(confirmed still up at the time of writing this post.)

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47626445

Points: 23

# Comments: 23

https://archive.org/details/burningofwashing00pitc

I know it sounds like an oversimplification, but "got off on a technicality" is a common thing among the well-connected and well-heeled. Sure, us nerds probably focus too much on the "technicality" part, since we are by definition technical, but the rest is wishy-washy, unfair BS as far as many of our brains work much of the time.

So instead of punishing everyone for some lying asshole's poor judgment, I propose management puts that lazy jerk on their own SDIP (sick day improvement plan).

EDIT: As an alternative, sure, update the handbook's sick policy while that liar is working for you. Since there's now precedent for handbook updating, should be an easy thing to revert it back to the normal, "no sick day policy" after they leave (by whatever means).

https://code.kryo.se/pingfs/

Discussed in 2015:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9844725

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39884821 195 points | 2 years ago | 66 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23902124 196 points | 5 years ago | 100 comments

I gave up after extended tries with three different lenses (I think it was six to nine months total), with my highly experienced doctor consulting with different manufacturers and researchers from around the country. Turns out my pupils naturally open up too wide, made worse by corneas that apparently are not thick enough to retain the reshaping all day. These issues, incidentally, make me ineligible for the popular cut-n-burn style of eye surgery.

On the bright side, it was indeed completely reversible and I've suffered no effects of any kind after about two days of non-use. That was a bit over a decade ago.

https://www.generationamiga.com/2020/08/30/how-24-commodore-...

Reminds me of the much-vaunted, then widely maligned and derided, burn rate metric of the dot-com bubble.

To my great consternation, I have not found this to be true in the cloud version:

https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRACLOUD-72631

Special thanks to Matt Lachman for keeping up the good fight every (business) day.

I highly doubt weeds, extensive though they might be, would wipe clean the evidence they've found in the landscape.

> I find it very hard to believe that we can find evidence of intensive cultivation after 3,600 years in such a wet area.

Perhaps I'm missing something. I'm no expert, and have merely skimmed through, but the earliest date I could find in the PDF linked from the fine article was 400 BCE [0], so around 2400 years. That's still a lot, but definitely not 3600 years.

[0] "While there is evidence of maize in the Upper Peninsula as early as 400 BCE (7), intensive cultivation, like we clearly see at Sixty Islands is typically not undertaken until roughly 1000 CE."

https://www.science.org/doi/suppl/10.1126/science.ads1643/su...

Oh gosh, no! Count me among those who greatly dislike pie charts in almost every context.

"Almost never use a pie chart for data"

https://theconversation.com/heres-why-you-should-almost-neve...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38912534