totalcrepe's comments

That sounds like the descriptions of the IPO purchasers (being the cash out providers for insiders) just before the last dotcom crash. They didn't know what it was but they wanted to be invested in tech.. anything they couldn't understand was going to have an absurd ROI, putting them in the rich crowd.

Like the nature of the dot com crash, if it ends like a pyramid scheme, that reflects worse on the state of finance and analysis of our industry than on the last "suckers" in another tulip season.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a briefcase, but I think the ideal use of large internationally recognized notes is to sew your life savings into your clothes before you sneak across the border to try to start a securer life.

The alternative to flight is fight.. The more you deprive someone of options in one direction the more often they take options in the other direction. But what kind of cold, sick people would like small arms skirmishes so much that they would fund bias towards them in international policy over decades under the guises like a pathological fear of chemicals?

I think writing an IDE or anything else with editor integration during the editor wars would be a similar analogy:

- you could push one or the other

- you could try to support users on both side based on the editor variable

- you could go the new route where only users who care enough to invest do

- you could go the Jed simplicity route.

In the end, IDEs like jetbrains have the new route with plugins for the factions. Most lower investment cases do the Jed route which is more like web neutral. No one who pushed the unwanted editor on its opposing group seems to be still standing.

But none of your examples are as cross system portable and "native/normal feel" as writing an app that only works in chrome/chromium.

For the decades leading up to this stage cross system GUIs with a few simple library dependencies have been an unachieved "easy" task. Web remains as frustrating as ever because now we need it to work on all non portable browsers even on platforms that supports better ones. Then we want new features at an alarming pace that GTK could never normalize across *nixes.

Using the only non-browser that I think sort of got cross system portability working as an example.. I don't think things functioned reliably against the weird m$, Ibm and gcj Java implementations. But since they aren't really GUIs themselves with bookmarks, and familiar menus, no one gets upset when you tell them to replace an odd Java implementation before running a Java program.

If a bank in America gives a loan in your name that essentially is your problem until a sequence of things happen that require a fair amount of education to research and do yourself or the advice of a low end but real lawyer (which is dangerous to seek out among the ones that screw over the poor).

If you live in the US you should consider filing every block available to you so for the banks you don't use, you can start the discussions with asking why they were illegally pulling your credit record or giving credit without it.

In Europe, it looks like banks are petitioning to be allowed to verify identity over camera phones using an independent third party. That is still better than the US, since you can probably force them to retrieve that record of "you and your id" fairly early in a dispute.

The French program as quoted is nothing like basic income. I've seen quite a few people just need a few bucks. The longterm risk of that and the likelihood that if they didn't get the few bucks they would need permanent safety net was sometimes pretty high.

For example, I knew a vet in college who came very close to dropping out, where a few hundred bucks the safety net never knew he needed made all the difference. I can only imagine what percent of their lifetime writeoffs come from having these condescending "shutup, we know what you need" safety net systems.

Give me money and I'll make you rich. Don't mind that I am spying on your allocators of money. More money please. My friends that I bought with your money want to sell crack on your streets, thats cool right? How about some heroin? More money please, I'm having trouble tapping the lines of everyone who has something bad to say about me. Oh I mean us.

And the last thing you need is those recruiters finding qualified employees in the US when you hire by h1..

I find that companies are very much opposed to seriously finding those matches where the employees are convertable since longterm employees cost twice as much as the untrained new hire in a role that now uses half their abilities. Further, if they are "certified" as competent in both fields instead of eliminated from the market as tainted goods, they can be snatched by better managed rivals who know how to get full value of a programmer-accountant instead of paying for both skillsets and not being competent to consistently manage profit from either one.

401k plans managed fairness by making sure your top and lowest employees got reasonably comparable benefits. It helped, but also lead to outsourcing the low roles. In this case, I think companies should be limited to h1s that cost more than the greater of: the average inflation adjusted salary they've laid off, the average salary they still have and the average market salary for the specific role. If that's too expensive for them, maybe its fine to let them workout their problems without crying about the labor market not matching their inconsistent needs.

It might not be sufficient, but I would no longer pay for education and do it "on the record" without first taking the equivalent free classes.

From what we know about human memory the practice of cramming a topic for 3 months is not helpful and just the result of resource costs.

I find these quotes very confusing, did they delete any words of criticism&support as well as the repost of the photo, and if so were they posted separately or together with the photo?

It seems like purely reposting a photo without comment could now be being called a post of support. While fb users can use whatever slang they like, I expect a media that assumes we don't know about these behaviors in the walled gardens and tells us what specifically was censored.

(Perhaps this seems like splitting hairs to FB users, but as a non-user of a communication network, I would tolerate a network that bans pictures of blue but not a network that bans criticism of its ban of pictures of blue. The latter requires government intervention.)

