JohnDotAwesome's comments

I used to notice something similar in college.

cough We were smoking a lot of... various things. I had setup a chill room that didn't have any air conditioning (so it was actually very hot; a hot box if you will). Just a small room where smoke would accumulate.

At any rate, I got very good at blowing smoke rings. In the still room, you could blow a smoke ring and it would expand for about a minute before dissipating. The more substantial rings would do something really crazy. They'd spawn a new, smaller ring, but going the opposite direction. I believe this was only the case if the ring was blown upward.

I don't know if this is related to the Two Vortex Ring Collision experiment, but it was definitely fun to watch!

> I’ve been in parts of the country where there’s complete blackness in the new moon. I didn’t stop to count the stars, but it looked much more like the second picture than the first one. The Milky Way is astonishingly vivid and the stars are endless.

I just got back from Exuma Island in the Bahamas. This is a decently remote island without much light pollution. It was by far the best star-gazing I've ever experienced. I've backpacked in Big Bend, Yosemite, and Yellowstone (and less notable areas), Exuma takes the cake for looking at the heavens.

I say all of this because the picture on the left seems much more representative of the _best star-gazing conditions I've ever witnessed_. The Milky Way was big and beautiful; It caused my S.O. and I to sit outside for 1.5 hours just staring. But it still looked more like the first picture.

Maybe you were mis-remembering, or maybe your vision is just better for these sorts of things. Either way, I want to know where you were to see the second picture.

Bidets are pretty weird, but I totally recognize their superiority to plain ol' toilet paper.

+1 for wet wipes.

I've always used aluminum foil. Just wad it up and scrub

The short answer is webpack!

The long answer is webpack, rollup, or browserify :)

I was thinking "Richard" - "d" = "Richar" or "richer"

Relevant example using Preact https://cloudflareworkers.com/#87ec550da87ab3f7de756a4979c00...

https://cloudflareworkers.com/#1f3220d90979ded0b1f5413db0eac... this fixes the styling issues :D

Is it really typical in SV tech to get that much matching on 401k and/or get a bonus? Seems extraordinarily high. Maybe that bonus, stock, 401k match is sort of an unknown that one may or may not receive (in which case, you'd be comfortably saving $10k/year).

At any rate, if those bonuses are real, maybe I need to move out of Texas.

> In San Fransisco, a coding bootcamp grad can get 140K out the door

I really hope that's not true

Is anyone surprised by the amount bootcamp folks in this thread who are now in "Senior" roles after only a few years? I'm not trying to diminish their accomplishment; Their accomplishment is astounding. But are bootcamps really that effective?

I remember interviewing a ton of bootcamp grads from a couple of schools in Austin, TX and being largely unimpressed. You know that feeling after you interview someone where you're just _not sure yet_? Maybe you liked talking to the person; Maybe they did great on the coding exercises, but you're just not sure. I've since learned that when I'm not sure, that means no.

I live in Texas. Private car ownership definitely has a materialistic component. However, owning a car is almost a necessity in every city in Texas. You see a lot of big, decked-out pickup trucks here (vanity). I drive a Prius because there aren't good public transit options (necessity) and I like to visit family in Dallas (I'm in Austin). I end up driving _a lot_.

I understand that some governments have penalized car ownership by way of license plate restrictions and other tax situations (I've heard that license plates in China get auctioned for $12k USD because they're so rare). This turns owning a car into a vanity symbol for the wealthy. It may not even be an intentional symbol, but I'm sure that's the way it's perceived by those who don't own a car.

My point being that for some, car ownership isn't so bad. No need to go shaming people.

> paradigm shit

Still works.

Yeah, all the things that need flexible schema can go in a jsonb column. While querying on JSON has gotten less painful, it's still a bit of a chore. But I've found that I rarely need to do that. Or if I do, I just denormalize a bit and put those fields in a regular ol' column.

We did the move maybe 4-5 years ago? At least in the JavaScript world, this makes your life so so much better.

Of course, you still have to handle migrations, but at least you have transactions :)

> Use this form if: Your taxable income (line 6) is less than $100,000.

For a lot of the folks on HN, I'd bet that isn't true.

At the end of the day, US taxes are super weird. This may be an overly simplistic view, but I'm definitely of the opinion that we need to drastically simplify taxes. Complex systems generally produce more opportunities for exploitation.

I wonder just how simple a viable tax system could be.

I think this would constrain the vision of Beaker. I can't point to any concrete examples (like, where the extension API doesn't support something beaker does), but I can imagine wanting a less sandboxed environment when developing the platform for distributed web apps.

Be careful with createElement('a') in IE. If the URL contains credentials (username or username and password), it'll throw a security exception.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/834489/internet-exp...

There's a story in Masters of Doom where Carmack and Romero do just that. If I recall correctly, they would take company (Softdisk I believe) computers at night because they were more powerful than their home computers, and use them to develop their own games. I think they even worked on their own games on company time. I might be getting the details wrong on that one, but sounds like Carmack dgaf (or just doesn't think about how these things could potentially be wrong/misaligned).

Does anyone know the drawbacks of simply using:

    .container {
      display: table;
      width: 100%;
    }

See bottom example here http://codepen.io/jrf0110/pen/xgXPGj

I've never had to use the clearfix hack (that's probably a lie, but I can't recall a time in my career where I didn't just use the display: table; width: 100%; method)

I've been using VSCode for TS (nothing else though). Do you mind elaborating on why Webstorm is on a different level? Genuinely curious. I really like VSCode, but I have my complaints (mainly, it's a little slow on my MBA)