sgslo

> in favor of "biological differences would mean permanent, uncorrectable injustice, therefore it is impossible that biological differences exist."

That's because the issue of men vs women in programming really is an all-or-nothing topic. Either you believe that a female is capable of being an equivalently skilled programmer to a male, or you don't.

Referencing biological differences always cascades to a question about the innate ability of a female to program. The best example I can point to is the infamous internal Google manifesto on male vs female programmers. If you read that text, it appears reasonable enough: the author thinks that there are biological differences, and these differences might lead to differences in programming strengths. But it is a wolf in sheep's clothing; as soon as you believe that there are differences, it follows that one set of differences must be advantageous to the other.

I can understand that there are biological differences between females and males, but I absolutely and vehemently choose to believe that there is no inherent difference in ability - females are 100% as capable as males when it comes to programming. Full stop.

Yes, this is double think. But I'd rather be a hypocrite than hold a secret belief that my biological sex makes me a better engineer.

I'm not sure your story proves a whole lot.

By the way you phrase it, the outcome of the older sister hinged upon the husband failing to get a job as a pharmacist. If he had successfully landed a job, the outcome of your story would be very different.

The same argument could be made for the younger sister. What happens when Walmart downsizes, and the husband is out of job with a background only in retail?

I'm not sure it is worth citing or criticizing the 'prudence' of either couple.

Relevant preface from 'The Adventures of Huck Finn':

"Persons attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot. BY ORDER OF THE AUTHOR per G.G., CHIEF OF ORDNANCE" - Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huck Finn

Its a good thought, but you're excluding ~15% of all web users[0] from using your product.

[0] https://caniuse.com/#feat=es6-module

Toss your email into your profile, I'll drop you a line.

Update your profile here on HN with some contact info, you might get a lead from this post alone.

I know what you're trying to get at here, that forming a 'women-only' group is selecting against men by allowing them to join, and that selection isn't fair.

Cmon, be real. There are discussion groups that select against other parties. Some of these groups are socially acceptable (cancer survivors, people in debt, women's issues). Other's might not be socially acceptable (excluding people based on their skin color).

In this case, a group to discuss women's issues is socially acceptable to a majority of people. If you're unhappy with this standard then go campaign against it somewhere else, don't try to poo-poo the OP's app.

I don't understand the purpose of your comments here.

The author is creating a platform for one group of people to discuss their common issues. In this case, that the common feature between people in this group is gender.

Other platforms exist for discussion between people with common attributes. An example is cancer survivors. Discussion in a cancer survivor group should probably be limited to cancer survivors. Do you think that people who have not experienced cancer first or second hand would have a good reason to post their problems in that group? I can imagine the posts now - "I haven't had cancer or experienced it in any form but here's how you should deal with chemotherapy." That's probably not appropriate.

I have recorded many hundreds of hours of content. I first used Quicktime on MacOS, it worked well enough. Great quality, fast, and easy to use.

More recently I moved over to OBS, which I consider to be far superior to Quicktime for one important reason: more control over audio settings. With OBS I can use just about any mic and get reasonable sound quality with a few tweaks. At present, I'm using a $20 headset and it works just fine.

I didn't know this was the case, thank you for sharing. For anyone else reading, it appears federal income tax was first implemented in 1913, more reading here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_State...

Games like EU4 often make me think about the role that video games have in education.

It seems as though all educational games are created with a primary goal of "education" and a secondary goal of "fun game". The result is always an unfun game. What if the ordering were reversed? Create a fun game, then try to tack on some educational elements after the fact.

Perhaps some games like this already exist. I'm sure you could make a claim that Minecraft is a fun game that also teaches resource management and spatial awareness.

I have trouble understanding why session invalidation with JWT's is challenging. The JWT itself contains an IAT (issued at time) describing when the token was created. To invalidate all sessions, you can store (in your DB, or other persistence service) a 'invalidated at' date. Any request with a JWT that was issued before this 'invalidated at' date can be considered to be invalid.

Honest comparisons on just about any online course will be impossible to come by. Anyone who does comparisons like this will usually embed affiliate codes with any links to courses they provide - these reviewers are incentivized to get you to buy any course, and they don't really care which.

I've worked at a company that did 100% pairing as well, you'd be surprised at the productivity gains that you experience with it, depending on your work habits.

Not everyone can sit down for 8 hours a day and write code. Some number of people get distracted by Facebook, Hacker News, whatever it might be. Having a baby-sitter of sorts sitting next to you certainly keeps this kind of person on track - and I know, I'm one of them.

Of course this is not every engineer out there. Sure, some people are able to stay focused for 8 hours a day, but I'm certainly not one of them.

In a professional setting - outside of software engineering - the degree requirement is absolutely common.

No young person has ever been hired as a structural engineer, mechanical engineer, water resources, etc, etc without at least a bachelors. The extreme minority that might be employed as such without a degree might have been originally hired at a lower position (as a draftsperson, for example) then trained and promoted from within.

Why is that?

Their post did not advocate for those conditions, nor is it likely that this is the person who originally instituted those conditions.

The sentence after the one you quoted referenced the species that already exist.

> The ones that do, mostly bacertium and fungi, were pre-disposed to doing so, and didn't suddenly X-men their way into consuming plastic.

Not to be a smartass, but I don't understand why people read a post to the first sentence that upsets them then instantly reply without reading the rest.

