bernierocks

I made the switch to libreoffice a few years back. For simple word documents, it works well.

It breaks down when you are using something like Excel with complex macros/calculations. This is why most companies continue to use Microsoft products.

This has been happening since 2008 (and probably even earlier). Why do we only mention all of these Russian trolls when it could potentially help a candidate/politician you dislike?

When Obama ran in 2008, the trolls were out in full force. Most people didn't care and many tech outlets wrote about how this somehow made Obama and his campaign tech geniuses.

I'm just tried of the political bias of the mainstream media and magazines like Rolling Stone.

Obama did something similar in 2008. He was called a tech genius and starting a political revolution that all future politicians will follow.

The tech articles I saw shortly after were falling all over themselves to praise Obama and his campaign.

It's funny how when someone like Trump does it, it somehow changes the minds of everyone.

I don't think we would really know the depth of political corruption if the Democrats would have won in 2016, because it seems to be perfectly acceptable when your team uses dirty tactics to win an election.

We should be using this as a learning lesson, but I suspect if a Democrat wins the next election, things will be business as usual. Hell, Hillary ran her own mail server with classified emails and the tech community jumped to defend her.

This is why I can't really take the tech community in regards to politics seriously anymore (or the mainstream media for that matter).

"Democracy, unions, healthcare and education: these are the forces that matter"

True. But capitalism is the only reason any of these actually work.

Did you read your own link? Chomping at the bit has the same meaning.

"Give with an open hand, and stop thinking about the tokens with which you will be repaid. Be happy to be worth stealing from. The future owes you nothing."

I see ideas like this regularly on HN, yet when it comes to the GNU/GPL, violators are regularly excoriated. If you don't care about plagiarism, you shouldn't care about a company making money on code you decided to give out for free.

My point is that people that write these articles quickly change their mind when the plagiarism enriches someone they don't like, disagree with politically, or just don't feel deserves to profit off of it.

This is why I stopped selling on Amazon. It's compelling because there's a built-in customer base. But in the long-run, they will use your selling data against you and eventually attempt to put you out of business by finding a cheaper supplier.

He doesn't deserve compassion because almost every video we see online is staged and fake and created by him. He's been making the rounds on Sirius and many podcasts.

I don't even know if I believe his health problems or his 'mental anguish' at this point.

well, I can attribute to anything, if there is no explanation.

When I first posted this, I had multiple down votes in the span of a few seconds with barely enough time for someone to read or even process my comments. It just seemed very suspicious.

"Pernickety"

I've never heard anyone use this word, even though it might be technically correct. At some point culture changes words and the new word is the correct one.

All of the things you mention have so much competition, it's not going to be easy to make enough money to quit your job in the short-term (if you want to rely on advertising). Maybe in 5 years if you started now.

It's better to come up with a product and then use blogging/podcasting/articles to promote it.

If you asked me about 1password a few years ago, I would agree with you. Ever since they went to the cloud, I stopped using and recommending them to friends and family.

I now use Keypss, which is free and doesn't require the cloud.

The only reason they went to the cloud is because most people were buying one copy and sharing it with multiple people. It's a way for them to make more money, which is fine, but I really don't think a cloud-based password solution is necessary.

Edit: The 1password employees must be down voting me. It's ridiculous that I get down voted for a specific opinion about the topic.

"Poor people are working two to three jobs to make ends meet, especially single mothers. Being poor is bad enough, have a higher mortality rate now you want to destroy their health"

I will say the same thing that many say when they want the middle class and anyone earning money to become more of a slave to the government: They need to pay their fair share.

When all of the wealthy people leave, the next ones on the chopping block will be the middle class. Why should everyone successful be punished for making the right decisions in life?

"Some of these poor people made poor desicisons (due to how they were raisedin their early life)that still hold them back and have lots of mental problems due to family bringing and the environment they grew up in."

This is making lots of assumptions about poor people with no proof to back any of it up. Giving someone free money for making poor decisions will only lead to future generations of people being dependent on government handouts. We need to stop this trend, not continue it.

"Maybe we should have a living wage"

We already have a living wage. Amazon is paying at least $15/hour in all their warehouses and many other companies pay well over minimum wage for jobs that require little to no education. The amount of truly minimum wage jobs is miniscule.

"If the threat of wealth taxes is the catalyst that gets us there then good"

A wealth tax won't get us there. The wealthy will move to a country that has less-restrictive tax laws (and most of these countries would be happy to have the new income) and the customer and the middle class will end up paying more out of their pockets.

a "living wage" is always a moving goal post and doesn't really mean anything. If I'm single and have 3 kids to support, my 'living wage' will be much higher than a person that is single with no kids.

Why should a company pay for the poor life decisions of all its employees?

I have great idea. Since poor people can't pay very much in taxes, how about we have required government work programs to make up the difference? IE: you won't get paid, you will work your tax bill off in the form of labor..during your free time and on weekends.

