Afton

While I don't doubt that the author could fix this up, you are not helpless either. If you have colour/vision problems it is often worthwhile to install a client-reader bookmarklet or plugin to your browser, which may come along with a host of other benefits (like saving, place-marking, etc).

I'd like to know about this. Can you link to something about the incentive programs? I thought that they were heavily regional, but I admit that I haven't looked too deeply.

IANAL, but am a Canadian. My belief is that TN status is a "non-immigrant" status. It is, by definition, temporary. Applying for a GC declares immigrant intent. H1B, by contrast is 'dual-intent'.

OTOH, I don't think they actively seek you out to revoke your TN status, but it would make border crossings pretty much a non-starter.

All this is remembered from when I was on a TN status from Canada ~5 years ago.

Cold-brew methods, or via directly cooling the coffee without adding water are the usual alternatives. The downside of both of the two methods is that they take significantly longer, so you can't quickly satisfy and urge for cold coffee.

This is a general problem with any punitive measure. There will be some false positives (unfair punishments).

I actually do know someone who was not able to get a CS degree because of 'cheating'. His story was that he was working in a group, got verbal clearance from his professor that this kind of collaboration was acceptable, and when that auto-cheating-analysis tool flagged each group members work, the professor claimed not to have said that and was uninterested in fixing the problem.

So, this absolutely does happen. OTOH, I've never personally had any experience with 'borderline' cases. There were enough cut-and-dried cases to keep me busy.

I'm sorry you were unfairly punished.

I've taught university classes, and failed students on the class for cheating. But it's true that I haven't seen anyone kicked out of a program or a university for cheating.

Huh, they do say 'relative to face value'. I still think that reasoning is flawed, but I'm not going to argue with the RCM.

Thanks for the link!

I don't think this is true. Coins are multi-use. Obviously the government wants to pay as little as possible in production costs, but there isn't any reason that the production cost has to be strictly less than the unit-cost of the money.

Maybe not 'literally', but the point is well taken. I got actionable feedback when I was applying as an intern at Microsoft, and I ended up working there a few years later. The feedback I got was crucial to my getting the job at MSFT (as well as to getting a different job before going to MSFT)

The point I was making is that it is odd that when teachers are evaluated for their ability to identify phonemes and morphemes, that their abilities don't seem to match what I saw in first and second year university students taking linguistics classes. Just that, that it is odd.

"First, let’s agree that the way to evaluate teacher training is to test teachers. "

Oh. Uh... Can I agree that testing teachers is a sensible part of an evaluation plan instead?

" When asked to identify the number of phonemes in a word, they were correct 62 percent of the time. They struggled more with morphemes, correctly identifying them 27 percent of the time. "

I'm surprised. When I was TAing morphology and phonology courses, people generally had more trouble learning the inverse. That is, identifying morphemes was relatively easy compared to identifying phonemes (although you could choose your examples to get a similar spread. People take a nontrivial amount of training to ignore how things are spelled)

Incidentally, this is now explicitly taught in elementary school math classes. They call it 'number bonds' and it often drives parents crazy because "OMG IT ISN'T HOW I LEARNED IT!", but it is clearly a better strategy than 'just memorize this multiplication table'

It is always either neutral or negative is probably what OP meant here. I.e. it is never in your interests to have such a clause.

In theory, you could use that clause as leverage for a better salary or benefits or other positive outcomes, but in practice I doubt that there are any cases of employment contracts where you give up this right for anything other than 'the right to sign the employment contract'.

Ah, perhaps I should have been more specific.

Having mandatory arbitration be a part of an employment contract seems like it is something that should be disallowed as part of employee protections. Or perhaps disallowing the choice of arbitrator by the employer would be sufficient.

I don't care (I don't think) if two companies agree to mandatory arbitration as part of their business dealings, in part because it seems more like a meeting of equals. But for vastly unequal negotiations (renters would also be a likely culprit) it seems like a 'works in theory, but not in practice'.

I know that in Canada, mandatory arbitration for consumers was disallowed recently in BC. Note that I'm not a lawyer or in the know, this is just a google search result: http://www.duhaimelaw.com/2011/03/18/supreme-court-of-canada...

There was a real suggestion buried in this piece. Ban mandatory arbitration. I'm most interested in knowing what HN thinks about that piece, since I have no informed opinion of working conditions on Wall Street.

