xofer

I'd like to reach out and snatch that last apostrophe from your comment for similar reasons.

Chickens and other fowl, if allowed to free range for a couple of hours a day, will completely solve the problem.

No guarantees are given, for nothing

This is a double negative. Depending on how you interpret the comma, it could mean "guarantees are given for everything." (Pointing this out in case you intend to protect yourself from liability with this statement.)

There's also a misalignment on the sell side. Since the seller's agent gets paid a percentage of the sale price you'd think they're incentivized to sell at the highest price possible. But they don't make any money at all until the sale actually goes through. They'd much prefer to sell 2 houses at $125,000 than 1 house at $175,000 for roughly the same amount of time and work. Since cost is the only knob they control of the three affecting the time/effort it takes to sell a house (the others being condition and location), they are going to turn it as low as possible.

I'm in the US and for years wrote software for the medical industry. I was contracted by a European company to write an app, and of course filled it with disclaimers and extra clicks asking "Are you sure?" When I demoed it, they asked what all that crap was for. I said something like, "Umm, liability, duh." Their response: "Oh, we don't sue people for honest mistakes here."

Deleting a record causes requests for that record to be negatively cached. The negative cache TTL[1] is often set to 1 day. So, deleting and immediately recreating a record can take your site offline for days. (Source: I made this mistake when changing a Route53 record for a subdomain that was getting about 70Krps. Luckily it was our source code making the requests, so we could change it, but that took an hours or so to roll out.)

[1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2308

IANAL, but I think she absolutely has a legal case. It costs a lot of money to make a case "go nowhere" even with the slightest validity.

The small penis thing doesn't seem relevant here, and even if so, it's a strategy for making it more difficult to make what would be a valid claim.

This is exactly what happens when you optimize for engagement. Usually when I find myself on Reddit, I'm looking for something specific and want to get it as quickly as possible and move on. The increasing level of noise created by "engaged" users makes me more and more hesitant to click on a Reddit link when one comes up in search results.

I've used this technique with a label that said "Leave Blank", also hidden with CSS. Seemed to work great, but now I wonder.

I've found the opposite to be true. Several lawyers I've worked with have asked to see what I've started with, perhaps because they're used to people grabbing stuff off the internet. I really like this idea because the hard part in my mind is the negotiation with the other party, in part because it inevitably becomes more complex as you go. Having something to start with and iterate on is great. At the end, as long as it's a relatively simple matter, having a lawyer review it is probably going to be lots cheaper.

One thought I had for a future version -- why not let both parties access the document on the site and build it together? That's something I'd definitely pay for.

I also was very confused by the pipe, which renders exactly like an uppercase I for me. [EDIT: oh wait.. it is an I? either way...] Replacing with a hyphen or colon would be a quick fix. Additionally consider bolding the main text and/or greying the subtext.

On a positive note, I really like the way prior answers appear below the current question on the survey!

Appreciate the optimism. Just to clarify, I'm saying that he has the skill set, the background, the time and the means to pull this off. That combo is extremely rare, and even with all that, there's one thing without which he'd never been successful at all: a tremendous amount of luck. As I said, I'm sure there's some value in his book, but it's based on a get rich quick story. If you're going to read it, I'd pick up a book by someone who spent 10 years on a side project too.

I haven't read this book, but I have read a lot of posts and watched a presentation by the author, Pieter Levels. While he is a nice guy and certainly very interesting, it's my opinion that he suffers from Survivorship Bias[1]. Not saying don't buy the book; just take it with a grain of salt if you do.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

This works if you know you're lost, know that someone will be looking for you and aren't too hard to find. Most people who are lost don't meet these criteria. Because she was an experienced hiker, I'm guessing they thought she was immobile (injury, heart attack, etc.) and this would mean she'd be in a place she would have gone if she wasn't lost.

One article[1] at least suggests that she wasn't able to start a fire.

  She had also tried to make fires using the matches and 
  lighters she kept in her backpack. There was a stream 
  near her camp, but it's unclear whether she was able to 
  find any food.

A long time ago -- before cell phones -- I was a member of a wilderness search and rescue team. Based on the description of where this person was found, I can tell you it's one of the last places we would have gone. Finding lost people is a game of profiling and math -- certain types of people (e.g. injured, despondent, young, experienced hiker) are more likely to do certain things, but AFAIK going to high ground and setting up camp isn't on anyone's list. I don't know if that's changed as a result of cell phones.

The assumption here is that salary is set by forces beyond the employee's control, and it's either fair or unfair. I would argue that everyone's salary is fair, b/c it's set at what the employee negotiated for. If you accepted a salary offer as-is, then that's what you get. If you feel your salary is unfair, then contact your boss and negotiate for more. I won't get into all the tactics of negotiation, but it works the same for salary as for a used car. It will help to have as much leverage as you can get, for example an open job offer at the salary you want.

Sounds to me like they are primarily measuring the financial performance of doctors.

True. Docker with a "ton of tooling on top of it" is going to be a VM with versioning, which as discussed, has its own set of issues.

Right -- for the right candidate. I don't buy things without vetting them first; why would I expect someone else to? The suggestion that there is some exact figure out there that you are worth is false binary thinking. There are lots of factors that make you a better or worse candidate for any particular job. The better you are at the art of feeling out the situation and presenting yourself in the best light, the better you'll do, and the more you'll realize that starting with, "What are you offering?" isn't a good tactic.

There's a problem with asking how much they're willing to pay up front: It's a negotiation and in order to get an actual number, you have to sell yourself first. If you seriously want to know what they're willing to pay, you'll have to go through the whole hiring process.

The article is not an attack of Docker, but the way it's being used by many.

It's an old post, but I really like it because it highlights a problem with almost all online accounts: Confirming the existence of email addresses and usernames in the database.

I just had a conversation with a friend about this. He was leaving a country where haggling is the norm, and he wanted to buy some gifts in a hurry, on the way to the airport. So, he tried to say: "I don't have time to haggle; this is my offer; take it or leave it." The TL;DR: it didn't work. He paid more than he wanted and wasted more time. What we figured is that, as with salary, the negotiation is important so everyone feels like they won. Your worth to your employer is only half of the equation. The other half is what you require. Neither are simple, and the point of the negotiation is to find an amount that makes you both happy.

   Maybe it works great from day one,
   maybe it will need a few more iterations, 
   and possibly with 3.2 we'll improve support for many stuff, 
   but my guess is that Redis 3.0.0 today, in some way, changes what Redis is.

This is relevant. I wonder how many of the people in OP's company suffer from this, and to what degree it's the cause of their behavior. OP should stay put (being the smartest person sucks too) and stop worrying about being thought of as an idiot. As soon as he does that, he'll start asking questions and engaging and my guess is it'll seem less and less like he's an idiot.

Is the author confusing "fumbles" and "fumbles lost" or am I?

Funny, it reminds me of an idea I had to monitor hundreds of servers with a $35 Raspberry Pi...

There is but one relevant scientifically proven fact in the article (with no citation): "UCSF researchers have shown these viruses to be present on genital skin with no symptoms that might prompt diagnosis and treatment." Everything else relevant to the thesis is speculation and commentary.

The ACA, if left intact, would prevent companies from discriminating against you when they provide you with /health/ insurance. Life, disability, etc. not included.