valeness

HE DIDNT FUCKING START THOSE THINGS.

Jesus christ the dick riding on HN is insane.

Lets say I really like basketball, like a lot, so much so that I want to work at a basketball company doing something. In doing so I accept that a basketball company will want to promote politicians that will build sports centers and will promote basketball (or whatever).

On the surface this is fine. However, a politician is not only a basketball advocate, this person will have thoughts on abortion, civil rights, healthcare, etc.

Now, just because I like basketball so much I want to work for a basketball company doesn't mean I like basketball more than my healthcare, right to bodily autonomy, or my right to marry who I want to. So is it not within reasonable expectation for me to be upset at a company that actively supports politicians that want to end my marriage or strip me of fundamental civil rights?

This is why a strict "no politics", (while still a cop-out imo because taking no side is implicitly siding with the oppressor), is the only logically consistent attitude to take if you don't want to "be political" at work. You don't get to use basketball, or crypto for that matter, as a shield against criticism for supporting someone that wants to raise taxes or cut healthcare spending.

The argument is not "I don't think crypto companies should support crypto politicians" the argument is "You cannot ignore the negative externalities of single-issue voting". If you vote for a pro-crypto politician that also supports, say, killing toddlers if they don't pass 1st grade math class; you can't ignore the fact he wants to kill toddlers just because he is also pro-crypto. It's ethically negligent to do so.

----

For your 3rdly point: You forfeit this option when the boss decides to talk THEIR politics at work.

Why do you feel like you're not entitled to compensation for your labor? Where is the line?

I've experienced take home projects that were expected to take "10 hours". If I spend 10 hours on a take home instead of my consultancy I'm out thousands of dollars.

I understand preferring take home projects, I prefer it over whiteboarding too, but I don't understand why you wouldn't be owed compensation. In my opinion the best evaluation is to work with the team on an actual story, task, ticket, etc. where you are paid the listed salary pro-rated for your hours.

Compared to what it was like when I was working at Walmart...?

Yeah, material gain has certainly made me a thousand times happier. I haven't had to worry about an Electric bill in years. I used to have to navigate and memorize the electric company shutoff routine so I could pay as late as possible while selectively mitigating late fees and disconnect fees in relation to payday.

I can afford to go on vacations now. Take PTO when I want to. When my AC dies I don't have to just suffer until my landlord decides to do something; I can just pay the repair guy $700 to fix it and have AC in a couple hours. Eating healthier is easier; I don't have to stress in social situations about how run down or holey my clothes are. I have the luxury of being able to eat and survive if I am fired allowing me to be more confident in how I carry myself at work. (Meaning I don't have to kiss-ass when I am being mistreated). I have the money to travel if god-forbid my wife needs an abortion, or I can move away from bad neighborhoods very quickly.

The pursuit of wealth in and of itself as a measure of personal worth will not bring happiness, but let's not all pretend that money doesn't bring happiness insofar as it provides individual autonomy over their lives.

I agree with the OPs point that some older people may have just reached a level of material success that grants them the luxury of 1. Processing their existential dread through things like therapy; and 2. Live a less stressful life that comes with a certain level of wealth

What the OP is saying is you could have phrased your comment like you did in your last paragraph here.

Nobody disagrees that until it ends the situation will create further instability; but it can end with Russia giving up or surrendering as well. There is no global objective truth that Russia will not surrender; so by saying "I'm just stating facts" you're actually making a normative claim instead of a descriptive one; which can be viewed as problematic.

What are you insinuating precisely?

Lolol, I've been jumping in after-hours for years. They only take notice when you say "I quit".

Oh, so like everything else, just be rich. Got it bro.

So tell that to my stepmom that made me sit in a car when I was 13 years old with the windows rolled up while she chain smoked on a 2 hour drive because she was on the phone and couldn't hear with the windows down. Despite my protests...

Your freedoms end where mine begin. If you want to smoke, fine. Do it in a location where I NEVER have to breathe it in.

> If I wrote a story about a night out with my mates, would you complain that only men were talking?

