mehphp

> Randomly asking for a raise doesn't work.

Randomly, no... but asking for a raise while showing reasons why you think you deserve it definitely can. I know because I literally just did that.

Keep a running document of accomplishments, especially anything that is "above and beyond", whatever that might mean in your context. It's much easier to present that then trying to remember everything you did months/years later.

Also, in my experience, it's fairly easy to tell which companies will be willing to give you raises based on how your initial salary negotiations went. When I've worked for stingy employers who wouldn't budge on salary, I rarely got anything over a basic 2-3% annual bump. When there was a lot of flexibility in the salary range (or when they've offered more than I asked) it has been quite easy to get additional bumps. I also have the same work ethic and drive at each of these companies, so I don't _think_ it was a difference in performance. I've always received glowing reviews regardless of the company.

I'm genuinely curious what can/should be done. If we ban it, people will still make it illegally, there will be violence, and we are in the same place that cannabis is now.

Well, it doesn't have to be either or. It's possible to think he's built impressive companies while also thinking he's an unsavory character.

As far as I can tell, the people who "smear" Musk don't do so because of his companies, it's because they oppose his ideas and how much influence he has to implement them. Whatever you think of Musk, it's a little scary that someone can just buy the megaphone that is Twitter and disseminate whatever information you wish.

Now the opposing team gets less time to score and possibly win.

I was also duped on this one. I still think he shouldn't have been there, but after watching the trial and finding out the facts, he didn't appear to do anything unlawful.

Do they though? I think the problem is just more visible in densely populated areas (which tend to lean blue).

Red states are filled with poverty/inequity it’s just more spread out.

Drive through the derelict areas in rural America and you will see similar issues.

Very sluggish and no vim support. It looks promising but I’m going to let it bake for a while.

> only code matters

Code is just an implementation detail that solves a business problem. I can't disagree more with this take.

> I really felt like I was part of this ancient order. We didn’t know each other and yet we all understood each other.

I mean, we kind of are, right?

I’ve had the same experience. Watching shows like that with the captions on makes me realize how much I miss with them off.

I’ve had a few instances where I didn’t “get” what had happened; I thought maybe it was just over my head. Turns out, I just missed some key dialogue is all.

Right, but if you transfer that money away before the bank gets it back then you would be liable for that part.

If you are just building random passion projects, then yes. If you actually spend the time to find a real problem people have and build a solution for that, I'm not sure if I'd call that luck.

Or... maybe reduce our defense budget nationally. We have endless funds for wars and bailing out large corporations. We don't need to raise taxes to accomplish this.

I mean, I'd still like for police to investigate/prevent violent crime even if they don't care about my laptop...

I think we both agree on what ought to be; just now how it is.

I think this is mostly right, but it makes it seem like successful apps are more of a crap shoot than they really are.

Too many (most?) apps are built without spending any time researching whether it solves a real problem people have (and are willing to pay for). I get it, we want to build things, not do market research.

Most people think that to build a successful app, you just have to "come up" with a brilliant idea and then go build it. That's not the case at all (while it does occasionally work, THAT is pure luck). Successful apps usually happen because the founder(s) saw a real pain point or gap in the market, and then build something to solve that.

You'll notice that the approaches are almost completely opposite:

- Build something and hope that people need it - Find a problem that people actually have and build a solution that solves it well

Of course, this doesn't guarantee success (nothing does), but it vastly increases your chances of not wasting time building something nobody wants.

Also, I'm not naive about the different backgrounds/privileges people have; of course luck plays a factor here. I'm speaking directly about people who are already in a position to create an app (i.e. a lot of HN readers)

Do you honestly think police have the resources to track every stolen item like this?

For one, tracking devices aren’t new and none of the others alert you id they are following you.

Good luck with that.

The second definitely doesn’t require luck. I built a $3k/mo app in a couple hours a day for a few weeks.

People think it’s all luck because they build things just hoping someone will buy it and when they don’t “ah well, bad luck on this one”.

Instead you need to find a problem people actually have first and then build something to solve that. Then its much more likely that someone will pay for that solution.

It is not luck when you hear several people say something like, “I really wish it was easier to do x” and then you build a solution that makes doing x easier.

It most certainly is luck if you just think of a random cool idea and it happens to be profitable.

One of my favorite quotes is “motion precedes emotions”. i.e. don’t wait around until you feel like doing something, just start and it’s likely that you’ll continue to want to so said thing.

Works for both work and exercise for me.

I mean, that happens but I exert myself to make myself more money. So far that has worked well.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree then.

We don't get to choose where or to whom we are born. If you are then born into "bad cultures and values", as you say, that has a huge influence on your "choices". If you drop the same kid randomly into a more affluent family, I highly doubt he makes the same choices.

I just don't think that the cause can be simply boiled down to choices, when environment clearly has an outsized effect.

> To reverse your logic, affluent people should never commit crimes but yet sone do too. People make choices.

I'm not arguing that people make choices. Also, we are talking about the rate of criminal activity, not absolutes. Nothing in my argument says affluent people never commit crime, that is a straw man.

> Poor people aren’t as stupid as you think. Most don’t turn to crime.

I don't know how to be any clearer that I am talking about the _rate_ of criminal activity.

> I think this was once called the soft bigotry of low expectations. You are a bigot by your logic. Looking down on poor people is offensive.

I appreciate the ad hominem, but the one thing you won't answer is why then do poorer communities commit more crime on average? It seems pretty clear that less opportunity/resources makes it _more likely_ to turn to crime.

How do you explain the difference in rates if it's just choice?

Again though, if that were the case (that it's simply a choice and opportunity has nothing to do with it), we should see the same rate of people choosing crime among affluent people.

It's simply not true that people in lower income have the same opportunities. They don't have access to the same quality of education, people who care about their career prospects or the ability to afford higher education.

Fair enough. I wish we structured it like that, so I could actually spend time on tech debt.

If that were true, wouldn’t crime rates be evenly distributed among income/circumstances?

You don’t find it convincing that poorer/less-educated places tend to have higher crime rates?

I’m not saying people aren’t culpable for their crimes, but surely it’s not as simple as people “consciously choosing” to become criminals.

Interesting, I’ve never been somewhere where on call entailed more than maybe an incident or two to handle during the week. I can only recall a single instance that interfered with my current sprint.

From the replies, it sounds like a lot of places have constant fires to be put out by those on call?

That doesn’t sound “well run” to me…

I don’t understand, is on-call not in addition to your normal duties where you work?

I don’t understand how it could tuen into extra time to work on fun stuff.

I've seen it at most places I've worked. A lot of people still use just VIM and the command line only.