jechamt

I've been looking, applying, and interviewing (though not as often as I would like nor expect from my volume of applications) for 8 months. After some recent disappointing news, I am looking to be moving away from software development and systems-at-scale roles, and spending more time and effort at IT support / system administration roles in the future as I can't help but feel the industry just isn't interested in any desire to grow and develop professionally, they just want the perfect applicant that has already used the technologies they need for 2-5 years and won't waste time on anyone else.

It doesn't help my own confidence that I have "FAANG" experience (I'll leave it to the reader to decide which FAANG belongs in quotes), and it hasn't helped my response rate or evaluations.

In any case, it's disapointing, and I feel your struggles. I wish you the best, and hopefully your newfound perspective separating the CV and the interview will help you spend less time and anguish over the less important parts

> Have Backbone; Disagree and Commit Leaders are obligated to respectfully challenge decisions when they disagree, even when doing so is uncomfortable or exhausting. Leaders have conviction and are tenacious. They do not compromise for the sake of social cohesion. Once a decision is determined, they commit wholly.

In this context, “leaders” is (at least) aspirational, and meant to include all employees. I have a good deal of experience with the LPs, though I can’t claim to be an expert in evaluating the merits of their various applications. Particularly with this one, as it appears to be sort of encouraging situations that are more likely lead to discord and conflict. I would venture that, in my experience, this one is one of the more highly prone to differing interpretations among individuals. The times I have seen it used, or examples broadcast of its value, it is used in the spirit of starting or engaging in a good faith discussion, and at some point concluding a time box to the discussion by one party asking another to disagree and commit. In other words, two well-intentioned parties that both have meaningful contributions to the discussion (and represent that they understand the other party also has meaningful contributions) reach an impasse and know they need to get past it. By invoking disagree and commit, they both agree to commit their full energy and attention to the same concluded direction, work to see the success of that path, and (usually) discuss as an after action lessons learned, so that future disagreements of a similar nature can point to the data / conclusions to make better decisions. Again, I don’t know I have the best understanding of this LP, and it has not come up often for me personally, so I welcome feedback here from others with experience.

This is completely independent from my opinion on this particular issue, which I will omit. It does differ somewhat from the representation in the reporting:

> In other words, once any company decision is made, workers are expected to fall in line, even if they disagree with it

First time posting an archive / access link. If this link doesn’t work for anyone, feel free to hide this post. I’ll monitor and delete if it’s failing / not helpful.

> in response to “feedback from the filmmaking team that wanted the actor’s remarks to be centered on the movie.”

the idea that someone could make edits to the text that will go to the teleprompter and thus favorably control what a human being will say, after being surprised on stage with edits to what they certainly planned and practiced, strikes me as phenomenally absurd and disconnected from reality.

It is even more striking that included in the cut speech (which the reader sort of must take for granted was part of an alternative, planned speech) is an impassioned description of the pervasiveness of lies and efforts to present alternative/revisionist histories.

It recalls comedy scenarios like a scene from Anchorman, or more acutely, that someone made decisions thinking people will actually behave this way.

"At the end of the study, we conducted in-depth interviews with 14 participants."

I wondered something similar while reading, but recognized the choices of explicit gender and detailed inquiry inclusion while intentionally changing the names. These pointed me to the likelihood this was in-house/controlled research. I believe that is the case from the quote above, though I don't see any additional details about how the study was conducted.

> this is for Windows-specific features, so it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API

seems to directly disagree with the author's analysis:

> These special links only exist to force users into using Microsoft Edge. They serve no other purpose than to circumvent the user’s default browser preference to promote a Microsoft product.

Why do you suggest these are for Windows-specific features?

Mostly individuals (and perhaps this is not the complete picture) through AngelList, perhaps AngelList (angel.co) itself might be interested to know in more detail the actual policies and communications of one of its listed companies.

Deciding to not cover this claim and claims like it seems to be a short-sighted and heavily financially-motivated decision. Perhaps if the financial stakes of that decision were more clear, the author could pursue a different result.

Perhaps, though, this momentum has come too late. Food for thought as I haven't seen it discussed here so far.

On the other side, I would never click on a headline like this from another source, but it being here on HN provides some benefit of the doubt. Yahoo news reveals its consistent character, as usual, but at least this is balanced by the always insightful comments toward the material subject matter of the article (my own comment here notwithstanding).

-Do you struggle to sleep every day? Or is it only as the work/school/lark-world responsibilities progress through the week?

-Would you characterize your difficulty as struggling to sleep or struggling to wake up, or both?

-How does this impact your days off (i.e. weekends), and what is the first and last day off typically like in comparison?

-Is this the kind of struggle that you manage, but it frustrates you, or has other effects, or is it something that regularly threatens to derail your life? (i.e. late for work or class, or other real-life consequences)

-Do you feel like it is something you will always live with, or do you feel that there could be a lifestyle/solution, either involving your change, or accommodating to your current behavior and/or natural inclination?

I'm a night owl, and I won't go into detail about my situation with hope to not impact responses too much, but it would help me (and hopefully others!) to understand just how similar/different I may be. Thank you!

I'm confident experienced security professionals know this idea well: I'd posit that no one hates passwords more than the person who has to design the training explaining to everyone why they need to use unique passwords, of a certain length, of a certain complexity, and how the risk behind those changes in different environments. I hope mostly everyone would agree passwords are a terrible security solution. So if somebody wants to post that's how they feel about this, and their experience with a solution to get away from passwords, or minimizing them, let's have a discussion about what better options are out there (as some have already done in this thread).

In my view, the most important posts in the discussion of user-accessible security management are these posts that identify what makes every user need to be a hashing expert to select and manage the ever-expanding repository of account credentials we have today.

The article above is pretty dated (which is noted in the post), and so leaves out some better options for security that are available today, such as authenticator apps for 2fa. In the context of when it was published, it was an excellent and important stepping stone in security awareness, but working with the tools of the time.

Now, we have better options and Troy Hunt (among others) has covered many of them in separate posts over the years.

It's useful to discuss the philosophical implications of any tech company having too much power. To add the most to that discussion, it's helpful to understand that these actions are not directly affecting customers (aside from those who were using these enterprise apps outside their intended scope).

1. The criminals launch a phishing campaign against you specifically to get your bank username and password. This is defensible, although the harder step, by being vigilant, not clicking links, regularly changing your password, ensuring your password is unique so they won't be able to find it on a database of another breached web service, etc.

2. They intercept your SMS-based 2FA. This is not possible if you are not using SMS-based 2FA. Switch to a more secure method of 2FA, or communicate your concerns to your bank if none is available (really, make it public, because this is a big deal), or switch banks.

I believe there are things you can do to defend yourself, although having to do these things is clearly not ideal. Hopefully just knowing about it will improve a person's defensive posture against such types of attacks.

Edit: formatting (for anyone who's ever wondered: https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc)

'a general understanding that peering is free ...' - (might this be spelled out in the business service contracts between Comcast and a provider such as Netflix?)

a metric for how to determine and verify by both parties how much data is predominantly flowing and in which direction

And if these details to an agreement had been discussed and agreed upon by some parties that later entered a public debate about them, I might also wonder:

if a metric is determined for how an ISP will route traffic, how will it identify and share how much traffic it can handle, and how much it has received?

What peer relationships is Comcast, or any other ISP, also bound by of similar terms that might connect a candidate business to remote customers that the ISP does not directly service, further along on the internet? How will this also impact the ability of an individual customer or business to make decisions on the terms described above?