This person is missing that there are whole microc communities that have no equalvalent anywhere is. If you want to connect with parents of autistic kids, it’s reddit, all the random hype local shard communities of Facebook, or hoping you find an invite to the countless secret groups you can’t even see unless you know about them or get invited. That’s it. There was an attempt to leave reddit during the API thing and it failed. Everyone has to move in mass or no one moves for these kind of hyper specific groups and they are mandatory for parents. The medical resources for parents are awful especially if your child doesn’t have the worst version. Reddit is basically the only resource. Who is going to abandon a group to help them care for theit child over something like this. Maybe other things, but when you have limited choices, you hold your nose.

This is the easiest thing in the world for someone to say, but it’s totally different if you wouldn’t have money for rent, or medication or food if you lose your job. If you have kids to care for who might suffer for your actions.

I have a medication that prevents me from dying a painful slow death. Any damage I take while waiting for medicaid to kick in is permanent. My daughter has autism and adhd. I’m hours away from family.

Let’s say I wasn’t the lucky one who has savings, that’s a hell of a situation to gamble with. I’m willing to not spend and my kid has already been pulled for homeschooling for her safety since we’re not white. I’m not even sure what an invalid and a kid are gonna do at a protest

Impeachment just says that congress cam try him. Removal is what we want and ehat they never agree to do.

Because tweet never had any negative connotations before Twitter took it on. It’s the sound a bird makes. Toot is slang for farting which doesn’t have the greatest associations. It’s also like skeet for blue sky. I get why the owners wouldn’t want a word that has a whole and common on their platform community that knows that word as slang for ejaculation.

All I can say to that is that I hope people who didn’t vote or voted for republicans enjoy this outcome. Regardless of what anyone thinks when it comes to the general election, you are voting either for someone or against someone. If you don’t vote you’re saying that you’re perfectly fine with either option. The time to whine and be philosophical about candidates is during primaries which most people don’t even participate in. That’s how you can get your mythical perfect democrat.

Anyone who didn’t explicitly vote for a democrat this past election I’m blaming for what the GOP is doing. The democrats are feckless cowards, but they don’t accelerate everyone’s ruin and sometimes that’s the literal best outcome.

My mantra now is have the day you voted for. Not voting is implicitly voting for the winner. I hope that all the petulant people who sat out because their favorite wasn’t on the docket or voted red because they have some shiny single thing they care about is personally experiencing everything that the entirety of the GOP platform stands for. I truly wish that they get everything they voted for.

Please, these are just the volunteers who either have years until reelection or are retiring. We know they are just a front because Warner voted yes and then mysteriously changed his vote to no. Couldn’t be because his reelection is coming up next year. No way.

Segregation is not mass murder. That’s how they could live with themselves. They just didn’t want Those People living next to them. They could be over here. Away from them. They would unironically think they were better than nazis.

As a black person, I’ll say that of the choices, I do think that segregation worked out better for black people. There is simply more POC wealth in historically segregated areas than areas there that’s not true. Turns it, it was actually better to keep racists away from you than letting them torment you while you were trying to establish your community from an even from horrific situation (everything abojt Jim crow and slavery.). I think the battle for integration was a good one, but it was done once there was such a thing as middle class blacks.

I don’t want it because I want to expose my kid to things early and gradually. My kid as had a tablet since 1. No one would know that if I didn’t tell them. She doesn’t use her tablet as a pacifier because of strong parental controls, boundary enforcement and general parenting. She doesn’t have unlimited access to YouTube because I learned that 30 mins is about all she can handle for short form videos. But we are working on tolerance and personal boundary settings with it. She started at about 10mins a day.

She’s in elementary and we are slowly dipping into social media. Right now she’s locked into platforms where she can only interact with a white list of people.

I don’t want the government to scream at me that my way is wrong because shit disengaged parents exist. It’s like at the stuff about screen time. It turns out the one study i read was correct. I don’t harm or hurt as long as it doesn’t replace human interaction.

Letting it be a free for all at 16 isn’t going to do anything but make it worse because then kids at that age will get no guidance and it’ll just be binging now with less societal care since nothing with be made to onboard children at all.

I mean… the Japanese who as a nation are mostly non-Christian and don’t know much about it beyond pop culture, celebrate Christmas. I mean it’s a couple’s holiday there, but they do all the superficial things around it. Plenty of non-Christians celebrate Christmas the way that many people celebrate Halloween. It’s just a fun little tradition cooped because a dominant culture enjoys it and doesn’t care too much if you don’t adhere to the heart, but just the ritual of it.

There are plenty of people who don’t know the first thing about what Christmas actually is that celebrate it.

Ads are super effective. If you have something to buy, but you don’t know much about it, you will tend towards buying the thing that was advertised to you more often than not just because you are more familiar with it over other things. You might not stick with it, but being the first thing someone tries is huge.

