master-litty

Ha! I did not know, thank you. Rein is what I meant.

It's about control. Some people feel a public utility is closer to everyone's control, as they feel we have a good reign on our government. Others feel corporations are closer to everyone's control, as anyone can start an opposing corporation and compete on even ground, or influence an existing corporation by leveraging social cues.

It's also about trust. If you are an individual that can more naturally give and help with little in return, it is easier to see the government as an altruistic and balanced entity that will do good in the end, especially if you feel empowered to assist or even lead those efforts. If you are often more worried about being hurt by other people, it is easier to see corporations as powerful tribes that can collectively protect us in the end, especially if you possess the skills to succeed in such environments and gain access to their benefits.

On your example, it is a great benefit not having to worry about money, but there are still many reasons why a public water utility still might not deliver safe water, some of which still revolve around money: If the utility is not adequately funded, it may still be unable to deliver safe water. Consider the difficult situation we have today with lead pipes. It's not any easier for private corporations to deal with, but theoretically I think each one would feel a greater sense of urgency to fix the problem first.

As for your terror, I find it comforting to see it this way: If an entity fails to use public infrastructure constructively, regardless of whether it be a public utility or private corporation, it will be modified or replaced until we find something that works. It will take time but we will get there, as long as we're in the company of good faith -- and we certainly are.

The notice of complete retirement is good, it's the notice of deprecation that is poor.

We can't reliably tell whether a product will be supported for the next N years. It feels non-deterministic.

I wouldn’t mind a $10k raise :)

I think you need to make your concerns more objective and focus on what can change about each one.

You don’t seem to lack the critical thinking skills that are the hallmark trait of a good developer. The most objective criteria you can ever pull from is, regardless of the messiness or efficiency of the solution, whether you’re able to solve problems. If I asked you to do some work, and you could do it in any amount of time, that is the most difficult milestone many fail to achieve — And it seems that bar is more than met with you.

Perhaps you are worried with the quality of your solutions. I’d argue that in many situations, it comes down to domain knowledge. That is something you will naturally gain as you continue to code and read about CS theory, and especially so if you keep exposing yourself to new things out in the wild or at work. Brilliance is often witnessed or measured by the application of domain knowledge, but the genuine underlying brilliance comes from your ability to recognize patterns and having the discipline to see things through to a working solution.

You’ll almost always find yourself with company that can work faster or slower than you and be different shades of brilliant, because our brains gravitate towards different things when we hear about a problem. It is not easily compared, and when forced it easily becomes unfair and unproductive.

If you had to leave this post with anything, it’s this: don’t you dare judge your programming abilities by the typical big tech interview. They are created in a way that tries to gauge your critical thinking skills, and sometimes that is executed quite well, but more often it requires arcane domain knowledge that demands deliberate and specific attention you would be unlikely to give and come across otherwise. It is a specific process that is related to our daily work, but do not get it confused with the actual work we do. Many incredible programmers are rejected because they haven’t nailed the interview domain — that’s okay and can still be consistent with being a good developer. It’s a different isolated problem you can focus on.

Quite the opposite, you bring value into all of our lives by sharing your perspective — Insight is one of the most precious gifts. Thank you for that.

There is nothing for you to apologize for.

I think it's an insightful look at today's society, and I'm fond of it. It's a result of the ongoing sex pride and positivity movement in the US.

Anecdotally, recent generations have been raised with sexual repression and frustration. The most obvious example is announcing yourself as gay and being very literally banished from your family household, but it is layered quite deeply -- I can go into detail, but in general, sex continues to be an unspoken and embarrassing topic that you figure out yourself in private.

Since these urges are natural and part of the human experience, the whole treatment is odd and is often seen as uncaring. If you experience it, it puts you in an odd place: The repression forces you to either build a fiercely negative connection with sex, or develop a positive connection while having a struggled and inauthentic relationship with your family.

There is a growingly open sentiment that it is healthy and natural to want to have sex, and to have it safely, and perhaps with multiple partners over the course of your life if it suits you, and perhaps with multiple partners at the same time if that suits you too, and to tell all your friends about what a great (or awful) time you had afterward.

