> A common Antifa defensive trope. Label enemies as bad guys and thus justify any violence against them.
Is this you?
> Antifa, who is a violent political extremist group.
Seems like the trope is actually you calling antifa "violent", despite all evidence to the contrary, so you can justify violence against peaceful protestors.
So, for one, you just glossed over my point. Namely, no otherwise legitimate corporation has ever killed a whistleblower. Secondly, this tree-cutting service was run by two people who were caught. Boeing could not possibly pull of a murder-for-hire conspiracy without leaking. They can't pull off a skip-a-few-bolts-to-save-money conspiracy without leaking. And again, I ask what would they possibly be trying to accomplish by murdering people who's story is already told? What in the absolute world would they get out of murdering someone from a supplier while half the world thinks they just murdered someone else? They would be committing corporate suicide over cases they would probably be able to settle out of.
I recently ran a hiring pipeline for a senior/staff SWE. There were around a thousand applicants. What you have to understand is that there is a strong timing component to these pipelines: Hiring managers and recruiters screen hundreds of resumes to find people they want to talk to, resulting in maybe dozens of phones screens, followed by additional interview rounds for a handful of people who did really well.
So what happens if you send in your resume when we're already evaluating a bunch of people? Well, we may not have the bandwidth to interview you while we see if our current batch of candidates pan out. But also if your resume is good we probably won't reject you, either, while we wait to see if we can actually close a candidate.
It's entirely possible that we DO reach out to you after 2 months if we fail to make a hire on the current batch of candidates, or if our offers are rejected. Believe it or not, your resume is right there in the tracker, and if there's no response yet, it could just be because it takes a really long time to go through this hiring process for everyone involved and there's no reason to reject you outright.
The author observes a phenomenon that is definitely happening but calls it an incorrect name. It’s not over optimization. People are becoming richer and more people want access to things that were once exclusive. More people can afford that as well. Whether you call it “things got less expensive” or “more people got richer” is relative. The point is more people are competing for fewer resources.
The author makes this sound like a bad thing. Often it does feel like that. On the other hand, more people are able to spend leisure time in places that were once only accessible to the rich. Is that bad? Not in my book. Does it cause crowds when taking the coveted Santorini sunset photo? You betcha.
I think you missed the point. People attempt to solve problems with LLMs that are problems only to them because they are unaware of existing solutions that have solved the these “problems” a long time ago. If you don’t know something exists, you can’t ask an LLM about it.
I personally find the two large buttons in the thumb clusters to be easy to access. I don't think the entire thumb cluster is designed to be used commonly while touch typing. There are plenty of pinky reachable buttons you can map needed keys to.
I don't know that I really get the point of margin-trim - there are already plenty of other, arguably clearer ways of avoiding padding at the start and end of an element - using flexbox and the gap property, using :not, even the classic + selector works pretty well here.
Is it designed to do more than just that, or is it just about avoiding gaps at the start and end of lines of elements?
I was just going to post this, but you already done it. Good on ya. Proves that I'm not the only one who things that things like this are relevant.
I also enjoyed reading "The Pagan Christ" by Tom Harpur a couple of years back. Thesis: Joshua ben Joseph (Jesus) did not actually exit: "early Church leaders fabricated a literal and human Jesus based on ancient myths." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pagan_Christ )
There is also the story about "Ya" v "El", two examples of the One-True-God, worshiped by competing proto-Jewish tribes, later merging into Yaweh, and leaving their families behind.
That's political suicide. As much as I wish for what you write to become true, look at how stupidly unimportant (or unsolvable) items made people like trump from 0 to hero. This is majority of US voters, and same applies in many other countries. This would hurt literally everybody and cost given political side couple of elections.
Look at how every single politician across all spectrum is playing politics and PC and is on full PR mode 24/7 when on camera. That's not the kind of people who make good long term decisions just because... they are good. Not when they massively hurt back.
It was expensive if you were at the forefront; but things were changing so fast that if you were willing to be back a few years, or a "unfavored" style, you could get in quite cheap.
That really accelerated around '95 or so with Windows 95 - anything that couldn't run it became almost free overnight.
I feel like we're arguing the same side here? We didn't get mandatory in-console ADHD factories and 6000lb daily drivers that punch through DOT guardrails because they enhance safety.
Tough to say if I have a "glowing" history, but I do have experience a few big companies that I think looks good.
One time, when I was applying to work for a newspaper [1] as a software engineer. The recruiter was pretty sure I'd get an interview so he actually fast tracked me to do some stupid personality quiz and compliance crap, which took about three hours. The next day, I get a call from the recruiter and he tells me that I was passed over because my resume "looked too much like a manager's resume, no hands on coding experience".
Now, that is very bizarre, because I've never really been a manager. I was an adjunct professor for two semesters, but for the last 13 years I've been a pretty vanilla software engineer, and my resume pretty much exclusively tried to highlight my work with .NET and Java and Node.js and Kafka. In fact, people have told me that my resume was "too technical" and that I need to speak at higher levels and get out of the weeds.
The recruiter was confused too for the same reason, and then I realized something: the hiring manager probably never actually read the resume. I believe that they already knew who they wanted to hire for the position, but for bureaucratic or legal reasons, they had to make it look like they were trying to find the "best person for the job", and put out feelers for people, and they were just kind of ambivalent about wasting my time. It really bothered me, but there's not much I can do about it.
2023 was probably the worst year of my life. I got laid off twice, and spent about six months applying to jobs. I never really got used to waking up to twenty rejections every morning so every day I would feel kind of depressed until I went to sleep. I hated the faux politeness that I display during Zoom interviews. I hated logging into LinkedIn every day, applying to 100 jobs. I hated messaging all my contacts to ask if they know anyone hiring. I hated feeling desperate. It was tough, and I don't wish it on anyone.
I have a really decent job now and I consider myself very grateful and lucky to have it. It's a really tough market right now, and anyone who's stuck competing in it has my sympathies.
[1] Not going to say the name but it's definitely one you've heard of and probably have read.
It's a lot harder to just spin-off and "build your own stuff" in hardware though, which is I think what keeps the "married employees" around longer. The startup costs are much higher and riskier. And you need a lot more people. Building that rocket engine from scratch probably required around 50 - 60 people to really get it all together.
Also, a rocket engine is a core feature of a rocket (literally cannot fly without it). If they started development of this engine in 2018, that's *six years* of work to get to their current state. Imagine spending 6 years on a core feature of an app that you'd consider "min-viable", and everytime you had a bug the computer you compiled the code on spontaneously combusted?
> worried about the security of their own jobs as AI is now making everyone worried
For junior coding, finance, law and low-level customer-facing roles, AI is absolutely being pitched as a near-term staff replacement. You don't want to hire and train someone if there is a material chance they'll be undercut in a year. For senior developers, however, the cliff is still at least a generation away. More meaningful might be the large firms retrenching in the face of antitrust risk.
