throwaway5250

8 ms·

31.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Yes. I should have said "unreviewable after the initial court approval". In my case, made it clear during negotiations that I simply could not keep up with my current job, and planned to downsize dramatically. (All quite true.)
32.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Sympathies. I might have written that myself ten years ago. Godspeed. (Never hit a million, and falling fast these days.)
33.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Had a lawyer. If money were the only thing I was going for, what you say probably would have worked. Unfortunately, life is complicated.
34.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
This figured for me. FAANG income, but only for a couple of years, so going to court would have burned up our entire net worth. (Lawyers and consultants are very expensive.) I was fine with mutually assured destruction for she and me, bu
35.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
It's the best service I've tried. But if Google decides to unperson you, your phone and all of your services might die instantly, never to return.
36.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
That's almost exactly my terms. In my case, not so much as a harsh word between us--ex just decided she deserved it, and that's the way the law works. My current gross doesn't even cover alimony. (And alimony isn't de
37.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
The human body is a stunningly complex evolved system. Intuitive reasoning at a trivial level doesn't really tell you much.
38.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Or, do like Kanye, and use a trash password when you know you're sure to be shoulder surfed. Then change it later.
39.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
The fact that we have not (at least, not yet) observed evidence of abuse is little comfort, from an ethical perspective. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_luck#The_problem_of_mora...
40.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Yes. I've killed almost all of my social media, and am most of the way there with HN (which is unfortunately also surprisingly negative these days). No TV or movies except for some older stuff. Trying pretty hard with "print&quo
41.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
As a practical matter, they're not wrong. If you can't afford to litigate a contract, it doesn't matter that the terms are unenforceable. The only real solution is to outlaw even the utterance of such terms, to be enforced b
42.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
I don't know whether this is really an implementable method (at least for most of us), but I want it to be true. It reminds me of the Grazing Principle, from _Beyond Success and Failure_ (Beecher): "The Grazing Principle is at the
43.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
If Duolingo can do it, why can't Google!
44.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Depends. Are you trying to improve the behavior of bad actors? Or scare randos away from acting badly? And how much do you worry about false-positives and out-of-proportion punishment? Myself, I think it's starting to look a bit lik
45.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Don't understand first sentence. Are you saying you bought a house and rent it out?
46.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Kind of a silly article. People are going to act in their own self-interest. Telling them that they should not is not particularly useful. Instead, figure out how to make things win-win.
47.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
For max portability, you should not try to notice that these variants might be the same account.
48.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Interesting how this is repeating itself these days with bikes versus pedestrians. Bicycles are increasingly being ridden in crosswalks and sidewalks at high speed, often without safe clearance from pedestrians. And yet, if you as a pedes
49.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Not in 30s. Having some undesirable demographics myself, I'm quite aware that corporations discriminate illegally. It's so easy to hide, though, and so costly not to do so, that imagining this as an example seems a bit silly.
50.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
That last caveat is basically the whole thing. Reading Exhibit B (from the Damore suit), it's apparent that a number of Googlers feel it's their brief to ruin your life if they discover that you don't think the way they do.
51.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
If they did, it was a serious own goal. For the last year, everything coming out about Google has been pretty negative, and this seems to fit the pattern.
52.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
A lot of HNers don't have much of a sense of humor. (I thought it was funny.)
53.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
There is absolutely zero chance that he was rejected in 30s based on ethnicity. No matter how unethical you might think a corporation might be, none would be stupid enough to implement a policy so obviously illegal.
54.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Thank you for posting this. I've never been assaulted, but I've been on the receiving end of some really shitty behavior. I won't deny spending a lot of time wishing vengeance. But I also think that if the cost for it were
55.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Yeah, caught that bit of gatekeeping: "I, Poobah of Tech, am here to say that Google might suck. However, all of the people who have said before me that Google might suck, well, they suck." As for Google, considering everything t
56.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Fair question, though it's an excellent essay. I suppose one reason could be that it was written by a software engineer.
57.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Yeah, I get the difference in levels of abstraction. Still interesting, at least to me. Among other things, it limits how "thin" the POSIX emulation can be. So, for example, if I had a POSIXy super-CPU, an implementation of for
58.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Wanted to love it, but in truth it always felt like a puzzle that I didn't understand.
59.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
This sounds awesome. Not a fan of the HN moderation scheme, and it sounds like this would allow others to experiment with improved versions.
60.
by throwaway5250 8y ago
Intriguing. Interesting that it implements fork(2), even though Go itself cannot really deal with that call.

More ›