bcassedy

This user has posted the parent post nearly verbatim twice. And the exact same responses about determinism several times.

They also did all that expansion with a focus on cryptocurrencies, and the hype has died on those so it makes sense to reel in investments there.

The some people win argument isn’t even really true for sports betting. Casinos just ban anyone that wins with any regularity.

Of course any individual bet can win but casinos stack the deck by only taking action from players they know will lose over the long run.

I've watched the Fedex truck pull up to my house and the guy walk up to the door and slap a sticker on it for missed delivery. Didn't even bother to bring the box, knock, or ring the bell despite my car being in the driveway.

That same management is the type to set rules where you don't get to assess if you're vulnerable, you just have to fix all the CVEs

> It's not a matter of "personalizing", it's a matter of recognizing that, just like you, the company is trying to get the best deal they can

This is kind of untrue. The company may "want" to get the best deal possible, but you aren't dealing with the company. You're dealing with one or more individuals at the company that have incentives that do not align perfectly with what the company "wants".

In most cases, the hiring manager has a budget for the role and they do not care if you come in at the bottom of budget or near the top. They don't make extra money for getting you as cheaply as possible. Sometimes they even have incentive to pay you more, to close you quickly or even just prestige.

Great grandparent comment said roughly "You can make chicken meat at home with just a chicken and a knife." While factory farming may be abusive, that is not what this discussion thread is about.

For me switching between code and tests is a context switch. TDD approaches that I'm familiar with encourage frequent swapping between them which really drains my productivity. It's much easier for me start something and hyperfocus than it is to swap back and forth.

This is just insanely wrong-headed. Tests with no code are always negative value, the time it took to write the tests. Code with no tests might also be negative value, but it at least has the possibility of having positive value.

Tests are great and TDD is great for some people, but the whole point is to write useful software. It's important not to lose sight of that.

I haven't talked to any teachers about this specifically, but based on my impression of the school system and public philosophy around schools and teaching that I've gleaned from my wife and many friends who are teachers, I think it might help in the short term but be worse in the long term. The one thing that seems nearly constant is that expectations of teachers are always increasing. So I think eventually we'd end up back in a similar place except teachers would have to keep the pace year round rather than getting a couple months off in the summer.

I don't know enough about chess mid-game and end-game to know whether chess is the same as poker in this regard, but poker is absolutely not a game of memorization deeper into the game tree even at the highest levels. tl;dr the author knows nothing about the state of high level poker play and I suspect they don't know much about high level chess either.

Chess and poker both require memorization or at least very strong understanding of the early game. In chess this is openings and has been required for as long as I can remember. In poker this is preflop play. Poker extends this a bit into flop play, but already on the flop there is a lot of opportunity for creativity because there are countless strategies that are indistinguishable from one another within reasonable precision targets.

As you descend deeper into the game tree for turn and river play we enter into territory that cannot be memorized due to number of possibilities and the increasing impossibility of having perfectly executed all the way to the current decision point. This opens up a lot of room for creativity and exploitation.

You have a viewpoint that is shaped by a very niche experience. Your experience was with students that happened into an interest that was itself a project that can drive learning in a handful of subjects. This kind of approach doesn't work so well when the subjects that need to be learned don't lend themselves so well to exciting projects or even when the students don't get to self-select based on their interests.

I've used it pretty extensively in Windows to expand text, execute clicks on certain buttons in GUIs, execute clicks on specific coordinates on screen or within a window, and to combine all these things into complex macros.

I feel like so much of the sentiment boils down to some people objecting to someone else benefiting from government spending and some other people having suffered so they think everyone else should suffer too.