facepalm

I must admit I can not really relate. What about somebody who can not FizzBuzz, but claims they can code? Most whiteboard interviews I had were not much harder than FizzBuzz. I was asked to implement Quicksort once, but they gave me the specification, some time and a sheet of paper.

Why would somebody for whom it is easy consider to hire somebody who can not do a seemingly simple thing?

I can understand if somebody has anxiety issues. Then maybe you can negotiate something else, homework project or coding on site for 30 minutes. But odds are you'll discuss stuff with your colleagues on a whiteboard, too.

What are the options for men who want to have a family/live with their children?

I guess men who just want to have sex might benefit, because they can just sleep with women and then leave, and society takes care of the single moms. Likewise, women can have more sex with varying partners.

The downside is not having a family or having a stressful family life (as a single mom).

And for the absent dads, the state will try to get the money back from them, so their outlook isn't pretty. They'll bend up being poor and lonely.

You think it is men deciding not to marry, as in "no thanks, I'd rather be alone and unemployed than change diapers"?

The article said it is women making the decision.

People fall in love with colleagues all the time.

I'm not saying she is wrong, just asking why is it wrong to investigate her claims?

Although the numbers you cite are not really evidence of a problem imo - there could be any number of reasons. Assuming sexism is the only explanation is heavily biased.

Is Snapchat strictly for entertainment, or is it also a way to stay up to date by following Tech influencers (like Twitter)?

people are scared and want to follow others so they don't have to decide everything for themselves. Humans are pack animals.

I really enjoyed the AI class by Thrun and Norvig. Nothing against Databases (I didn't take it), but AI class was fine - great, actually.

Why is this wrong - or is it? Seems like a pretty normal reaction to being attacked? Is it wrong because a woman's statements always have to be believed?

Why would anybody pay 35$ for crappy TV if Netflix is only 10$?

Or maybe it is/was obvious that there are certain flaws in the US health care system and Obamacare that definitely have a better solution. There are other health care systems in the world, so it is obvious that Obamacare is not the only possible way to do it.

I thought it was meant in another way, that the article blames lazy developers for not providing good privacy solutions. Of course certain developers implemented Facebook and whatnot, and are therefore to blame. But "developers" in general can not influence how big companies handle people's data. I can not change how Facebook or Google work, at least not without some genius idea (which may not exist).

"how would you distill an unwieldy set of options into a concise API?"

I'd rather implement Bubble Sort, tbh...

Somehow I still don't buy that dhh would fail to implement Bubble Sort.