yamasanama

Sure. But stating a belief without any reason why this would be true, or more precisely, why this hypothesis would be preferable over the currently accepted hypothesis which does have supporting evidence, is just not very convincing.

What advantage does this theory have over the more common (?) assumption that the amino acids came to existence on earth itself? Serious question, I'd like to know.

For example, this theory sti doesn't answer the question how they came into existence in the first place. It's certainly not obviously better than assuming they suddenly appeared on another planet and then transported to earth..

Is your belief based on any kind of evidence in which case I'd love to hear your best arguments, or is it a religios belief (like in Jesus) in which case there is not much to discuss?

> We don't even really have an agreed-upon definition of life, so the question is basically non-sensical.

...

> I am pretty sure we'd be able to recognize other types of life.

...

> Source: I actually studied this in college, for a bit.

So, let me summarize. You find the question non-sensical, then you are sure you know the answer, and finally you appeal to authority (your own) to elevate your opinion over those of us mere common-sense mortals.

Sorry, I'd have liked to give more weight to your angle, but you kinda made that hard.

Not all issues are urgent. Most issues I encounter in my job are not urgent. Sometimes it's not even issues, perhaps just a random but interesting observation. It can be less distracting to the team to bring them up next time you have a regular team meeting scheduled, instead of blasting it into a slack channel or even calling a specific meeting. That's what sync ups are good for.

I don't understand what you are talking about. Obviously we don't sit in silence. Some things are just easier to discuss in a meeting than over 100 Slack messages. Those things we discuss in meetings.

> I was totally exhausted by switching my leg between break and accelerator.

This one deserves an immediate nomination for this week's first world problem.

> It’s our industry’s equivalent to mise en place.

What an excellent comparison! Thanks!

> I'm not sure it can be removed, fundamentally.

I've not had this for the last 10 years, so it can definitely be removed.

Obviously everybody is welcome to bring up whatever is interesting nd worth discussing, and that's what we do in my current and previous workplaces. But there should not be a requirement that everybody has to bring up sth, which would lead to the described issues..

Yes, I can tell, because in the interview situation I'm sitting next to them.

And print statements are sometimes the superior choice.

This ties into my other comment that these things can be heavily subjective. As long as it gets the job done, I prefer print statements used by somebody who uses them as a sharp knife to gain understanding of what's going on over somebody just clicking buttons in a fancy UI but has no clue. (And vice versa, obviously.)

Most non-trivial programming homework assignments in college require debugging and a good school will provide guidance of how to do this.

One thing I do in job interviews is to have the candidate debug an issue (that they usually caused themselves and that I let them purposefully run into). Quite the eye opener of how they approach bugs.

> It produces this weird state where everyone saves up what they have to say for the meetings to avoid an awkward lack of participation or "I have nothing" in the meeting

This is an odd meeting culture. Just remove the requirement that everybody has to bring up something.

FWIW I've never felt like that in my teams.

There is a difference between "want to" and "have to". You are talking about the former. GP about the latter.

Missing from this list is that lots of the mentioned concepts are highly subjective. There is no generally agreed-upon standard of what documentation is "proper". Or what "clean" code is. Or what "competence" looks like. Or what a "scalable architecture" is. Etc etc. Most of these words are bent by whomever using them to make a point (or to boost their ego, sadly). Two people could easily work side-by-side and claim about the other that that person is incompetent and defend this position here on HN with some horrible-sounding anecdotes.

> Surely with a German passport this wouldn’t be a biggie.

The U.S. PR lottery couldn't care less. Neither many other non-EU countries.

I fully concur with everybody suggesting you to not skip a university education. As a basic example from this project, fundamentals of OT/CRDT which you need to deploy to make colab editing work correctly (you have used that, right?) are so much easier to grok after a bit of theory classes. Your future colleagues will thank you for it.