foobarbazqux

7 ms·

31.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
So per my original comment, there are lots of indicators of a lack of integrity. Just ask enough questions about someone's life, their values, their ambitions, how they'd respond to various conflict situations, ask them their opi
32.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
That's only the DSM-IV definition. Psychology is a lot bigger than that, and the English language is bigger still. The difference between passive aggression and aggression boils down to whether the anger is being expressed directly o
33.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Some companies don't require that their employees sign NDAs about the work they do. These companies still manage to keep confidential information confidential because in the interview process they are able to weed out the people that
34.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
I read it more like passive aggressive (obviously) fake niceness, but sure.
35.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
I was assuming the context was signing NDAs as a condition of employment. Even if that's not the case, I'm still going to talk to someone a little before I just spill the beans.
36.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
> No corporate job is going to let you become a DBA and a Frontend Developer and a Backend Developer and a Product Manager all at once, in a production environment, with no safety net. There is no other place where you can learn at that
37.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
If you know how to read people this all comes out in an interview. If somebody lacks integrity there will be many red flags.
38.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
> Spend your years wisely. Before you can do that you have to spend a great deal of your years to become wise.
39.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Careful, if you go around waving your pirate flag like that, you'll be the one getting expropriated.
40.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Nobody ever suggested it does.
41.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Hence the word "expanded".
42.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Pray, tell me more about this distinction between almost infinite and very finite!
43.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
When you say storytelling, I think you're only talking about knowledge by description. Knowledge by acquaintance is equally valid, and is based on direct experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_by_desc
44.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Yeah, you'd still need to call memset before free. Compilers have a much harder time convincing themselves of things about pointers, so it should survive dead code elimination.
45.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Oh I get it. You're saying the key is stored on the stack and then you can find it by inspecting memory if it hasn't been zeroed out. That's really interesting, what a great example of leaning on language implementation. I
46.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Malcolm Gladwell : non-fiction journalism :: Fox News : television journalism It's entertaining fluff. If we become a society of fluffheads, that's okay, these things have a habit of correcting themselves.
47.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
There's a reason they're called the natural numbers. Nature doesn't have to be decimal for decimals to be useful (the question that started this debate), it just has to be rational. Many many many parts of nature are ration
48.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Oh I see. That is a lot of fiasco. I guess I'm mostly curious about a minimal example of useful code that a dead code eliminator will incorrectly optimize.
49.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
> a compiler optimization for dead code elimination led to some zeroization of key material being skipped. That sounds like a pretty broken compiler, do you have a minimal example?
50.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
What is happiness? There are hundreds of things that count as happiness. Release of endorphins? Connection with others? Work/life balance? Sense of purpose? Sense of community? Satisfaction? Calmness? Serenity? Being in the z
51.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Pascal is a pretty good teaching language, Java is hopelessly complex. Delphi is too bloated for intro stuff. Simple, featureless, procedural languages that are not C are pretty good for beginners.
52.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Thanks for explaining, that was quite thorough. I don't understand the distinction between intrapersonal and interpersonal here. Are you essentially saying at least two people have to agree upon something before it's a right, ei
53.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
It's a funny story, but they screwed up the riddle. You need to know the answer to a yes/no question that this liar/truth-teller can answer. For example, which road should I take to get to the castle? You only have one que
54.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
It's actually a harder question if you phrase it with cats, animals, and mice! The correct answer is "possibly" (either yes or no), but the cats, animals, and mice question predisposes you to answer with "no".
55.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
I never said anything about absolutism, I believe moral relativism is healthy. I disagree that should and should not are useless concepts, because every moral expresses a should or a should not sentiment. Having personal values means you
56.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
I didn't really mean to argue about rights, or maybe I did and I just didn't realize. What you are calling "rights" is properly qualified as "legal rights". I am not suggesting there are legal rights in the s
57.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Oh, I meant legal rights in the state of nature, the context rayiner was describing - he was the one that said they don't exist therein and I agreed. Natural and human rights function like morals though, they describe what should happ
58.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
I gather you haven't read A Modest Proposal. The overall argument of the flogging proposal has the same structure, with less satire and more spelling things out. http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html https:/&
59.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
> A "good" IQ test simply tests your logic facilities. You can dramatically improve your logic facilities by taking a course in logic. Your boogles, quinks, and flets question is trivial if you know even rudimentary set theory
60.
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Legal rights don't exist, but natural & human rights do. Out of curiosity, are you in favor (in principle) of world federalism? That would eliminate the international state of nature that we have today.

More ›