Mandatory arbitration seems like a generally bad idea that employees should be protected from. Does anyone have a good argument counter?

Neither the article nor the survey "tells men to be less aggressive". If you have substantive criticism of the survey, you should produce it, not make a straw-man.

This is great. I wonder how these statistics differ from other workplaces?

My spouse agrees with my logic, but occasionally has pangs of visceral concern. We discuss these issues like adults. :)

The closing of this article is actually the key for me. I've been trying to teach my kids that if they have a problem, and I'm not around, they should pick an adult and ask for help. The odds that they will pick an adult that has malicious intention is astronomically small. The odds that things will get worse because they can't bring themselves to ask someone for help seem much higher.

I can do 6 chinups right now (I happen to have tested last night of all things). If I tried to do 100 chinups, I would certainly be scheduling a Physical Therapy session tomorrow to deal with the pain in my elbow. Unless I was having surgery for a tear in my shoulder.

There is lots to recommend "don't give up". But it also has to be tempered with "Stop if it hurts". You'll get fit/strong/endurancy-faster if you can keep training tomorrow than if you have to spend three weeks icing your wrists and gobbling down NSAIDs.

EDIT: Leaving this up for posterity because why not. After re-reading your comment, I'm not convinced that we disagree. It's just that the whole thing becomes extremely nuanced once you start talking about things like: "I'm stopping doing e.g. chinups today so that I can do more tomorrow. I'm not giving up on my goal, I'm just altering the timeframe". Here it's not clear how you should interpret the "Don't give up" mantra.

These techniques are useful when you have a large pool of young extremely healthy men. Then when they blow out knees, shoulders, back, etc you can just select the ones who didn't break. Claiming that this is a useful and effective way to train is a terrible idea.

The only reason this kind of article is useful at all is that virtually everyone who trains a sport fails to train hard enough. In other words, after you remove all the fancy language and rah-rah spirit, you are left with "You should probably try harder". And that's probably good advice.

My two cents.

It's not right. There are linguistic restrictions on gender-neutral, singular 'they'.[1] When the referent is known, it can't be used (i.e. it's not about 'patrick' and 'he' matching up, it's about 'they' not being usable with a known person).[2]

My favourite real-life example of it's usage is one in which we know that the gender is female, and we know it's singular:

"If a mother wants to use the nursing room, they can just key in the code in their pamphlet".

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/linguistics/comments/3cgbyv/limitat... gives some good discussion

[2] I can't help but feel that these restrictions are related to nondefinite contexts for "(negative polarity items)[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarity_item]", like 'no-one' and 'any', where you can't say e.g.

    *I ate any cake

but you can say:

    I didn't eat any cake

but you can also use it in questions:

    Did you eat any cake?

This seems related to usages like

    If someone comes, tell them to wait

vs

    *If John comes, tell them to wait.

Everything you do in an interview will be judged. Some people will give you an incomplete problem spec and mark you down if you don't ask questions. Some will give you the same problem spec, but feel that you were too hesitant to "just get started" if you ask questions. There is a guessing game going on in an interview, and while it's not 'just chance' to do well vs poorly, there is an element of chance involved.

Since there is this element of chance, a 'blown interview' is certainly worth evaluating, but also not necessarily worth completely changing your process. You may have just had a bad matchup of expectations.

Outlook 'delay delivery' option (or whatever your email client supports) is an even better way. If you don't intend someone to read and act on it until morning, you can enforce that trivially!

Hmmm I just assumed that the bookstore was a book-store wrapper around Amazon Lockers. The proximity to U-village denizens would make it a good place to put some.

I'd also mention that what counts as 'R&D' is often paper thin. Normal developer activities can count if they are spun correctly.

Whether that's a problem depends on the amount that you think of this as a general small business tax credit vs an incentive to do research.

I leave it playing overnight (plugged in, or course). The combination works much better than either alone, plus I can play the white noise much louder without it bothering me for extra power.

Good quality ear plugs and a brown/pink/white-noise generating app for your phone. I have children who get up early and stomp around the house. Doing this (and a sleep mask) have radically improved my sleep-time)

I wouldn't just find it astonishing, I would be deeply confused about what it could possibly mean!