I'm seeing more of this in HN where folks hint at something that's available only if you're an employee at one of the tech giants. I feel like it used to be gauche and isn't now. (No jab at you specifically tdeck, just a trend I'm not fond of.)
I think it's absolutely awful that you and others in this thread are actively discouraging this kind of wonderful discussion.
I think you are going against the hacker ethos and the Hacker News ethos.
It's still gauche, you're not going crazy.
Please explain specifically how I've done that if you've going to throw around accusations.
You seem to be reading a lot into the fact that I worked at Google in the past, but I didn't design the hiring process, the data access rules, the cultural vocabulary, or any of the other things you seem aggrieved by. People at giant companies don't have influence over those things, and if you go through my comment history you'll see that I have mixed feelings about working there.
If the mere mention that someone worked at a particular company gives you a feeling of inadequacy, I can certainly sympathize. But you need to realize that those feelings are coming from your own issues and not something I wrote in my comment. It's not necessary or sufficient to work at Google to have a fulfilling career, it's only necessary in this case since the codebase I reviewed is not public.
That's clearly the subtext here, and here [0]
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28172705
Ya'll clearly think people like me aren't worthy of being "in the know" (and probably of living at all to be honest) for describing this particular doc. Openly flaunting your immense privilege is usually considered gauche, for the record.
If this is your read on the situation, you have problems. First of all "y'all" is multiple different people on a website who don't know each other. You can't cite a comment by one person to support your claim that another person believes something, and "that's clearly the subtext" isn't clear to me from any comment in this thread.
For the benefit of other readers, I'll just state it explicitly: this doc describes a TAR file that was shared with me when I worked at Google, that includes source code owned by the company that was never released. That's why the doc isn't public, it's not because I decided you "weren't worthy of being in the know" or of "living at all" - that interpretation is completely ridiculous. There are docs I've written at my current job that aren't public either, and that's not because I believe my colleagues constitute some kind of master race.
The key takeaways for me were:
- The UI looked like an old fashioned flip phone, as in the screenshot from that article
- Everything was JS, as discussed elsewhere
- The functionality wasn't particularly impressive to me, it had a half-finished calendar, contacts app, etc... And some graphical 2D demos
What was most interesting was just poking around the screenshots and commit log which I obviously don't have.
People like me are untermensch to folks like you.
When you're given everything from peer bonuses to spot bonuses to first class flights to Hawaii to unlimited external validation from everyone else - it's not surprising.