mehrdadn

90 ms·

871.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Makes sense I guess, thanks. Going a little off-topic, but regarding what you mentioned -- how do you reply when they (inevitably, I often feel) reply to your 'why not' with "Well because we shouldn't send out needless e
872.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
> hundreds? of people deleted their accounts Two thousand: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23304097
873.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
What's left me confused is one thing: if the significance of "default public" was missed, then what was the motivation for the previous warning email? It seems bizarre to suddenly email everyone "Hey folks, we're ch
874.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
You're kidding right? Hostx64\x64 is like 51MB, lib\x64 is 428MB, together they compress to like 116MB. And then you forgot the ATLMFC x64 files which are 465MB and bring it to 230MB compressed.
875.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Which folder do you mean? I'm referring to C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2019\{edition}\VC\Tools\MSVC\{version}
876.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
But then why not just treat it as the company renting (say) a room in the employee's apartment (like a normal rent or sublet)? It seems to be what's actually going on fundamentally anyway, and it bypasses the need to think about a
877.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
But that's exactly what I'm saying then. The way to reason about this is that, as an employee, you leasing (or subletting) a portion of your home to the company, and hence they need to pay you rent for occupying your home. This is
878.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
What happens when the employee is a homeowner then? Or not the one actually paying rent (maybe their parent/child is)?
879.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
I get the motivation and incentives, I just can't make sense of it as paying a share of the worker's rent. It falls flat on its face from the start... e.g. what if the worker is the homeowner and not paying any rent? What if the w
880.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
The intent and justification is what's different.
881.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
My confusion was that those aren't "rent" that the employee is paying. But I may have misinterpreted what they're referring to as "rent" here. They might have meant the company paying rent to the employee rathe
882.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Oh wait, is this "rent" in the sense of the company essentially renting part of the worker's home? I read it as as paying the worker's share of the rent to the landlord! If that's the case then that would make a lot
883.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
I'm confused, what is the additional expense that employees are incurring by being home? Don't they pay the same rent either way?
884.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
There's no way all the libraries zip up to 75MB. Literally just the x64 CRT lib folder by itself zips up to 96MB. I think you meant more like 1GB?
885.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
> The change already happened and all the concerns about peak load capacity and storage were largely mythical Do you have a link to more on this? The story I recall was that we can't go fully renewable precisely because of storage i
886.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Even Bazel doesn't support spaces in file names!
887.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
On Windows it's around 1ms-15ms; I doubt on Linux it's very different. For reference 60fps gives 16.6ms.
888.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Delivery cost is different in that you normally avoid it as a customer if you go in person. So it's not actually abstracted away from you. You can't avoid their rent, wages, etc.
889.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
> Is there a way to do this safely without creating an extra lvalue? The static_cast<T>(arg) syntax I used does exactly this! It's what you should use pretty much everywhere instead of T(arg). If it's too much typing, yea
890.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Ah, I don't think that's a vexing parse issue; it's something else. It's a really great example though, because it illustrates a lot of different issues at once, and I can tell you exactly how you could've avoided i
891.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Do you enable warnings? Compilers have definitely caught these for me before. E.g. see https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/6RB55X
892.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
I'm guessing your case was more like 2015 Amazon than 2005?
893.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
> Strictly losing money with no upside in the future is in violation of the "duty of loyalty" that all corporate officers have toward shareholders. I'm pretty sure that's just the absurd HN take on the "duty of l
894.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Yeah, it really feels like that. Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/651/
895.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
This is about after that. > Judge Coughenour ruled that the police were within their rights to look at the lock screen at the time of Sam’s arrest, as there are circumstances in which a search can be made at the time of an arrest without
896.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
> holding officer searched stereo equipment by moving it That seems pretty similar?
897.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
This happens with Google Chrome address bar suggestions on Android too. Drives me nuts every time.
898.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Precedents are interesting: > Bond v. United States, 529 U.S. 334, 337 (2000) (concluding Border Patrol agent searched a bag by squeezing it) > Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 324–25 (1987) (holding officer searched stereo equipment b
899.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Sorry, I think my comment was confusing. By "this mess" I wasn't referring to the assistant screwing up, but rather the searches themselves bringing up an unexpected location with a similar name, even if you typed them yourse
900.
by mehrdadn 6y ago
Yeah, we're not legally speaking.

More ›