bcg1

Recently referred a friend for an opening at the company where I work. He didn't even get an interview because someone from HR has decided that all developers should have a four year degree (he only has an associates degree despite 15+ years experience). Maybe this would be fine for entry level positions, but it is straight up age discrimination for senior level ones (since there are still talented people in the workforce who went to school when CS programs were much less common).

One theory I have is that HR depts are pushing back against the upward trend of developer salaries; if they create an onerous process that tries to make candidates feel inadequate, it might make it more likely that they can land a low ball offer with whoever is desperate enough to stick it out. Also, if the HR department itself is incompetent and not capable of attracting talent, they can always point to their tests etc to "prove" that there are just no qualified candidates in the workforce.

Also, what is with all the coding tests etc? That stuff is obviously useless. Why don't hiring managers just ask candidates to read some code that is similar to what they will be working on, and observe how they approach stepping through it and how quick they can understand it? That is far more similar to what real work looks like most of the time.

Many people correctly surmise that the benefits to individuals are temporary and will sunset, after which their taxes will be higher than when they started.

Also, provisions such as repealing the individual health insurance mandate lead to an increase in other expenses, though admittedly those are not federal taxes. I work for a health insurance company, and earlier this year the company filed with the state regulators to say there might be close to a 50% hike in premiums, depending on whether or not the individual mandate was repealed. Whatever your feelings are about that politically, the increase in premiums will be real and directly related to that bill, and the money is fungible so people can't be blamed if they consider it an increase.

One more thing, a deficit funded tax cut today means a tax increase tomorrow to pay for principal+interest. People could be thinking of that when they say their taxes will go up.

Fair enough, maybe it depends on your definition of "full bust".

But consider this... if the price were to go back to where it was just a year ago before the current mania (which is a common thing to happen when a financial bubble pops, after overcompensating to the downside) then it would be a 95% retracement from the highs (where, almost self-evidently, many people were buyers). And BTW a 95% retracement requires 20,000% gains to break even.

If you gave me a $1000 and I gave you $50 back, I think most people would say that I took all their money, even though technically they could still buy a couple pizzas or something.

So, again, it just depends on your definition of "full bust"

Bitcoin absolutely could go full bust. It is not a physical commodity, there is no utility outside of its perceived value. It is not a company, so it doesn't even have book value as its floor. And the technology is open source and well known, so there is nothing special or scarce about Bitcoin technology at this point. Even the companies that have capital investments in Bitcoin hardware could just repurpose that for a forked coin or possibly some other purpose altogether

> About one-third of internet users stream cable TV without paying for it by using credentials of someone they don't live with

There is no way this is true. Not saying that it isn't a problem, but statements like the above are approaching the same level of BS as when the ad industry says most people would prefer to trade their privacy for the privilege of being manipulated by targeted ads.

> "On the oth­er hand, we still lack a de­cent high-quality JSON Schema lan­guage."

This turns data integration with JSON into a total nightmare. And to make matters worse, Swagger is a total shitshow. Combine the different flavors of JSON schema with OpenAPI/Swagger and you have are left with a regression from SOAP/XML that approaches the same complexity with with fewer features and no standards.

Even mf COBOL has a standard schema definition for data. For new projects I'm still cranking out XSD definitions and doing transformations to JSON if I have to. Even if they come out with a decent schema format I would probably skip it and jump straight to gRPC, Thrift, or some other IDL and just continue to treat JSON as an "also supports".

That's what the insurance industry is for. Just make the companies liable, and they will seek insurance. Insurance companies will force them to take reasonable measures in order to carry a policy. Nothing new under the sun.

Criminals, on occassion, fail to comply with the law.

It is correct to hesitate to guess ethnicity based on names. Quite sure there are plenty of people of color named Smith and Johnson.

Also, even if these were Caucasian names, the article states that the system disproportionately targets people of color; looking at the 10 most common combinations proves nothing one or another with respect to the assertion in the article.

Critical thought often requires intentional effort, even by those who value it. And many people that I come across do not even seem to value critical thought, especially when it comes to politics... to the contrary, there exists a movement promoting the idea that thinking is a practice that makes you some sort of elitist.

I find your post to be cynical.

The article you attribute to Adafruit is not written by them, they just linked to it from their blog, ostensibly as food for thought and discussion.

A couple of years ago I had the opportunity to interact with Limor and PT over email after they reached out to me in response to a project I'd posted on a forum. I found them to be gracious, supportive, and genuine, and based on the conversations we had I find your claim that they don't care about open-source hardware to be dubious.