redcircle

It is self limiting to look at it in terms of earning money. Clearly happiness is life's goal --- not money (nor prestige, nor power). If you are smarter, as Lyons says he is, then it should be possible to transcend the environment. I'm not talking Christian-like self abasement. If you try hard enough, you can figure out ascension points to higher planes of understanding and flourishing and self growth. In the process, you might get rich as a by-product, but by then the money should be irrelevant.

How much does it weigh? I didn't see its mass listed anywhere.

Someone found a way to bypass the PR dept to let you know that Microsoft's IM networks support lawful intercept (and that company policy supports this).

That's awesome. Of course, if we just want money, prestige, and success, then that is what we want. But if we want opportunities to grow, then the startup should be a challenge demanding our best to achieve success --- it should not be an easy ride on others' abilities. And the same goes for finding the desingineer --- if a founder wants to address a prime responsibility of running a company, and control their culture, then part of their legacy is the people that they help grow and to flourish into the desingineer.

This type of thing wouldn't help you get a job with me. It could make a difference in getting an interview with me, if you had no real experience on your resume/CV. I want a well-balanced team player, that has a good chance to flourish on my team. Do course grades correlate with real-world flourishing on my team? Of course not.

This is the first explanation of the differences between Facebook and Google+ that has connected with me. I don't know that Google+ is what I want though --- I like finding people with shared interests, but I prefer in person.

One without power relationships --- thus without American moral conditioning. Just because we grew up in the American system doesn't mean that other systems don't exist. It is far easier to raise a happy, flourishing, nuerosis-free child that integrates with society's norms and morals, than it is to discipline your way there with the child. The domination streak of America gives very predictable results: we bomb other countries relentlessly, using excuses that appeal to our moral conditioning. It is really funny to see the condescending responses (not yours) in this thread from people that belong to a moral system that bombs innocent people (whether directly or indirectly via delayed detonation of cluster bombs). Note: I've appealed to the indoctrinated American moral conditioning by mentioning the bombing, hoping to highlight the contradictions.

Is it proper to study canine pyschology via dogs kept chained all day long? It helps you understand the chained dog, if that is your goal --- but it doesn't teach you the nature of the dog. I'd like to see studies of teenagers raised neurosis free --- not studies of kids who have been dominated and forced to submit all their lives (which is the essence of American moral conditioning), filling them with repressions that finally reveal themselves during adolescence as antisocial behavior.

Yes, that is a good point, and something I see too --- I was just trying to take a shortcut, and say it from the poster's p.o.v., and like usual, my shortcuts backfire.

Out of curiosity, why was I down voted on this comment?

Feel relieved that you discovered their true character before you actually moved there and joined them and invested time with them. They are probably lying about your performance to have an excuse to rescind the offer --- now you know something about their character. They should have been honest about whatever circumstances changed such that they couldn't hire you anymore.

I believe that the written offer letter helps you seek damages related to relocation, losing health coverage, etc., due to the expectation of starting a new job. At-will employment lets you fire people without consideration, but it doesn't let you scam them into investing their time and money into the business relationship.

They don't call the system low latency --- it is the processing that occurs in the single-threaded main loop that has to be low latency. They of course want the end-to-end system to be low latency, but the term here describes the inner work loop, because their approach doesn't work if you have higher latency work items in the main loop.

If you apply "low latency" to the inner loop only, then you can resolve your second critique too: they won't be supporting anything that is CPU-intensive (since that isn't low latency). Also, all state has to fit in a single node, to keep things low latency.

I don't agree with his point that employees stick it out for long-term success in other places, while they don't in the Valley. Just because people stay with a company for a longer time doesn't mean that they subscribe to a different culture. I've worked in lots of places, and I got the impression that many people hold onto their jobs due to insufficient opportunities in the local area. If they had those opportunities, and a feeling of better security, I bet that they would move around more.

In a way, it sounds like he wants to have employees hang around longer without the company having to invest in a culture that makes them want to stay. The best way to keep employees onboard is a culture in the company that attracts the employees to want to stay. So many startups have compelling cultures at first, then bring in professional management, or excessive growth, and then the original employees seek their desired culture elsewhere. I sure don't want to hang around at a company that brings in traditional management techniques. I care about who I work with, and the conditions --- these days I think I prioritize those criteria over what I work on (and renumeration is a pretty low priority), because I can make lots of things that I work on interesting, but I can't change the management's attitudes (well, I'm trying to write a book to do so, but I wouldn't want to as a leaf node).