duncan_bayne

The EU situation sounds much better. To be super clear, we ignored the legal advice, because we considered that it was much fairer to provide the best feedback possible to clients who asked.

Wow, okay, never experienced that myself.

OTOH, sounds like you made the right call on hiring :)

> How can you identify brain trauma with ultrasound?

Well, put enough energy through the ultrasound transducer and you can guarantee there's brain trauma present.

Not sure that's how you meant it, though ;)

Not just Asian! I live in Melbourne, Victoria. Until we had three children and sent them to a private school, rent and later mortgage was our largest cost by a long margin.

I strongly disagree. My experience with that has been positive, _especially_ when candidates request detailed feedback and I provide it.

Caveats: this is in Australia, and I believe we've had legal advice a few times encouraging us to stop, because it could expose us to litigation.

> at least insofar as they do not work on the kinds of things that I dislike Facebook for.

Why do you draw that distinction? Do you believe it's possible to work for Facebook without at least indirectly benefiting the company as a whole?

And the early colonies had their problems too. IIRC at least one colony enacted capital punishment for anyone caught abandoning the colony to join the native American tribes.

It's no crazier than an online bookstore doing it :)

I think both are an example of an aversion to deep learning.

Perhaps to put the question a different way.

What is the difference to me, as an individual, what happens to the wealth once it's been taken from me?

Since I'm not spending it to further my own goals (e.g. by charitable donation to a cause whose values I share), does it matter whether that money has been spent on something someone else values, or literally burned?

Can you elaborate, for the non-linguists? His prescription seems sensible:

    i. Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

    ii. Never use a long word where a short one will do.

    iii. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

    iv. Never use the passive where you can use the active.

    v. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

    vi. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

... but I'm well aware of how sensible an asinine prescription can seem to a layperson.

I assume so, and it's a lot less hilarious if you have a large family.

I'm not from the Middle East but my nuclear family is brushing up against the limit, and I have relatives whose families exceed it.

It just seems so ridiculously arbitrary for Google (on any Product Manager) to declare that, as far as their products are concerned, a family contains at most six people.

That is pirate morality, codified.