dxf

You can find out the information you want without asking "How do you like the Director?"

For example, you can ask:

How does the Director support the organization? How do they support their reports? Have you seen them "go to bat" for the org (or someone in the org)? What did they do?

How long has the Director been leading the organization? How long have the senior leads been in the organization?

Are longer tenured people sticking around, or are they moving on to somewhere else? Etc.

Don't ask if the Director is good. Look for the artifacts of having a good Director.

Ex-Googler here. I'm not sure there is one answer to your question.

The culture of your org is 100% dependent on where you are, and primarily flows from your Director. This is both good and bad.

The good: You can have islands of positive culture inside otherwise problematic organizations, provided the Director sets that positive culture and makes sure their managers and leaders help enforce it.

The bad: You can be one re-org away from that positive culture going away. That said, I experienced many higher-level re-orgs that people basically considered no-ops because our Director didn't change, and I know of orgs that have had good culture for over 10 years.

If you are considering a role in some part of Google (either as a new hire or an internal transfer), you should ask probing questions about the organization itself to try and understand its specific culture and how that culture is embraced by the people inside it.

I saw Jef Raskin demo the Canon Cat in the 1980s when I was working at Stanford.

One of the more interesting concepts behind the interface was, everything was stored in one "circular" file, with marks for document beginnings and ends. By "circular" I mean that if you leapt forward from file to file, you'd eventually return to your starting point. The idea was, it's hard to remember the names of documents, let alone where in the filesystem you might have saved them. But you can usually remember something about the document -- some piece of text, etc. Using the leap keys you could quickly find the document you were looking for. Modern OSes allow for such searching, but at the time the idea of not worrying about file locations or names seemed very forward thinking.

Jef had research to show that "leaping" was superior (or at least, your productivity was faster) when comapred to other computer interfaces -- provided the user was used to using leap keys. Later I saw Andy Hertzfeld give a talk on Multifinder, and I thought the contrast between the two engineers was stark. The Canon Cat gave you one way to interface with the system (which was "the best way"), while Andy's interface gave you multiple ways to do the same task. Andy said something like "different people interact with the system differently" and he wanted to support all they ways they might want to do their work.

The current top comment on the article explains the situation, and ATC are "not being assholes here":

>NorCal had a new interpretation of ILS approaches come down several months ago that tied the controllers hands with regards to ILS approaches during visual conditions... The controllers were issued guidelines that if it’s busy and an aircraft is unable to comply with the approaches advertised on the atis or maintain visual separation that its better to hold them until there is adequate space on final as it’s more unsafe to start vectoring 30/40 different aircraft to build the required hole for the 1 aircraft who’s company has a lame rule

No you did it the right way. I lived in Canada for 10 years, my partner is Canadian, and we debated what to do when we moved down from Canada to the US. We got an attorney to help advise us.

It is very much a problem if your partner is deemed to have entered the US under false pretenses. That is, if they enter the US on a tourist visa and then you get married and they apply for a change of status, immigration can look askance at your spouse -- "The original tourist visa was a lie, you always intended to get married and change status, they are now barred from the US for 10 years." It might be faster, but you don't want to run that risk, even if the probability of that happening is low.

I can easily see the status of my garage door (open or closed) from anywhere. Solves the problem of "Did I forget to close the garage door?" (and the number of times the answer to that question is "Yes" is > 0).

I can open the door from anywhere to let someone in if they've forgotten their keys (times I've done this is > 0).

I can enter the house through the garage if I've forgotten my keys (times I've done this is > 0).

I have given access to my house to a houseguest without giving them a set of keys to my house; I easily revoked this access when they left.

Matt Levine's take on _Going Infinite_:

"Many of the reviews that I have read of the book complain that Lewis does not sufficiently explain that Bankman-Fried is Guilty and Bad, Actually, but that is not the book that he wanted to write... If you want to read a moral condemnation of crypto theft, you can get that anywhere. You go to Michael Lewis for character and story.

Also, reading those reviews you would think that the book is a defense of Bankman-Fried, but it is actually quite damning."

Hover's parent company is Tucows, listed in the parent article as being the third largest "domain holder".

I started using Hover/Tucows back when they were Domain Direct, as I liked the idea of using a Canadian-based registrar. Hover has been great. I've rarely needed to contact Hover support but they've always been responsive and helpful.

No, you can redistribute it. RedHat can't stop you.

But you might only be able to do this once. Because what RedHat can do is cancel your contract, and stop you from using RedHat services, and you won't have access to future versions or updates.

I had read and enjoyed Umberto Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum", and as I read Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" I found I kept contrasting Brown's work to Eco's. In the end, I didn't even finish "The Da Vinci Code", it just felt so weak to me.

But art, literature, music, and wine are all things of personal preference. You like what you like! And you shouldn't let anyone tell you not to spend your time reading Dan Brown (or whomever) if you enjoy it.

>When using an AOT language, how does one take full advantage of all cpu features at runtime? This seems like a place JIT would really outpace AOT.

One model is to not try and take advantage of the features at runtime, but to compile per-platform versions of your binary (with whatever flags and optimization levels you want, support for sanitizers, etc.) and deploy those appropriately. E.g. build one binary that supports "generic" x86 variants, one optimized for haswell, etc. This model works well if you have control over how your binaries get deployed (though not so well if you don't), and especially well if you can build the libc the same way at compile time also and statically link it into your binary. (This last point is one reason Google is investing in LLVM's libc.)