imsofuture

Go's errors are really nice (if a bit repetitive) in my opinion. Type signatures enforce that you accept and acknowledge an error returned from an invocation, but leave it up to you to handle, pass along, or silently swallow.

I agree that the ratios are most important. I tend to do highly targeted job searching (i.e. carefully screen for roles that would want me, that I would want).

My most recent job search had an 85% response/interview rate, and 42% of the total applications resulted in an offer... of course I only applied to 7 jobs :)

It probably doesn't mean that anyway.

You can tell a lot about SV-types based on how they feel about the show SV...

I worked at a company that was almost entirely bootstrapped, and honestly I think it was for the worse. When they had early momentum, they could have raised money but chose not to. It was an okay choice at the time, and the founders were rightfully proud of this -- that they'd grown as a profitable company on their own.

But when things got leaner, they didn't have a reserve of cash to use, nor did they have the accountability or advisory capacity of investors to help them out. And when things were lean, they didn't have the momentum to raise money any longer, just a 'lifestyle' business's revenue which isn't very exciting to VCs.

Just my personal, uninformed, opinion. And while it's clear to me that not raising money was a mistake, that's only with hindsight.

But you could also pour juice out of a bottle, which is effectively free, and takes approximately 0 minutes.

I don't care about a more efficient bag squeezing method, that there's a bag at all is a bizarre and useless distinction.

We use Pithos (S3-compatible API, Cassandra backend) pretty successfully.

It will still cement our position as catastrophically prolific assholes though...

Yes, sometimes, many times, maybe even 'often', the job applicant is more desperate for a job than the hiring party is.

But it's not a rule that applicants are desperate, and hiring parties aren't. It's absolutely a stereotype of the hiring process though.

I don't mean to imply that it's a primary filter of mine either, or even something I would attempt to find out to base my decision on. However, if a company makes a decision that we aren't compatible early on, they're probably right, for both of our benefit. That holds even more true the dumber the reason is.

It's an absurd example, but let's say you don't get hired because the hiring manager thinks your shirt is super ugly. That's insane and obviously completely improper and irrelevant -- but you're probably better off not getting that job!

Pricing yourself out of a job with an organization that uses salary as an first-line filter is maybe not the worst thing in the world.

There are a lot of bad jobs in the world, you should be happy to turn down or be turned down by many jobs that you apply to. It's kind of a sad cultural trope that the employee is desperate for a 'yes' at every job they apply for, when that is often not true at all.

That's an absurd assertion.

The best thing you can do is make your primary team-wide interactions remote friendly. In fact, it's really the only thing you can do to make remote work well! No matter where the employees are, even if they're all in the same office, you should make decisions on Slack or Hangouts or Github or Jira or whatever. Not just that, but you should have fun in those same places, that should be your water cooler for casual social interaction. I'll assume that you're doing that already, but if you aren't, no event(s) will make up for it.

One company that I worked for had an annual party, and many of the remote employees made an effort to visit one of the two offices. The two offices then established a live-stream back and forth during the party. Remote people that didn't attend in person could stop by the streams, but that was probably only fun for a few moments.

Offering (not requiring) a largely socially driven (instead of work driven) trip once or more a year is probably a good idea, especially if you have some sort of annual event to center it around like a holiday party.

Vendoring is how you do dependency management with Go. Using vendoring you would also not need to change anything.

Incorrect. You apparently stopped at 'that looks like a URL!' and dreamed up the rest of the implementation to fit some narrative.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how go dependencies work.

Dependencies are simply package names. It just happens that names are actually meaningful and tell you where you, the developer can get the package. Using vendoring and/or Godep/glide, you then strictly version and manage your dependencies. `go build` doesn't just run `git clone` or something.

What? Borrowers already have skin in the game. Lenders have none.

Make student loans dischargeable and suddenly a lot more people are thinking about the actual utility of college and it's costs.

Remote work is still an option, as is moving back or wherever (since this specific worry is predicated on moving to start with, arguments that moving is 'not always possible' seem weak).

The game represents pessimism, the concept, not pessimism, the philosophy, unfortunately.

Amazon has the wherewithal to not freaking publicly name their actually human employee, so I'd imagine their culture around outages is probably a lot more healthy.

The NRA doesn't sell guns.

pre-emptive edit in case someone finds some place where this isn't true: I mean generally. They are not a gun manufacturer or seller generally.

Yes, that's technically true:

You sign at 100k, they make 20% so: $20,000

You sign at 110k, they make 20% so: $22,000

No deal, they make 20% so: $0

Do you think they have much incentive to make that extra $2k, while introducing more risk, and not spending time on the other openings they're working?

Recruiters don't get paid if you don't get hired. They are not incentivized to get you the highest salary, they're incentivized to get you hired.

And like every other time people say this, it just breezes by the fact your remote employees can get other remote jobs. The market is not you-the-one-company-in-the-world-that-hires-remotely vs their-local-market.

Remote employees' market is the entire world though, that's the part you're not taking into account. Your competition is the other NYC or Boston or SFO or wherever companies that are willing to hire me and pay me a generally competitive rate (very roughly 80-100% of SF pay, in my experience). Sure, you don't have to compete with a GoogFaceAzon offer, but you do have to compete with the companies similar to yours that do pay a more globally competitive rate.

There's a very important difference between: "SFO is very expensive so we have to pay people who live there more" and "we can pay people who don't live in SFO less"

Which is funny, because remote workers almost to a fault work TOO MUCH. It becomes a lot easier to blend work and life. For some people that's okay (if not an ideal situation), for others it's not, and they either figure out how to segregate the two and work a normal amount or it becomes a one-way ticket to burn-out.

In fairness, employees are encouraged to think of it as zero value specifically when considering it in lieu of alternative compensation.

Yes, it's my understanding the company will sometimes offer ways to finance the options purchase such as cashless exercise, or promissory note. Alternatively you can taking out a loan (anything from a general loan, to a specialize 'options exercise loan'). Cribbed this answer from the longer form one here: https://www.quora.com/How-am-I-supposed-to-afford-my-stock-o...

SemVer is sometimes very annoying (pre-release and metadata rules specifically) but also just solves versioning. You have to jump through some hoops to use `git describe` in a sane way with it, but it's worth it.

"ill-conceived TV spot"

Not sure that was the ill-conceived bit.