of artisanal, non-"AI-first/fluent" engineer (whether I like it or not).

Even in adjacent roles (design, PM, etc), I'm confident "how do you leverage AI?" will be one of the central evaluation questions.

Edit: for emphasis, again: whether I like it or not.

XML is one of those things that fulfills the requirements I have but makes me say "not like this..."

I think my roundabout point is that companies, code, policies, etc aren't just "things without emotions that can't be offended" because they're all made (or maintained) by people (like art).

I agree with all your points.

> the subject is the code/system/product/organisation, which has no feelings and hence can't be offended

This is like saying that telling someone their artwork sucks is not offensive because "the artwork has no feelings."

I think the iPhone and iPad names are just "relics" of the iPod name, and the iPod name had probably a lot to do with the iMac's popularity at the time.

> If, in the context of cooperating together, you say "should I go ahead?" and they just say "no" with nothing else, most people would not interpret that as "don't go ahead"

This most definitely does not match my expectations, experience, or my way of working, whether I'm the one saying no, or being told no.

Asking for clarification might follow, but assuming the no doesn't actually mean no and doing it anyway? Absolutely not.

As European as American apple pie or as American as European apple pie?

I guess to me there's just a big difference between what you're describing (which matches what I remember) and "stubbornly check-focused" as ancestor comment said.

I do find the money transfer options where I am in Europe much easier, though, and they do make checks and PayPal/Zelle/Venmo pretty obsolete too, IMO.

I guess there's also a difference between "can use checks" vs "have to use checks" because, aside from rent, I can't recall having to write checks.

Everything else allowed either credit card or direct debit on top of allowing checks.

Yeah, exactly. "We're leveraging AI! Efficiency gains!!" and who cares about the actual humans on the other end.

Is it? I lived in the US for 20+ years until 2021 and, though there were definitely more checks than I see in Europe now, the frequency with which I used them was approaching zero, which definitely wouldn't qualify as "stubbornly check-focused".

I don't have any positive feelings about AI interviewers, but I don't believe your take is correct. I agree that it does filter as you describe, but it's just a side effect.

I think the actual reason is simply that they're lazy and don't care.