I don't think OP is complaining, just remarking on how it's a signal of the time.

You can write a story about your mates all day long, nobody cares, don't draw this false equivalence; however, when all of society is just writing books about "their mates" and somehow women aren't present in any of these stories in any significant capacity, then I think I'd raise an eyebrow: no?

This is patently false. They will remove it if they are feeling particularly jolly when you call and ask. But they are under no obligation to do so and they have denied this action to me before.

Does this mean we should never make progress or change anything?

Also if your tutorials are using a base repository to work from, then you can still have the branch "master" it's just not default. So your existing repos should still work. And if you changed your repo then you should be responsible for updating your documentation to reflect that. It's just good practice.

It's all relative. Compared to many that is "ultra" privileged. I'm almost 30 and I can't even access a line of credit for 30k of debt because of stuff that happened earlier in life without having my parents as a safety net. So everything I have done on my own has been just after work using money that could be going to rent, savings, investments, new technology, etc.

I also have a high level of privilege because my upbringing allowed me to have unmetered access to a computer at 14 landing me a good programming job when I dropped out of college. So from the perspective of someone who didn't even have the opportunities I had, looking into the life of someone who started a company from a shed while living in their parent's house, it would appear "Ultra" Privileged. (I have plenty of friends from where I grew up that didn't even have support from their parents when they were 14-16, working after school to pay rent because their parents either died, or were too deadbeat to consistently make rent)

Like I said, it's all relative.

But you have no evidence of this. You're just saying "This thing I like will be big because I like it"

Web2 had a lot of stars align to become "the next big thing". (The newfound capacity for advertising, smartphones driving adoption, and the mechanisms for tracking and stealing user data). And none of those stars had to deal with privacy, decentralization, security, encryption, etc. All of these things that we have been trying to get consumers to value and consider for years; are actually antithetical to corporation's profit incentive. The tech industry has tried for a very long time. The concepts behind web3, such as decentralization, are not new. They have been tried, and created, and even somewhat adopted, for a VERY long time. Blockchain is just the new mechanism to try and attack this, but like most things on the internet, the problem is not a technical one: It's a social and economic one.

Until you talk about dismantling capitalism, I don't see web3 as being anything more than a natural cycle of niche internet interest combined with speculative market scams that entrap vulnerable populations into caring about it just long enough for them get burned on the latest crypto rugpull.

You have too much stuff tacked onto a friday. If you want happier employees just let them have the early weekend instead of doing a "quiz" or "board game". I come to work to work, not be forced to play games with colleagues.

Also social check-ins are not great unless everyone is just living their best life. Over the pandemic it was pretty damaging for me as I was stuck in my 500 sqft apartment with an immunocompromised mother, too scared to go get groceries; and then seeing people from other departments posting about their spur of the moment vacation to cancun was quite the demoralizing agent... And, again, my colleagues aren't always my friends and I don't like to be forced to share my personal life with random people I wouldn't talk twice to outside of work.

It sounds like as an employer you're exercising unjust control over your employees personal and social lives. Some people may like this, but it's never been received well by me, my colleagues, or even friends I've worked with. We'd all rather have just enjoyed the extra time off and we could hang out if we were friends anyway. So while it may work for you, I believe you are self-selecting out of employees who would find this kind of thing a giant red flag; so the advice is likely skewed to those who want to foster a tolerable work environment for everyone.

I do like your forum idea though, I've been a large proponent of written documentation and thread-based persistent communication for years. However, convincing product/design/business of this is very difficult.

This is weird to me in a thread about requirements gathering. The OP isn't making the case weighing good, but slow, programmers and bad, but fast, programmers. They're specifically calling out C2 moving slowly to gather requirements and talk with the product/design team. Which is very likely NOT a "technical purist" type, since I doubt the technical purists are the kind to give two shits about the domain (I'm one of them, even though I realize caring about the domain is now my job as Lead, doesn't mean I have to like it).

If C1 delivers quickly on bad requirements, there is no guarantee that product will make revenue. Ask any startup founder who started building a product before doing market research and validation.

