jakobegger

Another metaphor: if someone decided not to pave their driveway, because they don't want it to get so hot in the summer, would you tell them, hey I'm not going to visit you until you pave your driveway?

> make sure you don’t leech off of those around you

I think that's a toxic attitude. Picking up the phone for someone else every now and then is really not a big of a hassle. Obviously I don't know the whole situation, but in general I do think that one should be ready to do such minor favors for another human being without calling them a leech.

Sorry, for some reason I assumed that the question was about Vinyl vs. CD, maybe because my preference for physical media seems like something obvious that needs no explanation.

Another factor is that I have the same analog hifi system since 16 years. I've grown to like it.

I've also used (and still use) digital players (computers, iPods, smartphones, etc), but they either break, or the software changes every few years, making it kinda hard to get attached to.

I hate everything about CDs. The flimsy jewel cases that break all the time, the tiny artwork, how easily CDs scratch, how choosing a song requires clicking stupid buttons, the delay after inserting CDs, the high pitched whine of the motor, the sound of the stepper motor as it moves the laser...

When I listen to music, I want to slow down and relax, and taking a record out of the sleeve is just so much nicer than fidgeting with CDs. I like that everything about playing records is analog. I like the crackle between songs when playing an old record, it's so much nicer than the random skipping when playing a scratched CD. When something breaks in my analog audio system, I can usually fix it myself with a soldering iron.

As for the sound, I think it's mostly because of a different style of mixing than the media itself.

So you think that companies don't care what candidates might tell their peers...

But at the same time they're sponsoring meetups and conferences, hosting coding contests, sending people to career fairs, buying huge ads on job platforms to advertise company culture, just to get people to apply?

I can't talk about all of Europe, but here in Linz a lot of companies struggle to get candidates, and they spend a lot of money and effort to get a good reputation as an employer.

Maybe OP doesn't want to burn any bridges just because one interviewer at a big company behaved like 90% of interviewers do.

> If you make a conclusion on made up data you get bogus conclusion

No. You work with made up numbers to understand the problem. Then you can make conclusions even without knowing the precise numbers.

For example, my analysis doesn't change much wheter the rate of lawsuits is 0.1% or 0.01% or 0.001%. It would change if the rate of lawsuits is 1%.

But I am pretty sure that the rate of lawsuits after interview rejection is much less than 1%. So I can make a conclusion without knowing precise numbers.

Calculations based on estimates come up all the time, and they are very valuable. They make it clear what assumptions your decisions are based on.

What's the alternative? You have to make a decision. If you don't want to use estimates, what are you going to base your decision on? Whatever feels right?

> The lawyers are correctly suggesting how to minimise legal risk, it's up to HR and the company if they feel like the risk is worth it.

A good lawyer should also tell you how big the risk is that you are avoiding, otherwise their advise is worthless.

I made them up.

> In Germany every single lawyer or HR responsible would tell you not to send any reason at all

I can't imagine that this makes any sense.

Let's say you give every interviewee feedback:

- 90% of candidates will be grateful

- 10% of candidates will not like the feedback and start to argue (at this point ignoring emails might make sense to avoid wasting time)

- 0.01% of candidates will actually sue you over it

The lawsuit will probably go nowhere, and in the worst case cost €10.000 in legal fees.

But all the good will from the other people must be worth something! Maybe one of all those people who you gave good feedback refers a friend, and they apply to your company. If you hire that person, you just saved 10.000€ that you don't have to pay a recruiter!

So either all these lawyers are giving bad advise, or maybe my numbers are wrong? I've never heard of a lawsuit where a candidate sued a company as a consequence of interview feedback that they got, so I assume that must be a very rare occurrence.

> Aesthetics matter.

Everyone seems to think that, and then they produce software that looks beautiful and is horrible to use.

Gray buttons and scrollbars at least make it obvious which part of the UI you can click!

> GNSS accuracy is poor in forests, canyons, and dense urban environments

I feel like this should be solvable on the software side, especially for medium or long distance runs. If I look at the traces, I can see that the recorded zig-zag is obviously wrong, and a bit of smoothing should be able to fix it.

Are there any running apps that are accurate?

Training a junior dev is going to take a bit more than two weeks.

I'm convinced that remote work is something that works only for some people and some kinds of tasks. Anything that requires a lot of coordination sucks doing remote.

Yeah, but currently everyone seems to focus just on those few customers who like subscriptions. Nobody caters to the guys who don't like subscriptions. (Or maybe just nobody blogs about it)