mcfunk

I find it interesting that I scrolled through this whole thread and there has been little if any discussion of excessively poor health care in the United States.

Also, things like how when people develop type 2 diabetes, the solution is often getting them on expensive insulin that causes weight gain, causing more insulin need, causing more weight gain etc. Look up Dr. Jason Fung for detailed information on how the typical approach to diabetes management actually just makes it, and weight gain, much worse.

Speaking of healthcare in the US, even for those who can afford a doctor -- I personally have gone to the doctor when I had unexplained blood sugar drops and weight gain despite being active (training for a century ride at the time), counting calories and eating the oft-touted '5 small meals a day'. They scoffed at me, told me they 'couldn't give me a pill to make me thin,' told me my habits were fine and I should keep doing what I was doing. As it turned out, and I learned through my own research, my frequent eating was causing me to become insulin resistant, and once I moved to 2 meals a day and a longer fast overnight my issues reversed. From talking to others there was nothing unusual about my experience with the doctor -- in the US obesity is considered a moral issue and not a health one, and our doctors have very little to offer in terms of advice based on the underlying mechanisms of obesity or taking patients seriously when they are concerned about weight gain.

We have all sorts of other things contributing to causing metabolic issues in the first place -- our poorly regulated food and ag industries have been pushing completely warped ideas of what makes a 'balanced' diet for decades -- e.g. milk and empty carbohydrates are 'a balanced breakfast,' the low fat fiasco where processed foods with reduced fat and increased sugars were touted as 'healthier', and for decades kids were taught in school the 'food pyramid' which was a suggested diet written entirely by agriculture lobbyists rather than the available science on nutrition.

We have an entire populace who, if they know anything about what is actually healthy for humans, came by it through having to seek it out themselves and wade through a lot of junk science sponsored by various corporate interests.

Also we are stuck in cycles of constant work, presenteeism and long hours in sedentary jobs, no sick leave, little if any vacation, etc. etc. where Europe etc. have much better work practices, not to mention less car culture, walk and bikeable and transitable cities, all things that are aggressively opposed in the US.

The problem is fueled by a number of systems. Imagining it to be a matter of simple will power or portion size is inane.

'I'm not sure if they expect you to slide into another dimension, but a loud, sharp c-word generally jolts them out of their idiocy.' Thanks for the entirely accurate and entertaining read. There are definitely many c-words among us, and I assume you don't mean 'commuters' -- most of those of us are just trying to get along without getting squashed, and that often means using infrastructure in ways other than the intended, because it was never intended for our safety.

you cite "very clear case of wrong doing like the George Floyd case," but the only reason that is clear is because of civilian video recording.

Here is how the police described it in the official MPD report: "Two officers arrived and located the suspect, a male believed to be in his 40s, in his car. He was ordered to step from his car. After he got out, he physically resisted officers. Officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress. Officers called for an ambulance. He was transported to Hennepin County Medical Center by ambulance where he died a short time later."

Seems a bit extreme. Plenty of people (younger people especially) prefer living in a city regardless of where they work.

The posted article is hardly "data" (at most, one poorly defined data point) and most of the questions here are pointing to how little information the article offers from which to draw conclusions-- for instance, what does "sheltering in place" mean? Where were these people? When were they leaving their houses? etc.

What data are you referring to that suggest shelter in place orders could be having only a marginal effect?

Sounds better than typical but not "cherry-picked" either, for the people treated-- of 125 patients:

>She added: “Most of our patients are severe and most of them are leaving at six days, so that tells us duration of therapy doesn’t have to be 10 days. We have very few that went out to 10 days, maybe three,” she said.

So again, not conclusive, but sounds like it is surprising medical professionals used to seeing 10 day stays for COVID patients.

fair point, I did miss that further down in the section. It's still unfortunate to lead with a generalization that plays into a common trope/assumption about developers that does play out in the hiring process, but it's good to see it called out explicitly below that it shouldn't be required. I certainly don't disagree that side projects are a good data point especially for junior developers who don't have the direct professional experience.

Some good questions in here, with one exception: > Programmers are unique. They're one of the few professions where outside the boundaries of their working hours they choose to do the same exact thing they do at work: programming.

Hiring managers should definitely not be assuming that all programmers do apps in their spare time. It's one thing to expect them to have a code sample (anyone should), but many strong programmers have interests and responsibilities that take them away from computers in their spare time. This doesn't make them less effective or dedicated programmers, so while it's always interesting to hear about the projects of those who have them, it shouldn't be assumed (and you shouldn't consider it 'points off' in an interview if a dev doesn't do side projects)

This, precisely. Maybe we find better treatment (especially treatment that reduces the incidence of patients needing hospitalization or ventilators). Maybe we get testing technology widespread enough that we don't have to treat everyone like they're positive unless proven otherwise. Maybe we get antibody tests that allow us to figure out who isn't immunologically naive to the virus. Maybe we learn more about how it spreads. Maybe we learn more about why some people are asymptomatic.

Basically there are countless ways in which quality of life can be improved over time as we continue to maximize efforts to contain spread.

Yes exactly -- it's two different sources of information that one party is not likely to have access to. Severity from a technical-only perspective is important to have. The sense of whether something is easy to fix (which should be size) is also important.

Ultimately you could have a low-severity bug, but it impacts a really important customer who cares about it, so it's high priority. This is the most common case I've seen.

Severity also can impact whether something gets prioritized at all. If it's low-severity and the business side isn't there either, maybe it just doesn't get done. Whereas something with high severity but low business impact still probably needs to be done regardless or it will lead to bigger problems.

"Yes, but: Two days of 3-percent-plus losses in the market don't constitute a downturn, or even, in technical terms, a market "correction" (which is defined as a 10 percent drop).

* Markets took a dive in late 2018 on recession fears, only to come roaring back. * Today's financial world is still awash in cash, which could provide a calming buffer. The venture capital world is still looking to invest huge amounts: Per Pitchbook, funds raised a record $88.3 billion and $75.5 billion in 2018 and 2019, respectively. * In some cases, smaller companies started laying people off even before this market drop, so they might be able to weather it more easily."

I'm sorry I gave this entitled drivel the benefit of a click. It's just a rant about how much more important his time is than everyone else's (flouncing on a dentist's office running behind and then crediting it with never having to wait again? wow. just wow).

It's almost as if we live in a world where communication of boundaries, needs, timestyles, norms and constraints is important and even necessary to working with other people.

It might even yield better results than just using it as just another excuse to treat people with similar approaches, constraints (or lack thereof), and abilities to you better than those who don't.

nicely explained!

It is true that if employers are offering RSUs selectively, the assumption would be that they would offer them to people they wanted to incentivize not to leave the company until after the vesting period at the earliest. However, it offers no guarantee at all that the company would continue to desire the employee's loyalty or that the loyalty goes in the other direction in the first place, since as mentioned the company loses nothing but the employee if the employee is fired or leaves before the vesting period completes.

Fun fact, there is also a Vonnegut-themed restaurant in Indy named after Bluebeard.