throwawaythekey

I find it fun because it prompts me to find the optimal guess (given hard mode). Playing easy mode I'm much more happy to do the first word that comes to mind and sort of fits.

To be more concrete, boilerplate != enforceable.

I'm sure Facebook had some pretty good boilerplate (probably something even more strongly worded and custom) and that didn't stop them from being GDPR slapped.

IANAL but as far as I know the existence of verbiage is not on it's own enough to make something binding. There is probably a lot of wiggle room here by jurisdiction as well.

Either way though, it seems like a very strange building block to base your business on. I assume if it were actually binding then many businesses would be hesitant to use namecheap.

Hypothetically should Americans stop paying taxes? Their government has a history of arming extremists/conflicts worldwide.

I understand the Ukrainian invasion is sickening/a travesty but I struggle to square what appears to be an underlying hypocrisy.

Or that could be the best way to start WW3. Your call!

> A private corporation is able to choose who to do business with, for any reason they want. They are not beholden to anyone but themselves and their shareholders.

Regardless of their motivations they are also beholden to the law. I don't have a lot of experience in this area but I would hope they would be in breach of contract for suspending legal/paying customers without notice.

Namecheap probably have a generic clause in their TOS that theoretically covers situations like this but these are not always enforceable.

My experience at a startup is if you get referred you get hired. We are ~50 people and about half are friends/contacts of previous employees.

Bland is forgettable. You don't want important biz comms to be forgotten. Bland doesn't spark thought in the reader. Clarity is achievable without being bland

> restrictions are justified based on the harm prevention to your neighbours

Taken to the extreme this kind of thought becomes pretty anti-human (thanos, global warming)

> mandating it could still be justified for certain activities

Yeah it could be justified for sure - I just don't think there's any way of ignoring that it's a judgement call/balance.

> When the principal danger is to oneself I think restrictions are rarely justified, but when the consequences are borne by others, I think it's more justified.

I think this point makes broad sense but needs refinement. For example if we assume there is a vaccine available that:

- Reduces personal injury - Does not prevent transmission

Using the above logic would mean that after taking the vaccine restrictions are more justified because the burden of the disease has shifted. I don't think that's what you intended and probably means that there still needs to be reference to absolute harm and taking reasonable minimization measures.

Forgive me for being an ignorant foreigner...

I see clips of train robberies in LA like this https://edition.cnn.com/videos/business/2022/01/14/train-the...

And then I have to ask myself how is that possible in modern society? Train robberies seem shocking enough that they HAVE to be indicative of a broader crime wave. Is there something about the US context that I am missing?

> if hypothetically, say, the virus had selective lethality

It might depend on how selective the lethality is! If a small population is vulnerable then I don't have a problem with them protecting themself to the best of their own abilities (no mandates). This is fairly common already with the immunocompromised etc.

If a large portion of the population is vulnerable then it becomes more grey. I'm pretty uncomfortable with there being a large amount of preventable suffering but intellectually my brain wants to take a long term view. The best possible society in the future seems like one where humans have stronger immune systems and take fewer vaccinations, not more. Is this something we can evolve towards? Is my poor knowledge of biology leading me astray? Who knows!

Given I know nothing I'm happy to fall back onto the distributed decision making apparatus (individual choice).

> We have seen how easily people are manipulated via misinformation campaigns.

I'm also not against a small amount of natural selection. People choosing their own fates helps to keep everyone happy and some Darwinism is probably a good outcome for humanity in the long term.

I'm not the parent but you have posed a funny question.

> in an alternate reality where the vaccine is super effective at reducing transmission of Omicron, and where Omicron is super deadly

If either of these were true then mandates would be far less required because people would be far more willing to take them voluntarily.

Instinctively though I do want to answer yes, I would support mandates more under higher risk scenarios. In an ideal world though I would probably prefer if communities could self select by risk tolerance i.e it's possible to live/work/party somewhere nearby with like minded people.

Google has an easier time providing targeted ads via search keywords. Facebook users spend most of their time in their feeds which is a relatively weak signal for monetization.

Note that google appears to be acting as though they are effected, you can see this in their push for FLOC/topics (but the impetus for this could be coming from android moreso than search)

> Image you were robbed and the robber suddenly asked if your issue with him could be solved if he only took half of what's in your wallet.

The pejorative robbed is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Advertising is how users pay for free services. Making the form of payment more agreeable is a worthwhile goal.

As full disclosure I earn a living in the advertising ecosystem. Any feature that means stakeholders stop asking me to invent backdoor fingerprinting and correlate against data obtained from shady brokers is a welcome step in my opinion.