I think when we add the archetypes of "fast but sloppy" and "slow but clean", we end up with more permutations than C1 and C2 since the matrix looks more like:

[ Business Oriented, Technology Oriented Quick/Sloppy , Slow/Clean ]

Assuming 20k in debt is more than manageable for most people really says more about you than it does others who can't pay that back.

The OP said he could just "reach into savings" and whip out 12k. That is an INCREDIBLY privileged position to be in and I would urge you both to re-evaluate your perspective.

People taking care of their sick mother, or paying for expensive medication for chronic illnesses, or living in a poor job market area, or have poor credit due to narcissistic parents taking out loans in their name, battling mental illness, or are paying child support, etc; are not "edge cases". They make up a considerable number of people who are struggling with the compounded failures of the system layered over of them.

It was Margaret Mead who said something to the effect that "The earliest sign of true civilization, was that of a healed femur." This was said because a femur is not something that can be healed without assistance from someone else to bandage you, care for you, and fetch food for you.

What is the point of civilized society and public policy if not to ensure that "edge cases" are treated as equitably as the general public? Why do you not have the same mentality when somebody breaks a leg? Why should society care for the outcomes of poor decision making: for example, such as playing contact sports, that results in a broken leg?

Also please quit spewing the nonsense of "didn't choose a marketable major". I see this a lot with STEM grads, shitting on the arts, and then turning around and watching DUNE on HBOMax. Everybody enjoys the work of "non-marketable" majors, but nobody wants to pay for it.

In all of my experience, it has never been engineers misunderstanding the users. It has always, ALWAYS, been C-suites, Executives, and VPs pushing product features to

1. Entice investors 2. Planning for some external company event like a merger 3. Pandering to analysts 4. Pandering to the sales department, who again, sell into VPs and not to users

I think it's incredibly out of touch to suggest engineers are the ones that lack empathy for their own product, and not the myriad of individuals who haven't touched a line of code or a design file for the past decade. As an engineer I field support tickets every day, I know what problems the system has, no amount of me using the application is going to change what gets consistently submited through help desk.

You'll have to forgive me for being bitter after a decade of trying to innovate in the products I worked on only to be shut down every single step of the way by upper management; then to have to swallow this self-righteous PR stunt where the world seems to blame "out of touch" workers for not knowing what their job is and not having empathy for their users.

Beyond that, don't get me wrong, I don't think doing deliveries is beneath anyone. I would probably accept half a million dollars to do deliveries. However, I do think it's incredibly immoral to suggest that you can pay some people $200/hr to do deliveries, but others only $7/hr. Instead of focusing ire on those that are upset that their job duties are not what was described to them when hired; perhaps we can be upset that doordash has the capacity to pay their laborers much much more, and chooses not to in order to ensure they can pay half a million dollars for what everyone here considers "mediocre engineers".

Also, again, I personally would not work at doordash because of this requirement. However, I wouldn't have any issue with the company if they CLEARLY outlined this job requirement during their hiring process; which it looks like they did not do.

Yes, precisely, they will get paid extremely well somewhere else where this is not part of the expected job duties.

And in my opinion, the doordash product will suffer for it.

Can you explain to me how someone who spends their entire day in k8s and helm charts would benefit by exploring the UX of an application through the lens of the user? Beyond a normal study, that is?

Seems like a great way to assist the engineers in just finding new jobs...

What net-beneficial applications of crypto would you suggest I look at if I wanted to re-evaluate my perspective on crypto?

I was a very early crypto fan, loved talking about decentralized trustless networks, legal smart contracts, that kind of thing. But after years and years of just getting burned by the space being taken over by financial people spouting cultist rhetoric, the space has lost it's shimmer to me.

Asking somebody to join a community and look around themselves is a huge demand of trust when the industry has coordinated rugpull after rugpull using social tactics very similar to your own.

I would very much like to hear about promising applications of crypto and blockchain outside of some esoteric financial ploy for more money.

