GreenJelloShot

People "vacation" in radically different ways.

For some people, a vacation is just spending all week at home playing video games. Others will just sped time at a B&B or visit family. For them, checking email is not a big deal.

Other people are way more active and want to go camping, surfing or something else that gets them away from their phone/laptop. For these people, checking email is unreasonable because it interferes with their plans.

The two types of people cannot understand the other side. One of them thinks "Why can't you spare a little time in between checking Facebook and Twitter to check your email?" The other side thinks "Who wastes a perfectly good vacation by spending any time on Facebook and/or Twitter?"

I don't think the problem is how many emails you will receive. It's how often you will be expected to check your email and how quickly you will be expected to respond.

I mean, if I an on vacation in Hawaii, what if I want to go on an all-day snorkel trip? I probably won't be able to check my phone a lot, and I certainly can't do anything if there is a real problem.

Imagine having only ever used Windows as an OS. Then one day someone hands you a Linux machine. You try it for a day or two, but then go back to Windows. And then you wonder why your coworkers keep saying how great Linux is.

If it is simple as copying from the government, then why aren't you doing it too? Why not take the existing medicine and resell it to the public for half of what everyone else is charging?

You would simultaneously be making a fortune, while at the same time being called a hero.

Suddenly forcing non-remote workers to switch to remote work overnight is not going to produce great results. By the time the workers get the hang of working remotely effectively, their bosses will have already decided that it is a bad idea.

If you don't know your own calendar, then I do not want to talk to you.

I would rather talk to the person who knows and controls your calendar. They are the true source of power and they are the one who can actually get things accomplished.

“We’d love to partner with Steve on getting his frameworks and templates from his books – The Four Steps and The Startup Owner’s Manual – onto our product. Can you connect us to him?”

That sounds to me like the start of some sort of relationship. If the guy just wanted info from the book, then why not just read the book?

The title should be changed to:

"You can only be a [mediocre, full-time] writer if you can afford it"

Completely misleading title. Retiring has nothing to do with it.

The real point of the article is this:

"Too much time spent with no purpose is associated with unhappiness."

I had this happen early on in my career.

My entire department was unified and clearly articulated the problems we were facing and how we could improve things. The only result was that our manager was told to get us under control or we would all be fired.

Management knows what is going on. They just don't care.

Srsly stop working for shitty startups.

I guess 99.9% of all startups are "shitty" then.

we would like the core team (first 3-4 hires) to share our passion to some degree. Perhaps naively we'd like them to become pillars of our company and help us inspire future employees.

It sound like they don't want workers, so much as worshipers. Call me pessimistic.

There is a difference between "encouraging" and "forcing".

Should we force people to exercise?

People don't always make the rational choice for long term benefits when there are short term gains to be had. Individuals, thanks to bounded rationality, tend to seek satisfactory solutions, not optimal ones. It takes coordinated effort to find optimal solutions.

Translation: People are stupid and need to be forced to do the right thing. (Where the "right thing" is defined by the current people in charge.)

However, if it makes most people better off, and makes society as a whole better off, then maybe it's worth it for the government to force their most-successful citizens away from their selfish instincts to the betterment of the nation?

So basically it's ok to sacrifice the minority, as long as it benefits the majority, huh?

In 1900, the average life expectancy for an American man was 48.3

Today, the average life expectancy for Americans is 78.7

If sharing wealth leads to greater wealth, then why is it necessary to try to take wealth (by force)? Why don't people willingly give up their wealth so that they can make more?

If it is possible to make more wealth by giving up some, why not let people choose whether or not they will share? If you theory holds true, then people who share will get richer and the people who don't share will get poorer and the problem will solve itself.

Taking direction or orders from a manager is only ever stressful if that manager doesn't take accountability for their decisions and directions.

This right here.

I will lead if you want. But then stop second guessing my decisions, and stop taking credit for my successes.

If you want to lead, fine. But then stop blaming me for failures, and admit when you screw up.

I am sick of being micromanaged and then blamed for when things go wrong.

There are many, many people that love solving problems, but have no desire to get mired down into politics and power struggles.

I have never seen a "bad" manager exist under a "good" manager/director. Every single "bad" manager was able to survive and thrive because the environment was set up to encourage and reward the "bad" behavior.

If you are hiring and managing bad people, then the problem is not with them. It is with you. If you are unable to identify bad people under you, then you are failing at your most basic responsibility.

It's driving me insane. It is sucking the joy out of life.

Seek therapy.

If you aren't learning, or getting better at the craft, then you're falling behind, becoming irrelevant, and certainly you aren't going to make anything of significance.

This is such an unhealthy attitude. You seriously need to take a step back and reevaluate your priorities.

Here are just a few:

1) All day interviews. Seriously, I've had an 8 hour interview. They served me breakfast, lunch and dinner. This was after several other rounds of interviews.

2) Expecting me to perform "free work". I have had several companies insist that I create and submit "sample" projects. This is NOT simple stuff like FizzBuzz. The projects realistically take 20+ hours and are solving non-trivial problems. This is before you even talk to anyone.

3) It can take weeks or months to go through the process and finally get an answer: one way or the other.

4) Companies straight up lie about everything, from working conditions to performance expectations.

I don't know about that. I have been in the industry for decades, and it definitely feels worse (more abusive) today than it did 10 or 20 years ago.

And yet here we are

A two sentence post on HN is "making a fuss"???

Title of the article: "You don't need Libraries for internationalization (i18n) of Dates"

Actual content: "... you might not need any of these libraries [moment, dayjs, date-fns] to have some basic Formatting and Localization on the Date Objects."

There is a difference between a "scam" business and a "failed" business. The scam business never had any intent on doing what they promised. The failed business planned on doing something, but for whatever reason, was not able to do it successfully.

It is not realistic to have a 100% graduation rate. Obviously, some people will fail/not complete any training. A lot of that has to do with the expectations and commitment of the students.

Lambda is not a "scam". They have every intention of actually teaching and training people to become successful Engineers. They might be making numerous mistakes. They might even be doing a poor job. But they are not a "scam". People are successfully learning and getting jobs. Even if the real rate is closer to 50% instead of 80%.

If being manipulative in marketing makes the company a scam, then pretty much every company is a scam.

I think it is completely fair to critique Lambda and to point out deceptive promises. However, when you go overboard and try to characterize the whole business as a "scam", I think you are going too far. When you go overboard like that, you actually hurt your own argument.

I think it at least debunks the claim that "Lambda School was a scam". It may have a lot of faults, and it may not be the best way to get training, but it's not a scam.

Wait, really? Do you have family? Do you have friends? You don't have anyone to talk to at all???

Join a club. Pick up a new hobby. Join a church. Attend local events. There is probably a hundred things you could do to meet and talk with all kinds of people.

Seems like it actually would delete any tweet containing the word "Lambda".

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/WillManidis/GoodbyeLambda/...

I thought they only had to pay if the students actually landed a decent paying job.

What? Web farms are automatically expensive? A web farm can literally be two Raspberry Pis behind a simple load balancer. What if this isn't "my company"? What if I run a web farm at home for fun?

Besides, your argument could be used to justify any price hike! "If you can afford X, then you can afford Y!"