Many countries have tried taxing net worth. The result is always the same: billionaires leave the country and investors think twice about building a business there...which means less jobs and a worse-off economy for the rest of us.

The government just isn't good at innovating and will waste that money on 'administrative costs'.

The funny thing is that the rich already pay the majority of federal taxes in the US. This isn't including all of the people they employ that are also contributing taxes to the government till.

It never seems to be enough because all of that money is pissed away and nobody is ever held accountable.

I spent a year teaching English in China and most of the teachers were early 20-somethings that were there to party and have a good time..and pay for their lifestyle teaching.

I honestly wouldn't want them teaching my kids. I don't think many would pass a drug test.

" it’s frequently within the context of code instead of the context of understanding. 10x developers speedily create elegant code that solves the wrong problem due to not understanding what the business needs"

Are they really 10X developers? They should understand what the business needs and write elegant code quickly.

If companies take too much of China's money, they can and will use it as leverage to stifle free speech.

There's no proof of anything and the actions of this user and other users responding to the tweet are just childish.

This right here is the problem with social media: A company or person's reputation can get tarnished simply because a tweet gets popular. It's modern day mob rule.

Even worse are the mediums because they are creating a false memory of a loved one.

The difference with government care is that you won't get a bill..but you may not get coverage either.

This seems way over-complicated as compared to Cron. I don't see it gaining that much acceptance.

I see two problems with remote work being the norm at most companies:

1) most people don't have the discipline to work remotely. I've been working remotely for a decade. I'm a self-starter and have run my own businesses. I find that the same discipline needed to build a company is almost the same as it is to work remotely.

You don't have the possibility of the boss coming in to see what you are doing or a manager right across the hall. Many people have a hard time succeeding in this environment, especially if you are working from home with lots of distractions.

I've seen many companies struggle to keep remote employees because if this.

2) Managers need to be excellent communicators to manage a remote team. At my last remote gig, I eventually had to quit because the manager was extremely introverted and passive aggressive, which made working remotely almost an impossibility.

I think if we were in an office, I might be able to work with his personality, but instead he just avoided any sort of non-slack chatting and intentionally assigned me tickets that had misinformation or left out important details for a task that I needed to complete (and then acted shocked when I missed them).

After it happened the first time, I thought I was the problem and tried to get more information about specific tickets. Something important would always be left out...and then I was always blamed for the mis-communication.

It finally came to a breaking point when I worked on a month-long project and was asked to merge it with a junior developer's work right before a vacation. The Junior developer's work broke everything. I explained the situation and asked the manager if he wanted me to fix the code that was a result of our merge, when I came back.

He said 'no' and then sent me a long list of issues while I was gone (I saw them in the airport on the way home..1 day before I was returning to work)..which all resided in the junior developer's code base.

He then had a conversation with me about not being a 'senior' enough developer and that they felt they were paying me 'too much'.

This conversation was odd and funny at the same time because In the previous 6 months, I had written large additions to the application, which were still in production with almost no issues and I was praised by the owner of the company. I was also getting paid 60% less than my market value, which I negotiated because their original offer was laughable. I only took the job when my business had a couple of slow months.

I should also add that the manager built the application we were all working on 7 years prior..and it was steaming pile of garbage. Spaghetti code, bad practices, and I would find so many bugs that needed to be fixed when I was working on a feature request, it would delay everything.

It's been a couple of years since I worked there and they still haven't gotten out of beta and launched. I'm guessing it's because of the managers inability to communicate and effectively manage a team.

Given the demographic. Is this really surprising?

That doesn't sound like a startup. It sounds like they are running a lifestyle business, which isn't a bad thing.

Startups, by definition, try to scale up quickly..which means lots of money (investors) and lots of time (overtime and long hours).

This isn't stackoverflow. Get someone else to do your homework.

I remember buying a digital tablet of sorts at that time..I can't remember the name of it. It was a startup that sold them as a glorified web browser (and eventually went out of business because many hobbyists did just that and got rid of all the advertisements), but there was a way to root it and install Linux.

This device had the ability to order pizzas through Pizza Hut. I tried it once and it worked pretty well.

Do you have proof that no fiber cable was laid down in any part of the US?

This article is referencing fiber.

It's also disingenuous (and just factually incorrect) to say there is 'nothing' in return.

https://www.highspeedinternet.com/providers/fiber

Multiple companies offering Fiber in many parts of the US.

There are also multiple options (Comcast, Wow, AT&T, Time Warner, bell atlantic, satellite, and many wireless options) in most areas of the US, which by definition means there isn't a monopoly.

Many people throw out the 'monopoly' label and really have no idea what the word means.

I have 4 ISPS in my area, including Comcast. It's been the same for the last couple of years and I've moved around to different areas.

How much of the infrastructure did companies like Comcast fund? They should get a check from the government, if they become public utilities and they funded it.