What I am most interested in is making something like game cosmetics into NFTs that can be traded around players. For example: Imagine getting a rare Season 1 helmet in the new Halo game, and then being able to trade it with your friends in season 2 for something else. The blockchain is actually useless here aside from the fact that it's a protocol that defines ownership outsde of the game so that the central authority can't place limits on trading.

But I just haven't seen anything in that capacity so you'll still have to color me cynical

This is more than just east. I am seeing the same error on us-west-2 resources.

Yes, but this is not evidence of "it will end" to me.

But didn't they sell the houses to investors and/or established landlords?

I'm not sure how this helps the youth or those otherwise disillusioned with the current housing market as that housing is still unavailable to them.

This is true only for those of us privileged enough to have discretionary income. Which is not all of us :)

Do you think the same way with movies? Many movies could probably survive on ad placement revenue alone. Why do you pay to go to the movies? Do you think the same way with buying a laptop? I'm sure you could fund a laptop with ad and bloatware placement, so why do you pay bill gates for a surface book?

If nobody paid to go to the movies, then nobody would want to advertise in those movies, those movies would lose their sponsorships, and stop being made. If everybody unsubbed from netflix right now they would stop funding original content, even though the content they make has ad placements. Why even ask netflix for money if you can just make a wildly successful tv show with ad placements and release it for free?

Why should you pay to go to a football game? Why should you pay to watch a football game? All the players have sponsors. They're all millionaires. Why did our parents pay for cable? Cable had ads, all the actors were millionaires, the cable company owners were millionaires, the production studios were millionaires. You're saying practically everyone who bought cable in the 1990s-2000s was bad with their money because the actors were millionaires and had ad sponsrships? Give me a break.

I just think it's incredibly disingenuous that because someone is leveraging a SLIGHTLY different monetization model that allows for free consumption, that anyone who pays for it is bad with their money. Maybe if you condemned ALL luxury spending with the same energy I could see you're at least being consistent. But this is just more irrational disdain for the new wave of media consumption.

This is a pretty privileged viewpoint imo.

This one small thing lost the public's trust?

Not the fact that cops used to pull me over for no reason because I lived in a poor neighborhood? Not the fact that my family member's lives were ruined because of tiny drug-related infractions? Not the fact that we went on a pointless 20+ year war for no reason (just the one within my lifetime)? Really. Wearing a mask is the breaking point here?

How easy are people's lives? They have everything going for them except they have to wear a mask so THEN they lose faith in the system.

Fucking spare me.

(speaking generally here at those I've seen share the same rage, not accusing you directly)

I just cannot wrap my head around being so upset that a public official lied you're willing to sever friendships, familial ties, and sacrifice your career because you refuse to follow sane and frankly manageable guidelines to prevent the spread of COVID-19. It's not even that the messaging is currently or has been conflicting now. It's like carrying a grudge for years over the smallest of infractions. Are people so bored, they have nothing going on other than to get in a big tizzy about having to wear a mask?

My life has been far more impacted by university security towing my car back when I was 19 and me using a credit card to get it back. Leaving me with debt I couldn't afford for the next year or so. I clearly remember my parents, and all adults in my life, telling me to "suck it up" when I complained how unfair it was. I believe I was far more justified using the parking space at a place I paid 6 grand a semester to attend than any of those adults are now to enter private property for free without wearing a mask.

Why is it only during a global pandemic, with millions of lives on the line, do these same people all of a sudden care about the tiniest bits of hypocrisy and unfairness of our society? Of all the things to be upset about, they choose the one thing that has been proven since mid-2020 to SAVE lives? I literally cannot wrap my head around it. Just wear the fucking mask! Not wearing a mask is such a weird hill to die on...

Twitch streams aren't free though. If nobody paid then they wouldn't exist. It's just a voluntaryist model. Those that pay, do, those that can't or don't want to, don't. So I'm not a sucker for choosing to fund a form of entertainment I find valuable.

I treat museums the same way. When I was young and poor my parents didn't pay to get in since it was optional. But now that I'm older and I make good money, I donate extremely well when I go to museums. I know that it's voluntary and I choose to participate in funding it because I enjoy the experience.