Growing up in the US then living for quite some time in Europe it was initially weird for me to not see AC everywhere, but I quickly realized it was much more comfortable for me. Something about being in a cold building and then going out into a swamp heater just makes it more miserable. Maybe its slow acclimation or some subjective thing.
Not really acclimation, but willingness to suffer through it. I hate it when my children want to play outside because I'm out there for less than five minutes and my shirt is soaked through with sweat, it's unbearably hot, and the insects are legion.
When I leave work in the late afternoon, it's so hot my car takes 10 minutes to cool down to where it's comfortable inside. By then my Right Guard has gone left and I'm having cold air blowing on wet skin. It really does suck.
And I mentioned same in my statement above. The entire lower half of the US would be largely unlivable without aircon. Even Alaska get 90+ in the summer, albeit for short bursts.
Yes - I worked on this as well. Very similar concept to some of the other solutions here. Self-hosted (keep mail internal, fast) - Invent any email address you like (†), trap it all here. View it via the app, or query via REST. Designed to be open, this is really useful when you don't want to have to setup mailboxes, or deal with the additional header of catch-all addressing. I'm currently adding attachment support for the next release.
† This comes with the caveat that you don't use PII, because people make configuration mistakes - but if that's how you do testing, then I'd argue you have bigger problems in your organization than capturing mail. We use it with somefakeguy@ourdomain.com, someotherguy_datetime_from_automatedtest@ourdomain.com, rather than just sending stuff to _real_ addresses.
This part is pretty scary... (sorry for the bad formatting)
... but god forbid you mix up the syntax - the following will simply silently fail with no warnings:
<template *ngIf="condition">...</template>
The reason is because the you see is a syntactic sugar that essentially wraps the element in a <template>. The problem is when used on <template> tag this gets translated into:*
"Silently fail with no warnings" is like the angular motto... At least in Angular 1 if something failed usually angular would just show an empty string on the screen.
Debugging is just a cold dark hell where very very few resources can help you find what went wrong, you basically just need to litter everything with console logs (Except the template html syntax, which you can't just write JS log statements in since... it's not javascript, its it's own language.
I've become much more productive and comfortable in all the JS vdom frameworks which have no template language, just javascript.
This, I think, is a common problem with library writing in general, and doubly so for Javascript. Ember tries, but it's still remarkably easy to get a cryptic error from it.
The ergonomics for using libraries needs to improve a great deal. I have my fingers crossed that this will be something most people have on their radar soon, but I'm not holding my breath.
"Silently fail with no warnings" is like the angular
motto... At least in Angular 1 if something failed
usually angular would just show an empty string on
the screen.
not true, while still developing the angularjs 1 app in my company it actually prints either a useful error or a cryptic long stacktraces error.
But basically it still is a awful framework, still working on the replacement.
It might to some people. It doesn't for me though.
I personally want to see more corporate leadership taking responsibility and leadership for backing up their personal views and those of their employees. A good example is how Grubhub's CEO Matt Maloney sent a company-wide email about the culture of the company that I respect quite a lot. http://media.grubhub.com/media/press-releases/press-release-...
Now do I agree with exactly what /u/spez did? Personally, the vindictive part of me likes the idea of fucking around with the morons in that subreddit. But as the ceo of the company, no. If it was any employee that had done it, they would likely have been terminated or at least had a severe write-up, no matter how much the leadership agreed with it. But when its the ceo, I'm not sure what the outcome will/should be.
To be completely honest, we have to remember that reddit is a company and not the public airwaves. There is no requirement that it be a bastion of free speech for all users. If I were running reddit, I would have banned that subreddit months ago. Any users found to be making racist, homophobic, hateful, or any other kind of similar commentary would have been permabanned a long time ago. The internet is a big place and its already too full of negativity. There are no socially positive reasons to provide places for it to fester.
Maloney's email was terrible. I would never want to work for someone like that, and never will if I can avoid it. It was a kind and wonderful thing to send a company-wide email saying something to the tune of "If you ever feel marginalized in any way, come to me personally, immediately." He then promptly shat all over the goodwill by indirectly calling for Trump voters to quit. Screw that. I would have loved to have seen a brazen employee call him on that.
That's fair and I respect your point of view. But I have a different perspective. I'll grant that emotions are still heightened from the election, but if anything it has brought some long-term underlying issues to the surface. I'm no longer comfortable working for/with people that take positions that disenfranchise and discriminate against other people.
I actually think we agree more than it may seem, even if not entirely. I too am no longer comfortable working for or with those people. I just think it's egregiously bad form for a CEO to send a mass email calling for X group to quit if Y. Whether that's that you voted for a political candidate, or whatever. It's a pitchfork-y mentality that I think only serves to embolden whoever the perceived opposition is, even if it's in the medium or long term rather than the immediate. In this case, it's the racists/alt-right/etc. And to me, actions like Maloney's only strengthen communities like /r/The_Donald. Just my 2c.
Yeah I agree. Actually I'm not traveling for Thanksgiving. If you're in SF and want to get lunch tomorrow send me a message at charles@geuis.com. Be happy to chat for a bit.