Malcolm X got a fair amount of criticism for saying JFKs assisination was chickens comming home to roost, I.e. poor US policy brought the same back on them. In this case, the terrorist the US designed to attack Soviet forces now view the US as their enemy.

This could end well, or at least comically. I am sure the Saudis have a treasure trove of evidence on the source of Afghan war derived terrorism and the US is now equally compelling them to share it and hide it?

Killing Malcolm X might not have been enough to supress the theory that chickens will go home to roost.

Imo, that is just turning neurosis into high art.

To flip it around, sociopaths are charming and dangerous people and they aren't going to waste time trying to make social progress with a relative brickwall, when there is buisiness skills Jane, who can't even remember what friendly lies she told whom.

I've never had a coworker tell me a quiet person made their skin crawl, I couldn't say the same for the past year in any past year for the buisiness smooth.

Yes, and HN is in violation of Google's performance guidelines for putting those sensible rules in a sensible place.

> Not all websites can do without all of that - imagine a photography site, or an e-commerce site, etc. without pictures?

How does HN's CSS enforce a ban on img elements in pages pointing to a photo's canonical location? Or preclude putting your standard frames into it?

Imagine a photography site where no photo link is shared across any pages (but 90 page base64 encoded URLs are repeated randomly), an ecommerce site where a product is shown in a strange new light at every step in the checkout process using a mishmash of entirely different CSS.. Google's advice is approving the most idiotic behavior on sites that are barely keeping their head above water in terms of technical understanding, letting them hold onto strange ideas because they are "fast."

HN is neither of the two and IMO represents where people spend most of their time.

I think Google's CSS embedding is terrible advice for the meaningful web, but logical advice for adwords landing pages or sites with content so bad or sparse you wont be navigating them.

> Personally, I don't think "well I'm comfortable, so it's okay" would be an acceptable response.

In the 1950's the underlying actions one speaker would have been "guilty" of to make these other speakers uncomfortable would have been what? A gay "indiscretion"? Associating too closely with other races?

If you are uncomfortable, that is primarily on you unless there is a rational explanation underlying the discomfort that is better than prejudiced nonsense like I am avoiding all gays or all homophobes. A portion of the society is uncomfortable with all social events, but we don't cancel them and do everything straight to online video out of deference to their discomfort. We at most try to do what we can to make them comfortable to the extent that they don't get in the way of the event.

My problem with this situation was the conference publicly taking sides and disparaging a particular speaker based on current political winds. Professionalism in running these things is avoiding any unnecessary public slight to anyone whether the society is anti-homosexual or anti-homophobe. It is simply not appropriate for a conference to judge a speaker or any evidence about them.

I think the resignation and reflections in the OP were very appropriate and I hope Kevin will return to organizing future events using this hard won experience.

(edit- I should note that I mean inherently uncomfortable with the other participant, I think it is fine for a group to exclude a participant who has a history of ignoring rules explicitly agreed to. But excluding someone who was "rude" in the past under no specific rules really amounts to ageism eventually.)

No, they "often" ask people to cancel and state personal grounds or scheduling conflict, etc. Much like suspicious resignations. Then they get wierder when people refuse but the facts are then confusing nonsense about inflexibility and inability to reach a concensus, not a statement of vague unease about a speaker.

Given the terrible track record of the JS community with regards to basic behavior, I really have to wonder what is wrong and why anyone should risk their personal reputation by doing public activities in JS.

Perhaps transpiling purely to avoid interacting with caustic elements of the JS community will be the new normal.

> And yeah they are in short supply because you can't teach them directly.

If you can think critically are you going to get past the HR filters and convince them you are the recruit willing to take a deal that will descend into just a little worse than unemployment? (So your empty shell of a life after they spit you out is devoid of any unused benefits.)

If you want to openly think critically in corporate employment, step 1 is becoming irreplaceable so they can't replace you when you become inconvenient at step 2.

An easier tactic, (employed by the best corporate game theorists that I've encountered) is following directions like a total Svejk, this leads employers to think you lack critical thinking skills. Then more resources are allocated and eventually you have a whole empire of minions.

A net zero property seems like it could generate less paperwork if the management balanced incomming and outgoing payments, (less their fee.)

How exactly do they pay utilities/etc without anyone noticing their transfers? But I don't believe they are successfully hiding anything in any case, governments want everyone to be guilty of something so they can achieve whatever political outcome they need through selective enforcement.

I did a mix of fulltime school, fulltime work (with an occasional class) and part time work/part time school. Employers seemed fine with my being in process of a degree and having done basic reqs, so no degree wasn't a barrier at entry, but it did slow down my career path as the highest status/most interesting groups couldn't justify selecting me until I had the degree.