overgryphon

Because half the population doesn't have front pockets that fit phones, and sometimes your purse is slightly out of reach.

Which is another good reason for in person communication- you can see if your coworker is intensely focusing and give them space. Pinging them on IM is distracting and interrupts them regardless of what they are doing. Pinging an entire team on the "team chat" is even worse.

Library hours strongly conflict with 9-5 job hours.

For many small businesses, increasing the minimum wage would increase the cost of their employees but not increase the income of their customers. These businesses would see an increase in expenses but none of the benefits of a consumer base with more disposable income.

Walmart wants a higher minimum wage because their consumer base includes minimum wage employees.

"It clearly runs fine since Apple is using it."

This doesn't mean it runs fine, it means that in the particular cases that Apple uses the API for it runs fine. Apple may not have tested the API sufficiently for broader usage, or made special cases in the API to support their specific internal usage. Public usage of the API on iPhones may result in concerns about security, stability, or it may simply not behave on iPhones the way most developers would expect it to, and Apple doesn't want to create an API that will result in a lot of application bugs they can't fix themselves.

No one outside of Apple knows exactly why this API is only supported publicly on iPads and not iPhones. Concluding the reason isn't valid is premature.

Health care is generally included on top of salary in the US, so Canadian health care wouldn't be a consideration for engineers working at established companies.

Even significant health costs per month are ignored in a corporate environment in the US, though small startups may be different. For entrepreneurs, health care costs would matter before the company was large enough to have figured out benefits.

Any startup employees\founders willing to comment on how health insurance is generally handled at US startups?

I went vegan for a few months and abandoned it because everyone else was unable to have a conversation with me about anything other than meat. Everyone felt an unprovoked need to justify their eating habits to me. Social groups were uncomfortable picking a restaurant without asking if I was okay with it even though I would much prefer to just not eat and hang out with people. Without any comment from me, my eating habits became a constant source of discussion and concern.

There just isn't any way to be politely vegan. Everyone else automatically assumes that you care why they aren't.

I've dropped my Nokia 521 down stairs, into water, all over the place. It's incredibly durable.

A lot of the tech employees that are being protested are young, single, and much more willing to move for economic reasons than families. The ability to buy a house in the future, not deal with protesters, and probably make more money overall in a city with lower rents is pretty enticing. Silicon Valley has a lot of tech companies, but now Seattle and Austin do too- not as many, but growing. At some point the hatred misdirected at tech employees could result in San Francisco suffering from less tech investment than other more stable cities.

The article specifically picked someone whose problems were clearly his own making and avoidable. I'm going to guess that the majority of people that will be affected by this new law didn't have successful careers in software development.

When something isn't right a long period of time, it's easy to lose perspective on what being well looks and feels like. It may be well worth it to explore your options now while it isn't urgent, until waiting until something changes and you can't deal with it anymore.

Therapists don't prescribe medication- the best they can do is refer you to a doctor or psychiatrist. They can often answer questions about medication though, and help you decide whether that path is right for you. Therapy isn't about medication, it's a different tool altogether.

This can depend more on the particular product group and manager you work for than which company. All big companies have less than perfect managers, and some people have a hard time accepting work/life balance choices that are different than their own.

Who shows up to the career fair may have more to do with the university you happen to attend than a lack of hardware related internships. Cisco, Qualcomm, Intel, AMD, and Nvidia all hire college interns, and all go to college career fairs. Apple does hire college interns at college career fairs for more than home tech support.

Companies only hire so many recruiters to go to so many university career fairs (which the company often pays to attend), and this has an unfortunate effect on how easy it is to be hired at a particular company from a particular university.

Perhaps if all of your friendships are shallow and aloof, a change of city wouldn't solve your problem?

I love Seattle, and do not find people here passive or unfriendly.

From a manager perspective, you wouldn't want an employee working 60+ hours on a regular basis. When actual crunch-time happened, that employee wouldn't have room to work more. You likely wouldn't be able to meet expectations, because your under-staffing problem had been hidden by regularly overworking some employees.

Why did fashion come up in this article at all? There is no reason to believe that a woman who wears heels and makeup can program any less well than a woman who doesn't. Or that girls that read fashion magazines aren't interested in computers. Fashion and dress are irrelevant.