> I personally want to see more corporate leadership taking responsibility and leadership for backing up their personal views and those of their employees. A good example is how Grubhub's CEO Matt Maloney sent a company-wide email about the culture of the company that I respect quite a lot.
I'm guessing that's likely because you agree with the political stances of Spez and Mr Maloney. Would you be equally supportive of a leader of a large company espousing the virtue of traditional gender roles or other socially conservative stances?
Well, to be completely honest, yes. It would be honest and help to get away from the common political non-stance that most companies take.
Two good examples of this are Chick-fil-a and Hobby Lobby. (I worked for Chick-fil-a briefly when I was a teenager. I appreciated never having to work on a Sunday.) Both of these companies establish policies based on the belief structures of their founders. I readily admit to being an liberal atheist and am proud to stand behind that. While I may not agree personally with those policies, the companies are very forthcoming about them and as a customer, it helps me to make decisions about whether I am comfortable or not doing business with them.
To be even more specific, I want leadership of companies to be more open and honest with these things specifically because we have a lot of hard-won laws in the US to prevent discrimination. I want conservative leadership to be called out and potentially punished when they violate the law, rather than being allowed to execute their discriminatory beliefs in private and hide them under made-up reasons.
Now just to round that last statement out, I do not stand for other progressives and liberals to discriminate against people just because they hold personal conservative viewpoints. As long as everyone is obeying the law and not letting their beliefs affect the lives of others, I seriously couldn't care less what they think. Do I personally believe that conservatives are lacking in basic levels of education and compassion for other people? Yes, yes I do. Do I believe that those people should somehow be discriminated against just because they are happy to discriminate against other people? No, I don't.
So I guess to summarize the answer to your question: Yes I have similar political stances as those two, but I want more openness among all corporate leadership because it makes it much easier and clearer to decide which companies to do business with.
Based on what you've written here, I think you might find Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind" interesting. He's been involved in a lot of recent research into human psychology, morals, and understanding how people can arrive at different political stances.
What credibility? Even on 4chan, which has next to zero credibility AND no voting/reputation system intended for 'self-policing' (so it is not likely to ever become credible), some users express their dissatisfaction with low quality or spammy posts by suggesting the perpetrator go to, or return to, Reddit. This is also a common occurrence here — should a HN user make a useless post, particularly when invoking a meme or trolling, that user is often reminded that HN is not Reddit. This is not a proof of Reddit's lack of credibility, just an interesting/amusing anecdote.
Reddit is not an oft-cited source of news. By and large, it is a marketplace for link sharing coupled with a comment system and a currency of reputation. In other words, a forum focused on reacting to content elsewhere around the web but with some original content here and there. Where there is credible content, it is often from somewhere else like a news vendor. Everything else, including all comments on any thread, must be subjected to scrutiny and distrust as with any other forum. For starters, any comment can be a deliberately hyperbolic or entirely false/nonsensical assertion — rhetoric or sophistry — and thus no comment should be trusted on the grounds that it being correct may be coincidental if the intention was not to be correct, but rather to incite a reaction from others (trolling).
Then there is of course the possibility (indeed inevitability) that posts will be edited silently by those with sufficient permissions in the forum system, or access to the database if the system does not have silent edits built in. I say 'inevitable' because, given enough time, those with access to administrative power or the database itself will find a reason to silently edit something, by someone, somewhere.
No forum should be treated as credible. Even if your study is about how forum users behave, you cannot trust those you study to be behaving normally as their intentions are always questionable. We don't have Asimov's psycho-history yet.
I do not think forums have ever been credible sources of information, and I have participated in discussions on forums for fifteen years now. HN has more credibility than others, but that has been earned by clever people who visit this community for the sake of discussing intellectual topics — not the founding ideal of Reddit.
If the US has had congress hearings on the basis of Reddit posts, as was stated in a comment above, that is testament only to the ignorance of the US congress.
Edit: if you mean viability when you say credibility, i.e. in terms of generating revenue/getting investment, that depends on the rationality of its current/future investors. Assuming rational behaviour, this probably won't make any difference. The users will still come and if anything Reddit users should feel better precisely because the CEO fessed up to silent edits. It means that the issue can be addressed, perhaps with PGP signatures as suggested by others here; the ability to make silent edits by administrators could be removed; and the code powering Reddit could be open-sourced to prove that (apologies if it already is open-source, I am ignorant of the state of Reddit's back-end).
I would disagree with your claim of Reddit users not creating original content; the moment you step out of the default subs, you have great niche communities where you can find absolute gems on a regular basis.
The key is to look in the comments, not in the main post itself.
Fair to say. I did not mean to imply that no original content was produced on Reddit, only that its primary mission or purpose is to share and discuss — not to authoritatively, reliably and accountably document — ergo, the site had little credibility to lose.
We have a similar issue in the quality management space.
Multiple quality folks on a shop floor accessing a QMS from the same machine. If an IT admin forgets to disable password saving, compliance rules could be broken if one quality member has the ability to electronically sign a document using someone else's saved password.
