It sounds like a piss poor deal for seniors unless senior engineer now means professional code reviewer.

I definitely agree with what you're saying here where these words actually do mean something, but it's completely opaque to those outside the "know". I also have found that there's not any better way to express information to those in the group than in this coded language, even if it makes completely no sense to me.

I wish younger me understood that the way I'm being perceived is the only important thing, not choosing the "best" words to technically describe a situation

> "error": "Text to speech is not available. Please set Azure speech credentials in .env"

Not saying Arango can replace Postgres but for my needs, it's a much better fit AND it offers the FTS that I need out of the box.

The funniest thing to me was my parents just straight yelling at me about it as my only rule at that time was "don't get in trouble with the cops". I tried explaining it was just tag, the cops were over reacting. They didn't buy it. I told them "I was with Friend A and Friend B. I'm telling you the cops were being ass holes". They immediately changed their tone to "oh, if A and B were there, those cops were ass holes"

I think the "golden rule" has been often misinterpreted as " treat people how you want to be treated" which leads to this misunderstanding that you called out. If we change it to being empathetic towards them and treating them how they want to be treated, the NPCs seem to become fully fledged characters.

Ever since I heard this, I've been protective of what I talk about and it seems to have helped me ship more things than before.

When I play poker, I don't get the same fun value when it's for nothing but the clay chips or even if it's for $2 total win (_when playing for pennies_). The _fun_ for me is when it's a $20+ decision, the _fun_ for me is to play against other people where the decision they have to make has _weight_ to it. I think that there is _fun_ to be had when you're playing for stakes that cannot be had when you're playing for nothing. When I throw the dice, it's not _fun_ to see if it lands on a 7 or 11 or whatever the rules of craps are. The _fun_ for me is the betting, the winning or losing of the money. If I just wanted to see who could get a set of numbers from random dice rolls without money involved, I'd play Yahtzee.

I agree that _some people_ shouldn't gamble because it's not _fun_ but an _addiction_. Just like _some people_ probably shouldn't drink because it's not _fun_ but an _addiction_ or shouldn't smoke weed because it's not _fun_ but _addicting_. That doesn't mean that there is _no value_ being added to the people's lives that _find it fun_ and don't find it _addicting_.

We may disagree on if _fun_ is of any value to people vs the harm that that _fun_ might give them and I think we both agree we should make it _really clear_ the consequences of the _fun_ someone chooses to have. But I disagree that gambling adds _no value_ whatsoever or the idea that what I find is of no value means that everyone should agree it adds no value. Let the players have their fun, tax the shit out of it, and offer help to those that have an addiction to it, just like smoking or drinking or anything else that we as a society have deemed not illegal but not directly beneficial.