About 1/3 of the covid cases in the ICU where I live [1]. No idea how that stacks up compared to total ICU capacity (I think <10% but am not sure on this).

https://twitter.com/VicGovDH/status/1486225759874486273

Thanks for the extra perspective. Without going into specifics like linearity it still seems like it could be the basis of reasonable public health advice. Forgive the tongue in cheekness but something along the lines of:

"Expect some discomfort - that lets you know the mask is working"

> N95 masks are not at all difficult to breathe in in my experience. Not at all.

My default assumption would be that if the mask doesn't make it more difficult to breathe then it is unlikely to be effective. The filtration mechanism should introduce friction which you then have to compensate for with additional pressure in your lungs.

Just today Sweden's health agency advised against the vaccine for kids

> STOCKHOLM, Jan 27 (Reuters) - Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/sweden-decides-against-...

I'm not super well versed in the science but it seems like reasonable parties advise against vaccination in certain scenarios. Also knowing that government bodies are more likely to prioritize group outcomes over individual outcomes it seems reasonable for individuals to be skeptical.

Please refer to countries like Australia/Israel who are still experiencing massive case loads with a ~95% vaccination rate. It doesn't make it go away. For example please see

https://twitter.com/orwell2022/status/1486330027549544452

Sure, you can deny some people medical treatment if you want to reduce the load on the hospital by a bit but it does not go away!

I once tried to do regular postings of 'funny bits of code' in the slack at my company. It was mostly meant to be in jest, but also had the side aim of trying to get the team to aim higher.

The first few editions were snippets of my own code. I got a few token lols from other devs.

I then saw a senior had committed what looked like a gem... something obviously contorted but fairly short and understandable for if they were coding on autopiliot

`if day.isWeekday() && !day.isWeekend() && day.isMonday() { // this is a monday`

The day I posted that to slack was the day I learned never to criticize in public, even non-personally and even in jest.

> Any issues of style should be in the style guide. Anything not in the style guide can be ignored. Or the style guide should be updated.

I find that there are two components of style:

- Formatting

- Clean abstractions, modularization... everything else that goes into making you a great (not just passable) programmer

Formatting should be handled by tools like others have said. For everything else I have the options:

- Turn the style guide into a book which no one will ready anyway

- Ask them to read an actual book but it isn't practical in the scope of a PR, and even after reading the ideas take a while to digest

- Attempt to mentor the employee via the PR, often appearing pedantic because it's hard for a novice to appreciate what they don't know.

- Code that passes CI is working code - screw everything else!

I take the mentoring route whenever it's presented to me but have generally found that some other team members (especially as they get older) have no interest in best practice and become annoyed by the code review process. If the mentee has persistence it tends to work out but moreso over 6mth-1yr timeframes. For mentees without the patience we drop the code review and keep them in areas of the code base where they can't do too much damage.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that our culture is willing to bend the processes to fit individual's strengths, and overall our workplace is pretty happy/chill. Maybe the engineering quality takes a hit but I can definitely sympathize with where the OP is coming from.

Could you outline specifically which Go roles would be interested in Australian applicants? I applied a number of months ago to a few teams marked as REMOTE and was told my timezone was a deal breaker.

> It's probably necessary work, but not important.

I like the direction you're going with this but note that a task being necessary also implies that it is important - otherwise it would be optional!

The only success I've ever had (but at a small co) with getting others to work out what is important and what isn't is by forcing the requester/decision maker to prioritize goals against each other. It gives the opportunity cost a more personal, and therefore real, taste.

> This is a common but fundamental misunderstanding of what determines your salary. Your salary is determined by the market...

Location based adjustments are replacing this misunderstanding with a different misunderstanding which is roughly "The market rate for the position is determined by where *the employee* lives, not by the many others elsewhere that would be qualified by the job"

Employees with full (exercised and vested) shares at my company don't have any voting power until after an exit event. The paperwork these days is truly ridiculous.

Surely you can though! Isn't that what endangerment exists for (or is that bar too high?). I imagine if actual harm, or near harm, was required then it would be very difficult to enforce a lot standards.

FB might have some negatives to society as a whole but there are also some positives (besides being able to talk to your family).

The ad product has enabled a whole new generation of entrepreneurs. I really can't understate how pivotal facebook has been -> because they know so much about you the targeting can be REALLY REALLY effective. For many products the traditional competitors like google can't even come close.

Being an e-commercialist+advertiser may make me biased but I've grown to love Zuck much more than I would've previously been comfortable with.

Controversial videos, or those by controversial creators, are the ones that get brigaded. If you're inside a filter bubble and can't see a dislike count how will you know what you're looking at is controversial? Yes, the ratio is not representative of the general population but it's the signal that matters.

Would you rather not know something is controversial? What mechanism would you prefer for nudging people outside of filter bubbles?

I'm happy to be generous and consider all videos with heavy dislike ratios as victims of brigading and not of public sentiment.