mecha_ghidorah

The poor definitionally spend a higher percentage of their income on just about everything because their income is significantly smaller

I genuinely don't have a webcam. I mean my work laptop does, but I wouldn't be using my work laptop to interview with people. My home desktop doesn't have one though because I'd literally never use it, and no way I am buying one to take an interview test.

> "Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. "

I really wish I understood the original language for this because both sides of this or sound essentially synonymous to me, so I don't really get the "either" part of it.

Back in the day I had a messenger account without a Facebook account, you used to be able to create one with just a phone number

> Before Starbucks, the median coffee was worse. They showed the world that coffee is something more than Folgers or something you drink out of a carafe that’s been warmed for 6 hours.

You mean they showed America. Lots of places weren't doing carafe coffee before starbucks

It kinda depends on the candidate. Someone who already has experience may not stick around long because they aren't learning new skills, where as someone who isn't familiar with a particular technology will have added satisfaction and reason to stay from developing mastery of a new tech

> There isn't more news now than 100 years ago, so how do you feel all that time and how do you keep someone engaged?

So, I agree with your point, and I also agree that there isn't enough news to fill 24/7 coverage... but there is definitely more news, or at least more news that may be of interest to any given audience, than 100 years ago because we live in a more globally connected society where issues in another country can absolutely have direct impact on us because manufacturing/materials sourcing became something that now happens on a more global scale.

I think mostly just the iPhone exploded it, and also made a lot of things much more low effort. Like take for example people constantly posting photos of themselves and food and what have you on social media - pre iPhone high quality photos required a separate camera and a computer in order to upload onto social media. Post iPhone you could do it all from one device.

If Republicans are voting against it too they are also to blame though? If some Republicans would vote for it then it could pass. I'm an Australian so maybe there is nuance here I'm missing about how the US of A's legislative process works, but I don't understand why you think they don't deserve some culpability and a mention?

< can afford med school

I mean arguably subsidizing med school would be a pretty sensible thing for a government to do if it wanted to increase the number of doctors. The other elements of the venn diagram can't be modified I agree, but affordability of med school doesn't have to be there

Eh. The problem is that people can change software too easily. Say I work on an app as a major contributor and then later on a colleague makes an update to it which makes it do something unethical. Now my name is attached to this unethical app

I'd definitely feel chilled, because what I post here isn't under my meatspace identity. I don't think they should have a right to pass judgement over something I'm doing under a pseudonym that can't be attached to me easily

> I have never in my life seen an Indian person with a beard and turban

Wait really? I see Sikhs not too uncommonly. Sure they are the minority of ethnically Indian people I do see where I am (Australia), but I see Sikhs with the expected beard and turban pretty often, though admittedly I live in an area that has a decent number of immigrants

> I'm firmly in the latter camp. Because the compiler can't check program correctness only type correctness. Type correctnes is necessary for program correctness, but NOT sufficient. Static typing adherents fail to recognize this, thus falsely believing that static typing guarantees them more than what it actually does (blub).

Uhm. What? I'm a static typing proponent and I have never believed that the compiler will guarantee program correctness. Nobody believes that. They believe it largely eliminates a certain category of error, which it does. You're entitled to your opinion on dynamic vs static typing, but this particular point of yours is just a wild straw man

> And good luck untangling your type definitions when your requirements change. That one is the killer. Static types are premature concretions on the domain data model as you understand them now. They will change and if you are unlucky you will have to support multiple different variations of domain models in the same runtime. Good luck with that. Especially if you use inheritance.

I actually found this way easier with static types because with static types I could be significantly more confident about every single place one of those types was used, and look at it and see if it needed changes. This was way fiddlier to do in a dynamically typed environment