The novelty and "shock value" of this song, if you will, is being able to discuss these topics without consequence. And it reinforces something that is newly ingrained in society: To be more open and encouraging of safe sex for all is aligned with an active social movement that is making a difference to a lot of people, one that brings us closer to inner desires previously repressed.

This song is especially fun for a few reasons but putting the silly absurdist humor aside, I see people get hooked because it strikes this social chord really hard, demonstrating this generation's cultural shift in a comically honest way. A progressive household has both partners happily and willfully cooking and cleaning regularly, so to be a more desirable partner there's pressure to offer something else extraordinary -- "I don't cook, I don't clean, but let me tell you how I got this ring".

On a meta level, it's a comfortable beat for the bedroom and it sets a mood that is more primal. On another meta level, there's also a novelty that this song could only get to this level of popularity right now, realistically. It's not a song you can play on the radio or in stores.

Anecdata: I don’t know what that acronym is off the top of my head, and I’ve worked with databases in some form consistently for over ten years.

It’s multilayered advice with a healthy component and a controversial component.

It is good to de-escalate and keep discussions alive, which is the heart of the idea. But timing is key and the human condition needs to be factored in; We do get hungry, we do get tired, and these things affect our processing and how we approach problems.

There’s a dangerous implication in the “never go to bed angry” idea — You’re controlling whether your partner gets to sleep. I suppose some relationships don’t mind that aspect if it is mutual — But if you are truly tired, that is miserable, and it will affect how you approach that problem in the moment.

Anecdotally: I’ve seen this advice stem from a fear where the problem won’t be discussed the next day. Rather, actively avoided. That’s a different problem that isn’t about short-term de-escalation, but instead commitment and long-term resolution.

I gave Amethyst a serious try about a year ago. I even joined the Gitter intending to contribute, as I needed some more dynamic rendering features, and read the foundational research on the wiki that seemed to inspire the project.

I found the application of the research -- the execution -- too early in development for my needs. I have the feeling it will grow into something more flexible with time, but at least back then, I wasn't able to render to a texture being applied to a mesh. Not being able to get around the deeply integrated ECS was hard, as well.

I often battle an odd insecurity about taking too long to do things. I've taken some time to write this comment, for example, and I can't help but wonder how long all these other comments took to write -- How normal do I compare? If I'm slower than average, is there something wrong with me, and is there something wrong with that? Surely, I tell myself, I must be focusing on the wrong things, and my time would be spent more productively elsewhere.

I once thought it was an issue of intelligence, but my wife has helped me see the careful thought I put into every word, every stroke of the pen, every movement I make. The time I take is deliberate, purposeful. The issue I've recently faced is justifying the time spent to create a certain quality of art and work.

It feels quite normalizing to read about Dr. Seuss and his year-long struggle to create this book. Inspirational, even. Look at all the joy this man has brought into the world. Look at how his time spent has served everyone well.

Look at the fun he had along the way.

You can't quantify that against time. If you find a way, perhaps you shouldn't.

Me too. I still don’t understand why it was killed.

People tend to make negative associations with poverty.

To survive in social circles, we tend to mask such negative associations -- Because sometimes it does have genuine negative consequence, regardless if it is fair or logical. It comes from the same idea that certain topics aren't appropriate to discuss on first dates, with your extended family, with children present, etc.

So to guarantee social survivability, in this mindset, you must offer something that creates a positive association.

Lying is a risky way to create that association. It's social cheating, in a way. If you're convincing enough, your lie might as well be real, as far as your relationships are concerned, and you gain the social benefits of that; Intrigue, mystery, perceived power. But if you get caught, you are labelled as someone who will lie for these benefits.

Many of us can look at these consequences and say it isn't worth it -- Some of us look at those same consequences and say it is worth it. This doesn't make sense to you because you perceive the consequences as the former, not the latter.

They often shoulder that responsibility to reduce friction, and I think it works net-positive in their favor.

Billing the customer and then penalizing them for being a victim of theft introduces so much friction and frustration.