th4dv

I can't afford to buy a Ferrari, however I would really like to have one. Does my need is less important than a need of those who can afford it? Does this mean that now all Ferraris should cost (let's say) $1000?

It's all about negotiation really. Being a junior doesn't give you enough leverage to make this kind of demands IMHO. Juniors have this weird tendency towards overestimating their value. Don't make this mistake in the beginning of your carrier (been there, done that).

Basically every statement that says "Never do A" or "Always do B" without providing any justification for it. Documents like this only contribute to holy wars between junior developers by creating an impression that they should blindly obey some random set rules rather than forming balanced opinions.

This document should rather be called:

"Some practices for JavaScript projects that work for devs at Hive but might not necessarily work for you."

A lot of companies these days create "Best practices" guidelines just to boost their online recognition. Very often I find these guidelines useless or even harming.

This is an excellent point. Sadly, people who share less popular opinions will (probably) never get to the point when they can start up/down voting. So the only way to get these "superpowers" is to join the HN circle jerk.

> The main failing of TDD is the assumption that you know all of the tests that you will need before you know your software

One of the main failings of TDD is that developers think they need to know all of the tests up front.

> they are clearly exactly what the community rejects

aka. "HN herd mentality." It feels me with sadness when I see the same trend over and over. People who have different opinions on certain political/social matters are being silenced by this whole "community rejects" bullshit.

> Even though it's an US company

It always amazes me when someone just assumes that US companies are somehow superior to the rest of the world. I've worked for a couple of US based companies and the experience was shit compared to other non-US companies I worked for.

This is not about being "tired". It's about resetting your nervous system which for different people works differently. I often think about it as about a distinction between sprinters vs. marathon runners. Some people have biological predispositions to perform better in one of those.

I don't think that making any type of generalisations (eg. "people shouldn't be that tired") makes much sense.

> Nobody will ever want to use `yes` at 10 GB/s

Just because you say so?

Ever seen an ad saying "All shoes 50% off, offer ends by the end of this week" ? Now think about why these ads always have such a short deadline.

> improve the public impression

Someone trying to influence your impression IS manipulating you.

> relying on attempts to place yourself as an informed authority

I've spent 5 years studying psychology at uni so even though I don't consider myself as an authority, I think I've got enough knowledge to know what I'm talking about. I don't give a flying fuck if the person reading my comment will be convinced or not. With that said, if they at least do a research on the subject, we'll all be better off.

> In contrast to your comment, an ad for Viagra is straightforward

Care to elaborate a bit?

How discussing with someone anonymously on the internet compares with a situation where a company is using all kinds of techniques to trick people into spending money on their product?

It's not only about poor impulse control. A lot of those techniques work in such a way that people don't even realise that something is trying to influence their behaviour. Usually, these techniques "catch" people when they are off guard. There is a lot of psychological literature describing how unreasonable people behave for the most of the time.

Sadly, when it comes to manipulation, human kind has already lost this battle.

> how do they create needs you didn't have?

They use all kinds of sophisticated socio-psychological techniques to do so.

Unfortunately, most people (including yourself) don't even realise this, hence they become more prone to such techniques.

If you're strongly motivated by money, London is probably the worst choice for taking a permanent job (unless you have enough experience to make a nice 6 figures salary and all that).

Making a personal remark on someone just because (presumably) they have a different opinion on certain matters is pretty low.

> the total number who are willing to walk away are far too smaller

Because people are too lazy to walk away from a bad deal or simply don't want to read the contract they're about to sign is a really poor justification.

> But my hunch is it will come from the unproductive time. Studies have shows that shrinking the work week does not mean employees do less work. They do the same amount of work more efficiently.[1]

And yet, you want to fire people who let their brains relax for a couple of hours.

> You talk like they are playing foosball for 2.5 hours

Not a big difference. A lot of those people will forget most of the stuff they "learned" in a few months time.

> It's also about the market adjusting prices

Yes, but it'll work the other way around - the "safe option" will become cheaper, otherwise services that provide it will go out of business. What makes you think that "unsafe option will be the only option available for some people". Feels a bit like you're demonising the free market.

> some people are just too stupid and they'll hurt themselves and complain about it

stupid people will hurt them self, one way or another. You can't protect people from their own stupidity by introducing more and more regulations. Soon, you won't be able to purchase a kitchen knife.

> Regulations usually exist for good reasons

It's just a very small group of people telling everyone else what's good for them. I have a better idea - create regulations that "protect the innocent" but at the same time allow people to opt-out from such "protection" and use whatever transportation service they fucking please (but at their own risk).

> now it has become a problem

It's always been a problem. It's just that now main stream media focus more on these issues to force the anti-trump agenda. (I'm not a huge fan of Trump btw.)

"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions" - just sayin'

> But this was the police/airport-security that should shoulder most of blame

Not really. It's the United that called those "cops" so they should take the full responsibility for their actions.

I'm still amazed that "overbooking" is legal though. It feels to me like it's a one big scam - airlines basically sell a product that don't have and it's absolutely fine by the law. WTF world?

> Does that work

It does because it allows to apply very vague criteria when selecting candidates. 'Culture fit' bullshit at it's finest.

> You Are Not the Code You Write

Unless you're really passionate about your work. Take this from developers and programming will become just a job.

All the things the author mentioned in this article is just a bunch of statements probably based on their personal experience.