weareconvo

6 ms·

1.
by weareconvo 6y ago
FYI: As of the time of this reply, https://dixonary.co.uk/cabal-2020 returns a 404.
2.
by weareconvo 6y ago
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
3.
by weareconvo 6y ago
Come to Homer's BBBQ. The extra B is for BYOBB.
4.
by weareconvo 6y ago
True, but there may also be a national interest in him not being in charge anymore.
5.
by weareconvo 6y ago
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&#x2
6.
by weareconvo 6y ago
Now apologize for spamming my inbox without an unsubscribe link.
7.
by weareconvo 6y ago
...also, the existing frameworks are either unmaintained or god-awful (I'm lookin' at you, web development community).
8.
by weareconvo 6y ago
Or to put it mathematically, the optimal amount of exploration time in this explore/exploit problem is far less than you might think.
9.
by weareconvo 6y ago
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
10.
by weareconvo 11y ago
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.
11.
by weareconvo 13y ago
Says the guy named "crazygringo".
12.
by weareconvo 13y ago
...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?
13.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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
14.
by weareconvo 13y ago
I'm mocking the situation: - Promotion is largely driven by launches - Erego, people launch unnecessary shit - That's ridiculous - ??? - The New Hangouts
15.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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 contrad
16.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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 a
17.
by weareconvo 13y ago
>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
18.
by weareconvo 13y ago
If you're a PC douchebag who actively seeks out opportunities to be offended by things, then, sure. Otherwise, I wouldn't recommend it.
19.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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".
20.
by weareconvo 13y ago
Maybe you should be more open-minded then.
21.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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 lo
22.
by weareconvo 13y ago
No, it's not. It's the truth.
23.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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 wit
24.
by weareconvo 13y ago
And if you do DOM manipulation inside an eval... god help you.
25.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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.
26.
by weareconvo 13y ago
Yeah, I mistook your username for another one. That's why I deleted it.
27.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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".
28.
by weareconvo 13y ago
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.
29.
by weareconvo 13y ago
"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 c
30.
by weareconvo 13y ago
Yeah, maybe cooking meth is a science experiment too in a certain light.

More ›