aezell

1600 and your GPA was 4.0. Any other answer proves you aren't trying hard enough to get the job.

I took too much cold medicine and was given access to a coding agent. This is the result.

I was in an interview once and the prospective employer asked me what church I attend. I replied, "Catholic." He said, "Is that even Christian?" So, yeah, plenty of Americans have a skewed view of Catholicism.

Bummed there wasn't one vampire joke or pun or allusion in this entire article.

I had the opposite experience coming from Django/Flask to Elixir/Phoenix. I found it very comfortable and that there were many similar patterns at the framework level. Now, LiveView is a bit of a different story but basic Phoenix routing and views seem quite similar to Django routing and views. Ecto's model schemas have a decent amount of overlap with Django's model objects.

Was it the LiveView stuff that felt foreign? I'd agree there's a learning curve there as someone coming from Django.

I'm interested to see how this goes.

I recently used ChatGPT and Claude to help myself build a simple app for my wife. Just listing things and being able to edit them basically. It was VERY frustrating as both models get pretty basic things wrong around the plumbing stuff like configuring SwiftData or CoreData.

I tried it with a version of the prompt(s) I used in that project and I got an app that's just a white page.

I wouldn't rely on their aggregation. But, with a subscription, you can just read the magazines in the same format and layout as they are printed. No aggregation to get in the way.

Would you go into a store, pick up the newspaper, and walk out without paying?

Apple News does this. Tons of magazines across the spectrum and number of larger US newspapers. If you aren't in the US or at least wanting to read in English, I don't know.

Qobuz markets itself first as a hi-res streaming service. However, it also offers FLAC purchases without DRM that are yours even if you don't continue to use Qobuz. Their selection is very large and might have more options for more well-known acts.

I spent a lot of time doing newspaper and magazine layout with this back in the day.

Really, any forum that focuses on a specific niche. They could be some of the best places in the Internet. Facebook ate up most of those amazing communities.

> Wow, just wow.

This is not conducive to honest conversation. I've been nothing but polite in our discussion. Your sarcasm here and in further responses isn't constructive.

> Managers earning $300K+ are not getting rich. Good. I guess it's all relative.

It is relative. If you live in San Francisco where the WMF is headquartered, this salary won't make you rich. I wish I could make that much money but given the role and the location, it doesn't seem exorbitant.

It might be instructive to look at how many people are giving money and not just the actual amount of money. I'm honestly saying that. I don't know the numbers because I haven't looked in years. Maybe there's more money because more people use it, more people find value in it, and more people donate. It would be an interesting way to slice the data. What's the average donation size? How has the geographic distribution of donations changed?

It seems like across all these threads, what many people, possibly including you, are responding negatively to is the language in the ads and not strictly the fact that the WMF collects money from people who willingly give it. I've already said that I don't care for the language either. I believe that they could be successful without it. Perhaps, not equally as successful but successful nonetheless. I shared that feedback when I worked there. I want them to appeal to the better angels of our nature.

Still, it's marketing and if my money supports the mission (the whole mission and not just Wikipedia), which by all accounting it does, then I'll continue to donate. The marketing, while undesirable, doesn't change their dedication to the mission.