As an example, McDonald's has a net income of of $4.686 billion. The CEO gets paid 21.7 million of that, or 0.4%. That's net income, not revenue, which was $24.6 billion. Let's be honest, the money is there to pay workers more money, and the CEO's pay does not redirect any meaningful amount of that available cash away from employees.

To be clear, my issue is not that workers shouldn't be paid more, it is that justification for higher worker pay shouldn't be "my boss gets paid more than me."

Then it appears the issue is stagnant wages, not inequality in pay. Let's say that all pay of big bosses gets capped at 200k across the nation tomorrow. Does that solve any issues with healthcare, education, etc? It seems as though the assumption is that higher pay for bosses comes solely at the expense of line workers. I don't think cutting pay of one party is going to magically increase pay of another party.

It seems as though there are two competing issues tied to pay inequality:

1) Increasing inequality of social power between the mega rich and the common person

2) A feeling of unfairness as business leaders take home the lions share of profits

#1 is a true issue, but, let's be honest here, the average CEO's level pay isn't contributing to increasing inequality. That McDonald's CEO had a yearly take home pay of 21.7m. That's unbelievable peanuts compared to the wealth of the mega-rich. It is the multi-billionaires flexing their political muscles and exerting influence that leads to the nasty consequences of pay inequality.

As to #2, I understand the unfairness, but fail to understand the social consequences of it. In other words - what harm to society is being done by a manager getting paid more than a line employee? You mentioned offshoring jobs, but that is a separate issue, not tied to pay inequality.

Add "elegant" onto that list and I think you've hit the nail on the head.

These words aren't descriptors, they don't explain anything or give any further context about the nature of a library.

Unfortunately there seems to be high incentive and little downside to claim 'we will not sell easy'. You get the upside adoption by any customer concerned with longevity, and when you decide to fold for pennies you write a blog post about your incredible journey.

I get it. You get tired of a product, it doesn't do as well as you hope, but you still want to get acquihired and make sure your hardworking engineers don't end up on the street. Nonetheless, its frustrating when evaluating a startup's product and use 'longevity' as a factor.

If the goal is to test the thought process why not give interviee a self-directed project then ask them to present a 10 minute talk about it? You get some code written to verify the engineer can build something, plus you get confirmation that they can organize their thoughts and effectively communicate them to another engineer.

Isn't that a more realistic scenario? How often do you give an (employed) engineer a task then ask them to immediately explain what they'll do to implement it?

In the US, at least, inspectors are liable for issues not uncovered during the initial inspection. Seller-hired inspector missed a malfunctioning AC unit? It's on the inspector - or their insurance - to cover the cost of a fix.

Regarding #2, the Ruby sensibility on pulling in dependencies is very different than the Node world's.

As an arbitrary example, consider the deps of two similar packages, delayed_job (Ruby, https://github.com/collectiveidea/delayed_job) and Kue (JS, https://github.com/Automattic/kue).

Delayed_job has two dependencies if you're running on Ruby (rather than JRuby): rake and sqlite3. Neither rake nor sqlite3 have any dependencies of their own - in production mode, of course.

On the other hand, Kue has nine direct dependencies, each of which have their own. The full dependency tree of Kue has one hundred and eighty two separate dependencies.

Back in the 90's and early 2000's this was a hugely successful model, its the period during which Fry's had its greatest expansion. On any given day of the week you could see a line of 30+ people waiting for a spot at one of 15+ registers.

More recently many Fry's seem to have become ghost towns - even the banks of registers seemed to have thinned out, likely due to an expectation of never seeing that volume of customers again. The most probable explanation? Amazon. It's all the same cheap electronics.

The upside of self driving vehicles is so immense that I can't help but find in favor of giving leeway to companies developing this tech. I would vote legislation limiting the accident liability of 'qualified' companies developing self driving tech. No, I don't know what separates 'qualified' from 'not qualified'.

Try looking at this a different way: there were 37,461 vehicle related fatalities in 2016 in the US alone. In the current risk-averse climate, would we - over the early 1900's - ever allowed the development of public infrastructure to support an invention leading to so many fatalities? Likely not, but the benefit we enjoy from motorized transportation far outweighs the cost of those 37k yearly lives. The point is that continuing with a risk-averse, liability-obsessed development culture will stifle invention that can otherwise lead to great quality of life improvements.

Seems unlikely that road infrastructure will be upgraded/changed prior to construction of self driving cars.

When developing the self driving tech, a company retains all IP associated with research/development costs. Would they ever instead pay for development of public infra? Would a municipality build roads that conform to Company A's standard of self driving roads, omitting the requests of Company B?

Check out Dart with Flutter. You get browser compatibility with Dart alone, iOS/Android through Flutter. Flutter isn't a JS bridge solution as RN is, alleviating some of the pain that RN exposes.

I've used it to extend the functionality of a library without having to monkeypatch or subclass a bunch of classes. See here: https://github.com/StephenGrider/AdvancedNodeComplete/blob/m...

The CustomPage class 'extends' through the use of a proxy a Page and Browser class, while adding its own methods on top. The proxy mediates access to the Custompage instance, and the Page and Browser. When calling a method on CustomPage, it first looks to see if the method exists on the CustomPage instance, then the Browser instance, then the Page.

I had originally wanted to subclass Page, which is implemented by the Puppeteer library, but the Browser class had a dozen direct references to the Page class. I would have had to sublcass the Browser as well and override all those methods to instead reference my CustomPage. The proxy seemed like an appropriate solution.