In that he was devout in any economic theory it was capitalism. Crony capitalism but capitalism. He literally made slaves work for private companies, you don’t get more capitalist than that.
The German industrialists of the early 20th Century feared unionism, socialism, and communism. They backed Hitler and funded the Nazi party. In turn, Nazis enacted the Nacht und Nebel slave labor program, Lex Krupp, and allowed companies such as Krupp to take property from conquered nations.
You are right. Those not killed within a week's time were sent to to concentration camps. Many were forced labor (slave) and then moved to death camps.when they could no longer work. My apologies for being unclear.
Not really, if you want your new platform to instantly become one of the most used websites in the world. Why should he care about twitter's brand name?
I don’t think this process is instant. I also don’t think there’s almost any adoption to the new feature associated with X. I for one don’t even know how to access these presumed hour long videos, much less watch them. Similarly, I almost never click the “read more” in longer posts on my feed because it takes me out of my feed.
Could also be why you can't find a job. You may be too expensive, and they're looking for engineers in the sweet spot of cheap/can keep the machine running.
FANG like companies also do a lot of things different then most other, especially smaller companies, so it's not that uncommon for small companies to hesitate to hire someone directly coming from FANG.
Then for lower paying jobs a lot of people are hesitant to hire "overqualified" people as they expect them to jump ship the moment they find something better, i.e. no FANG people.
Then team leads no matter which job/industry often avoid hiring someone perceived more qualified then them, like e.g. from FANG.
Or in other words in an economy where you might need to be happy with a less well paying job which you also might be perceived to be overqualified for having a long term FANG employment without an employment afterwards isn't necessary a good thing...
> FANG like companies also do a lot of things different then most other,
As a hiring manager, this is a factor that weighs heavily in my mental math. My experience with ex-BigTech engineers has been that they tend towards wanting to make everything to match their BigTech experience. But they often don't have the pragmatism to understand that X is a good pattern at BigTech because *of the size of BigTech*. Have had way too many conversations of the form, "Yes, that is objectively better. But at our scale, the value add does not warrant the effort involved". Or "there's no need for these 15 layers of indirection because there's 5 of us, not 5000".
Obviously this is a stereotype and doesn't apply to everyone. But that's no different than how people have a positive stereotype of ex-BigTech employees being sharp.
i got into an argument with a bigtech employee (outside of work, in a social setting) that senior engineers should spend 25% of their time mentoring junior hires.
he literally could not understand that a small company can't afford to do this.
not only that, he also could not understand that small companies doesn't even make junior hires. there's nobody to mentor!
and i would guess this guy has like a top 1% iq, whatever that is.
If you can’t afford ~25% of your week educating junior hires, then you shouldn’t have junior hires.
It is a sin of the industry to not train new folks, and I would argue that many “senior engineers” do not know how to mentor juniors because they don’t see it as a priority.
I was heavily mentored during my time in small businesses with limited resources and profit. I hope others get that experience too.
I know people on HN seem to think it is, but the people here are a tiny subset of the people in the real world, even in the tech area of California. I really doubt it's a representitive view.
There is always an element of "let's see how low we can get" in mainstream IT, since people outside tech view tech as a cost center and not a profit center, which devalues candidates.
>Maybe they want Putin to invest more and more and grind Russia down slowly? Losing too quickly would leave Russia with too much left? Of course, the cost of such a strategy would be borne by the Ukrainians, who pay in blood.
I think this has been the conventional wisdom for a while.
One thing I ask people who are vociferous in their support of Ukraine (and our paying for that support) is, how is this going to end?
Russia quietly bleeds out and overthrows Putin? Is that realistic?
If Putin is a madman dictator, do you really think he'll just whimper and disappear?
It seems necessary that a negotiation take place at some point, and that negotiation result in lost territory for Ukraine. It's not a question of justice, but practicality.
Russia has a history of throwing out leaders after failed wars. On one hand Putin appears to have a fairly tight grip on power right now, but it doesn't take much to actually execute a coup. A small group of of participants to capture or kill him, and maybe one or two handshake agreements with one of the many security or military forces might be enough. There is a reason Putin has been spending most of this war in his bunker after all. It is certainly not because he fears attacks from Ukraine. He know this war has greatly eroded his leverage over the oligarchs and as such he is acting accordingly.
Of course it is hard to even put a probability on something like this happening, but I think most folks are underestimating the odds. It is one of those things that feels very unlikely to happen, until it actually happens.
However, I do think that the highest probability outcome is Ukraine and Russia end up roughly where they were before the invasion, perhaps with slightly different boundaries. If you were not aware Russia and Ukraine have been at war for 8 years. For most of the years, it was effectively a stalemate, with a handful skirmishes to remind each other of the others presence. And the rest of the world for the most part carried on with business as usual. If feel like this is the most likely scenario, and if this is where we end up, I think it was 100% worth the cost as it means Ukraine maintains self-determination and Russia likely learns a really hard lesson regarding its Imperialistic ambitions.
The result will not be just "lost territory" it's hundred thousands people left in Russian bondage. And that will not be the end of it - Putin will be back for more in a year or two. There can be no peace as long as his regime is in power and as long as russians cling to a fantasy of living in an empire. I don't know how realistic is to bleed Russia, but fighting it now is only viable option, there is nothing else.
Debate is literally appealing to in-group/out-group bias. The purpose of debate is to try to influence that bias.
The weird thing about debate is that the most ridiculous claims have the most evidence against them, and are therefore the most work to refute with sources. Claiming that the earth is flat takes a lot more evidence to refute than claiming that the earth has slightly incorrect parameters of oblate spheroid-ness.
This is played upon by certain people. Trying to explain why a concept such as "anti-white hate-porn" is just not a thing is like trying to explain how we're pretty sure we actually landed on the moon.
This comes back to the fallacy of "equal time for both sides of the debate".
Why would they want less time spent on the site? That's optimal perhaps for the user not site, and the article discusses how the site is designed to keep the user searching.
It could be optimal for the site if the site monetizes via monthly subscription fees. Giving the user what they "want" as rapidly as possible would allow them to save money on infrastructure costs.
Still could cause some interesting 2+ order effects though!
How long does one need to watch porn in a single sitting? Netflix,YouTube, TikTok, etc. benefit from the fact we can sit there all day watching it (and some people do). Porn? Well...
They probably got it from Snow Crash. The oldest surviving globes of the known world date back to 1492 according to Wikipedia and the Greeks probably created their own variations a few millennia ago.
It was so natural and intuitive that Youtube's version STILL doesn't compare to how good, fast, seemless, and unintrusive it is done on the porn sites, years later.
Out of interest, does anyone have any book/article/resource recommendations for writing a programming language? This is something I would like to revisit, not to write a 'good' language, but to revisit all the concepts I was introduced to in college in practice rather than in theory.
I really like crafting interpreters. It walks through 2 implementations of a minimal language. It's also free to read online https://craftinginterpreters.com/
