weareconvo

FYI: As of the time of this reply, https://dixonary.co.uk/cabal-2020 returns a 404.

Every single question of that form is impossible to answer with mere words. Luckily, people CAN answer it through aggregate choice, so we don't have to worry about it.

...but since I feel like taking the bait, something like 9 trillion people use Facebook for at least 36 hours a day, while at MOST 4 people ever even need to consult a neurosurgeon per YEAR. So he's clearly the winner there.

Come to Homer's BBBQ. The extra B is for BYOBB.

True, but there may also be a national interest in him not being in charge anymore.

And then displayed them in the worst way you could think of? Why does it instantly produce two-way scrolling? How do you even advance to the next slide? Why does Facebook's pitch deck have three pitch decks and an ad for the site I'm already on?

Now apologize for spamming my inbox without an unsubscribe link.

...also, the existing frameworks are either unmaintained or god-awful (I'm lookin' at you, web development community).

Or to put it mathematically, the optimal amount of exploration time in this explore/exploit problem is far less than you might think.

I can't put my finger on it, but this seems less like a helpful incremental improvement and more like sowing the seeds of our own destruction. Like it's obviously bad to only write code that you've seen other people write in circumstances you can recognize as similar, and it's bad to only write code nobody has ever written in history, and this just barely crosses the line.

Your argument here seems to be that even if the majority of programmers find Lisp and all its derivatives to be difficult to read, we're wrong.

Says the guy named "crazygringo".

...any comments about the actual content of my post, or are we just going to talk about my odd use of SoCal surfer idioms for a while?

Surprisingly, nobody jumped on "crazygringo" when he attacked my usage of a word with a negative connotation.

By the way, if anyone's inclined to fucking ASK why I used that word at any point in the next century, I use words like "dude", "chick", and "radical" because I enjoy the delightful throwback. Such idioms are definitely in my wheelhouse.

I'm mocking the situation:

- Promotion is largely driven by launches

- Erego, people launch unnecessary shit

- That's ridiculous

- ???

- The New Hangouts

I think the fact that I worked there for over 5 and a half years should afford my opinion a bit more weight, but as I despise the Argument By Authority fallacy, I'll concede that any other Xoogler should be able to chime in and contradict me here.

Thank you for the benefit of the doubt. Admittedly, if I cared about being taken seriously, I would've chosen my words more carefully. However, I just felt like dashing off a quick comment to let people know that the core tone of the article is at odds with reality.

Calling her a "chick" is like calling Larry Page a "boy toy" -- the word is used largely in sexual situations ("picking up chicks"), and is incredibly unprofessional and demeaning in a professional context like the workplace, or Hacker News.

Then why don't you just ask what I meant by "chick" rather than insisting I was being sexist?

And talking about the Internal Tools team as "that shit" is equally unprofessional and demeaning to everyone who works on it.

More demeaning than the comment itself, in which I actively demean the team by pointing out that everyone else in the company laughs at them?

If you're a PC douchebag who actively seeks out opportunities to be offended by things, then, sure. Otherwise, I wouldn't recommend it.

Or let's just not put words in my fucking mouth by declaring what connotation I had in mind by my use of the word "chick".

Maybe you should be more open-minded then.

It's hard to get promoted at Google unless you launch things, and the Internal Tools team never launched shit. So they just latch onto any excuse to launch whatever they can, even if it makes no fucking sense. You'll see this a lot with other Google products too, Gmail being one of the worst offenders (totally unnecessary UI changes that piss everyone off, changing Gtalk into Hangouts just to have a chance to launch a new app, etc).

The Gtalk one is particularly ridiculous if you buy into their disingenuous arguments about combining disparate forms of messaging, especially given the spectacular failure of Wave, which tried to do the exact same thing. But if you view it through the lens of "Gtalk hadn't launched anything in a while, and their engineers wanted to launch something" it makes perfect sense.

No, it's not. It's the truth.

The chick in charge of the Internal Tools team? That shit is widely regarded within Google as a dead-end ghetto, devoid of opportunities for promotion and looked down on by the other focus areas.

- 5+ year Ex-Googler

EDIT: I'm done with this fucking site. You won't have weareconvo to kick around anymore.

And if you do DOM manipulation inside an eval... god help you.

BTW, I did work at Google for over 5 years as an FT SWE, so if that helps the effort to discredit me, by all means.

Yeah, I mistook your username for another one. That's why I deleted it.

Now you're not only attacking my character, but you're attempting to label me for the sole purpose of dismissing my arguments.

This is so ad hominem it's almost cycling around the universe and landing back on "polite".

Ironically, the subtle implication of THIS comment - that my responses are less valuable because I am, in general, a negative person - IS drifting towards ad hominem.

"Ad hominem" is only an appropriate term to use if I was saying that he was making an argument, but that his argument was wrong because of some defect in his character. It isn't just used for any time anyone mentions the other person in a conversation.

In this case, no argument was made. He simply said "The things I care about seem to be opposite of the things you care about". That's not an argument, it's just a personal statement. Even if ad hominem WERE the correct term, it would be even LESS appropriate here, because he was the one who brought up his own tastes in the first place.

EDIT: And to respond to the rest of your post, numbers like those are meaningless. Unless they're presented in a comparative context, they're very much like showing someone a graph without its axes labeled.

So for comparative purposes, Windows Phone shipped on that many devices. Great. How many Android and iPhone devices were shipped in the same period?

Yeah, maybe cooking meth is a science experiment too in a certain light.