That term really put me off in the article. Just about everyone uses technology to some degree, and I've never heard of someone separate people into "technologist" and "not technologist". It seemed very us vs. them.

It's humbling not to be chosen, but to look at the task set out before you and realize how small you are in comparison.

My experience is that people who consistently overwork and choose work over their family life feel that those who don't are lazy. The inability to have reasonable expectations of others, and tendency to look down on coworkers can undermine large projects or create a reputation of being incapable of working with others. This can limit their career, especially at senior levels where employees are expected to coordinate high risk projects across many people or serve as a mentor for newer employees.

Yes, which of course she attributes to men's problems with needing attention from women who understand them.

Woah there, software development is a very collaborative field. You can be the best programmer on the team, but if you go around putting others down and name calling you are going to sabotage your product.

There are ways to criticize people constructively, and sometimes that requires being nice to others.

I'm not trying to say that she should "just deal with it". These are legitimate feelings and struggles, but they have nothing to do with sexism. Her attributing these problems and feelings to sexism prevents any actual discussion of how to effectively address these feelings because that's sexist, obviously she plays no role in this if it's because of her gender.

She's victimizing herself, and by association all of the other women in tech who only work with men. Honestly, I'm a bit defensive here because I'm tired of being told by other women that any problem I encounter at work is because of my gender.

Getting involved is hard, and takes practice. Same goes for mentoring others. Had she simply wrote about those struggles, the comments would be filled with similar anecdotes and empathy from all the people in HN who have been there regardless of gender.

But claiming all of these feelings are because of her gender is, well, sexist.

Are we supposed to conclude that men never feel isolated, alone, or struggle to mentor others? She describes very common feelings and struggles related to working in a corporate environment, and then blames them on her gender.

This made leaving tech her only option, since she can't change who she is. Had she been a little less quick to assign sexism to fairly common struggles, perhaps she could have explored ways to effectively address those feelings.

None of the problems she describes have to do with sexism.

She felt isolated, alone, unseen, unappreciated, and unable to teach others. These feelings have less to do with being a woman in tech, and more to do with her own social habits and communication skills.

If she felt alone and isolated, why didn't she socialize with her teammates more? Organize some social events to bring everyone together? If she felt so isolated, what was she doing to address that? Was she isolating herself?

Becoming an effective manager isn't easy or automatic. For someone to learn from you, you need to first develop mutual trust and respect, and that can take time. I certainly have worked for people I wasn't willing to learn from, and that had nothing to do with their gender. I didn't respect them or trust them as a mentor. It sounds like she resented her struggle to be a lead, and blamed it on sexism rather than work on communication skills to learn how to be an effective mentor.

The only sexism here seems to be her viewpoint of the men around her as unloved, unseen, and needy for female attention. If she treated her coworkers that way, or felt the need to distance herself because of this perspective, that might explain why she felt isolated.

Sometimes when we're insecure about something, it makes us more brittle and sensitive. This can make it difficult to be comfortable around others.

How someone conducts themselves in response to rejection can affect future opportunities.

It isn't uncommon to be reject a candidate for one job, but approach them about a different job that better fits their skillset. This can happen even year or two down the road if that candidate left a good impression with a senior person who hires people regularly.

Worst case scenario is that not only are you rejected for that job, but are considered not hirable for other positions in the future. Trying to prove someone wrong after they have rejected you for a position indicates that you do not respect their decision, and feel entitled to reconsideration after they already made their choice clear. It's disrespectful.

Keep your dignity, and maybe that job rejection turns into a valuable opportunity down the road.

Not being able to focus is quite a bit different from simply being bored.

Distractions are a problem not only because of the sheer number of them, but because you don't really notice you aren't on task anymore. It can take 30 minutes to realize that reading about ancient Mongolia has nothing to do with that paper you were reading, and another five minutes to trace exactly how you got there. And then you need to find where you were and start again.

Focus is incredibly complex, and not well understood. I don't know where the line is between problem and "lazy", but I do know that will power isn't the whole answer to these types of problems.

So they released an unsupported publicly accessible API?

There are many ways to express emotions.

Your perspective changes when you need to find that extra 15 hours of time while also working full time. Apply to 2-3 companies at once, and all of a sudden 30-45 hours are added on to your normal work week.

She moved to Germany to provide housing, health care, and education for their younger children. Divorce came later.