It’s not good. Sometimes the only computer a kid has is a chromebook because their parents got it for them for school. I’m seeing more and people just don’t have computers at all. PC isn’t moving fluidly to the next generation as a result. I’ve told parents about steam deck hoping they’ll pick that as their kid’s game console, but it’s not as easy as when I was a kid where you just had a computer anyway and it was about if it could play the game you wanted to play. With the indie scene that concern when away a lot, but now a lot of kids just don’t have PCs

I don’t see why. I grew up with those systems as well, but Nintendo is actively hostile to videogame culture, so there is no reason for my child to develop a love of Pokémon or Mario. She can be nostalgic over new things.

I’m doing my part by never exposing my kid to Nintendo and capturing all my kid’s friends before they leave tablet gaming and convincing their parents to look into PC gaming and steam decks. It’s an easy sell to their parents once I show steam’s parental controls and how every game isn’t full price all the time. Plus remote play makes the initial cost low if they have a computer. Their kid can just play my kid’s games. I’ve already converted 6 kids. My kid just started first grade, so I expect to convert a lot more.

Every company has learned that any friction to using your site is a bleed of customers. There are a lot of people who will just not use your site if it requires a lengthy validation process. If there was some kind of identity system that sites would integrate with like login.gov, then people would ignore this, but I don’t think the UK has such a thing that every site can use, so a lot of people will not use the site and over time fall to piracy or illegitimate sites.

I’d be interested to see if that ruling would apply with video evidence and no illegal fire arm or reasonable suspicion on the part of the officer. That case seems to uphold the idea of a search on the grounds of reasonable suspicion. That’s not the case here.

That is a difference people make in their mind. I don’t see a difference. The criticism is the critism. If you receive enough negative feedback on PRs after being hired, you will be fired for not be good enough.

The only way to take away the stress of an interview is to not care about the outcome. I don’t and interviews are stressful for me. I present myself as I am and if they don’t like it oh well, but that is a confidence I think most people don’t have. I have been like this since I was junior so it’s not the arrogance of experience. It’s not even the confidence of easily being able to get jobs because in my early career it would sometimes take months to get a new job. I’d ask for feedback if I could get it and accept or disregard it. Some feedback amounted to, “this wasn’t the job for you” and that’s okay.

I just don’t think it’s worth worrying about any particular job when hiring is like dating. You can be perfect for one job and an obvious no for another, so it’s not worth worrying about the outcome. They like you or they don’t.

Your post was about stress not anxiety and theu are different things. My point is that these these kind interviews approximate what you will actually do at work. If someone finds them stressful then they should think about if this is the career for them. Feeling anxious is another thing, but you can feel anxious while being confident because anxiety is about fearing and unknown outcome.

My point is that people should fine these interview styles stressful and that has always been my point and what I have been replying to since you never brought up anxiety until now.

The literal point if interviews it to judge. The point is to find people who will work in the environment you have. I have done work on codebases where bad code means people die, by indirect or direct results. This probably biases me. For example, I have coded in front of a group several times. This year in fact. Sometimes a problem involves multiple people thinking through it. That’s probably why I don’t care about panel interviews as well. I have had to explain myself in front of a group several times.

These are things that people find stressful, but they are part of my job and have been at nearly every one of the little over half a dozen jobs I have held. My current job isn’t even doing anything important. No one dies if I make a mistake and I’ve still experienced explaining myself in front of a group and coding with several people onlooking. I just assumed that’s how the job is as my friends in the same field have similar kinds of stories

People can be stressed I guess, but is normal and common events in your job are highly stressful, then I still say that’s a sign that it’s not the career path for you. For all we know, these jobs have these things because it’s common on the job and a candidate should really feel at ease doing it. That’s my opinion anyway. We can only form opinions based on experience and apparently, mine differs from yours.

I don’t agree at all. I’ve definitely been in lair sessions where the other person has been assigned to babysit me to the correct answer. It’s just an experience that mostly happens with juniors. I’ve babysat juniors to the solution myself.

There can also be zero trust between colleagues forced to pair, especially in debug sessions. I have worked a lot of jobs, so maybe it’s just my experience, but I would not say that if categorized every single pair session I’ve had in my entire career anywhere near half involved two colleagues who trusted each other and didn’t judge.

I’ve definitely been judged as a senior for dumb dumb moments and that’s okay. If you care about people’s opinions too personally as a software engineer, I’m not sure this is the career for you. It’s a career that involves a lot of negative feedback even as an experienced professional.

I guess my question why should anyone feel stressed from live coding? There are some jobs where this is legitimately a common occurrence at your job. Some jobs are big on pair programming. And I don’t think I’ve ever had a single job that at least a couple times a year didn’t have me living coding through a problem. It happened way more often when I was a junior and needed a lot of assistance. If you are stressed by being watched while you code, that’s not great because you are going to have to do it regularly or semi-regularly at your job. That’s whether someone is sitting right next to you or they are screensharing. It’s why I personally am comfortable with live coding. It’s literally a thing I do at work, albeit not with toy problems.