MadManE

There is nothing competitive about the wages in Denver when you're comparing to CA. Cost of living is lower than SV, but still one of the highest in the country.

This is an interesting look for me into exactly who Apple is targeting. Obviously, not you, because you want more control. But the more that I hear about what they are doing and the direction they are going, I am more likely to buy their services, because I just want something that works.

Really, I think the crux is that I trust Apple to do the right thing for a bunch of non-solid reasons, and so I am willing to give them the control over the particulars of the mechanisms as long as the input-->output is what I want/expect from them.

They don't need to, but Colorado, and Boulder in particular, is trying like hell to do it anyway.

Unless I missed it, they didn't answer their own question, and instead just listed a few emotions that get people riled up the most.

  Location: Denver, CO, USA
  Remote: Preferred
  Willing to relocate: Dependent on new location and nature of work
  Technologies: 2D/3D mechanical design, SolidWorks, AutoCAD, FEA, CFD
  Résumé/CV: e-mail
  Email: enmock at gmail

Ok, but why?

The issue, as I understand it, is all about weight. Putting two different power systems on board takes away all of the benefits of using one or the other exclusively.

I think that "paying attention to" could just mean watching for other bad behavior to justify action. Not necessarily paying attention to take notes from.

It's not that it's a phone meeting. It's that it's a pointless meeting.

One of the first things that I got told in my materials class was that for the strength and weight, carbon steel and aluminum are essentially the same. Steel is about 3x as dense, but also 3x as strong, and does not fatigue like aluminum.

I'm assuming that NASA knows this, and chose aluminum for another reason that I'm not aware of.

I don't think those are mutually exclusive options, myself. I would classify a lot of startup founders as crooks.

That's not been my observation. People assume that if you have a lot of money, you must be good at something, not that you are inherently good.

There is a huge gap between "not frictionless" and "impossible". Sometimes, people have to make hard choices. The reality is that if you want to live in a trendy/convenient/nice part of a major city, then you will have to pay for it, because EVERYONE wants to live there.

Sometimes, you just can't have everything you want.

I don't think that the particular time is the issue here. It's that there is a specific time at all. On top of that, the thoughtless commitment to a particular amount of time being in that chair is just insulting.

I agree with the title - if you don't trust me, then you shouldn't have hired me.

But if they told the truth, they wouldn't get upvoted to the front page.

If NOx was really a priority, then the large producers would be subject to increased regulations rather than the tiny fraction that's produced by individual passenger vehicles.

I had an almost jarring occurrence of this happen when I graduated with my BSME. My first name is traditionally associated with old rednecks. I sent out a hundred or so resumes before I got any response at all - an offhand comment about duct tape engineering.

For whatever reason, that clicked with me. So, I added my middle name to my resume and had a job within a week. I've been going by my middle name professionally ever since.

My argument is that the context is irrelevant. You have to do what you can with the hand you're dealt, but ultimately, if you're not willing to work for things, you will be poorer than someone who is.

I also find it ironic that you use the term "pass the buck".

I grew up there. It's not pleasant, but it is ripe with opportunity to seriously grow your worth.

And 5-year-old hardware is hardly inaccessible to the internet. It is orders of magnitude cheaper, though.

It's hard not to have your income rise if you take care with it. And it's hard not to have your income fall if you refuse to work for it.

Acting entitled and actually being entitled are very different things.

Yeah, life sucks sometimes. But I have yet to see someone complaining about how hard millennials have it who doesn't also have the latest iPhone and MacBook, living in an expensive city.

If you're really serious about growing your net worth, then stick with the old hardware and move to somewhere between the Rocky Mountains and the Mississippi River. Prices are low enough to live the "American Dream" there, but it's not the cool, hip living of SF Bay, Seattle, or NYC.

But who set the stage for the Baby Boomers? Do we blame the previous generation for that?

At some point, you need to take responsibility for your own actions. Even if the situation that you're in isn't your fault, it IS up to you what you do to get out of it.

I find this to be more than a little disingenuous. While it is true that millennials are poorer, the reasoning isn't so cut-and-dried.

I fully place the blame on the attitude of entitlement. There is the expectation that everything will be handed to anyone who just follows the pre-set path of college-->office job-->retirement, without the acknowledgement of all the behind-the-scenes effort that it takes.

College is more expensive, but it's not impossible. Some non-college careers are now more profitable because of this also. No matter what some people say, just showing up is not going to cut it. You need to do your job well and advocate for yourself to get raises/promotions/opportunities.

This is not to say that it's easy to get ahead. But making the "right" choices and having a little temporary discomfort or making the "wrong" choices and committing to a life of debt is pretty standard throughout history. We just have a much larger group of people with access to mass marketing tools than before, so we get to hear about it more often.

I got asked to do an audition project as part of an interview last year. After completing the phone interview and receiving the project, I determined that this was something that they were having trouble getting ideas for, and were simply using the interview process to jump start it. I declined to participate and told them I would look for work elsewhere.

If the project is a couple hours, then sure, I have no problem with it. When it's an entire real project for the company, you're just donating a week's work to someone in the hope of getting an offer letter.

I love the strawman stance that aspirin, coffee, and weed are all equal, and that the single constraint of simply not selling to children is plenty of restrictions.

Technically, yes, Lowry is not Denver proper. Nitpicking aside, there is no practical difference.

I should have been clearer and said "leave the metro area".

So you're saying my experience is unique by providing your sister's experience that is the same?

I don't like the attitudes of pro-legalization people in the US. They wont accept that there are negative sides to drug use and seem to think there should be no restrictions.

This sums up my experience both in this thread, and living in Colorado.

Sorry, it should be: What is the practical alternative?

We must have wildly different definitions of "cheap". My rent is going up 21% in a month. My actual cheapest option is to move out of the city and get a job that pays 10-15% less.

I'm not trying to address your needs Changing the frame of the debate doesn't change the points made. In the case of alcohol, an individual is in control of how it affects them. In the case of smoke (pot or cigarette), the individual is at the mercy of the general populace.