kradroy

> I'd like to see a revival of awk. It's less easy to scale up, so there's very little risk that starting a project with a little bit of awk results in the next person inheriting a multi-thousand line awk codebase. Instead, you get an early-ish rewrite into a more scalable and maintainable language.

Taco Bell programming is the way to go.

This is the thinking I use when putting together prototypes. You can do a lot with awk, sed, join, xargs, parallel (GNU), etc. But it's really a lot of effort to abstract in a bash script, so the code is compact. I've built many data engineering/ML systems with this technique. Those command line tools are SO WELL debugged and have reasonable error behavior that you don't have to worry about complexities of exception handling, etc.

There's no greater source of professional resentment than suffering under a manager who's incompetent and a narcissist (my summary of his blurb). After 18 years at Google he probably feels safe burning that bridge.

Propping up, probably not. Enriching IBM directly and indirectly, probably yes.

Absolutely. Walmart used to have a policy of refunding gift cards in cash. You'd buy many at one location, and return them at another. Less trackable. Gift cards are also used quite regularly in human/sex trafficking to control the victims.

I have doubts about this too. I remember seeing a Humvee autonomously driving around the CMU campus back in 1998. I get the feeling research institutions and, now, product companies have been working closely with local city governments about safely releasing these into the wild for some time.

Always remember.

What do you call a med school graduate who had a straight-A average? "Doctor".

What do you call a med school graduate who had a C-minus average? "Doctor".

I've had to weed through a couple dunce doctors in my time.

In the US retaliation by an employer for an employee reporting inappropriate or unlawful conduct to a superior is unlawful. This is a protection granted at the federal level.

That sounds like a very reasonable course of action. However... given the circumstances the author is in, I don't think his director is the type to schedule a pen test and then wait for all the violations to be resolved in order to get the contract. (I assume the client, as a government entity, is legally required to obtain a minimum number of bids for contracts and make a decision in a timely manner.)

Lying and fraud aren't the same, which is the author's concern. Lying incurs a social cost. Fraud incurs both social and legal costs.

But I think the author's paper trail will show #3 is not the case. He doesn't appear to want to deceive the client OR his boss. He's being pressured.

Magnesium saves me too. I've had persistent leg cramps since my teens. If I look at my right calf the wrong way, it seizes up, especially after a night of drinking. All of that went away when I started taking 200mg supplements daily. Big, big difference.

In the article: > “The pros are certainly fundraising development. I think people like to think that if they give a lot of money to a university, their children will get special preference,” he said. “I can sort of understand the other side saying it’s unfair to other applicants.”

The quoted person doesn't deny it helps, but people like to think it helps.

Also, please don't donate to your university. You paid them for an education, food and housing. You don't owe them anything else. Compound interest on their takings is your contribution.

I wish I had the source, but one view of being in the dominant position in a relationship is that "one gets things done or their needs met, but 'moves' the least." A baby is an example they gave. It just lies there, but everyone around it tends to its needs unconditionally. It is in tyrannical control of the relationship.

In the case of Tesla vehicles, the human driver sits (or lies) there and his transportation needs are met. The auto-pilot does all the work. The driver is still in control of the relationship, even if the chauffeur is software. The technology serves him; very much in contrast to the similarly "rugged, individualist" men who felt threatened by industrialization 200 years ago.

This was my experience at my last company, except compressed into 1 year.

Once I joined I learned that 30% of my time would be dedicated to hiring. The company had a pooled hiring process, and I came to hate it. I spent several hours a week reading resumes, interviewing, reading interviewers' feedback, sitting in roundtables, strategizing with recruiters, and if all that went well, pitching candidates to the hiring committee. Then I would sit back, with no control over the comp, and watch the candidate choose another team, largely because my team wasn't a "sexy" team; very critical to business, but not sexy.

In the handful of cases where my team was the only option, the candidates would turn down the offer due to "insufficient compensation". The company had a "no negotiation" stance on offers. So once the offer went out, that was that. In my first performance review my manager put "hiring" as an area of improvement. I felt this was a trap and would be used to let me go eventually, in spite of the fact my team grew from 3 to 10 engineers from internal transfers and we were hitting all our deliverables.

Between hiring and navigating the terribly siloed corporate structure to build cross-functional teams I had almost no time outside of 1:1s to spend with my own team. It was a really disappointing experience and I felt really bad when I left, because my team and stakeholders were all delightful and capable people. Like you, I felt I couldn't protect them and keep my mental health intact at the same time.

Back in 2010 I had a friend refer two potential clients to me, who were looking to get some links related to them pushed down and off the first page of search results. The links were about financial fraud convictions and ongoing investigations into them and their business. The guys were claiming that it was "hard to get dates" because "crazy chicks do Google-sleuthing" and ghost them. I knew that was all bullshit, and they were just looking to defraud more people.

I spoke to them for about 30 minutes and I remember feeling disgusted by the end of the call due to what absolute creeps they were. I was also certain they'd stiff me on the bill, if in some bizarro universe I had agreed to do the work.

So yeah, I can't imagine the morals of the person who willingly offers this type of service.

I'm hoping these highly compensated former employees go on to build their own companies that create more jobs. That would be a net gain for everyone.