[0]: https://github.com/orgs/pypy/discussions/5145

I disagree.

I'm making a board game of 6 colors of hexes, and I wanted to be able to easily edit the board. The first time around, I used a screenshot of a bunch of hexagons and used paint to color them (tedious, ugly, not transparent, poor quality). This time, I asked ChatGPT to make an SVG of the board and then make a JS script so that clicking on a hex could cycle through the colors. Easier, way higher quality, adjustable size, clean, transparent.

It would've taken me hours to learn and set that up for myself, but ChatGPT did it in 10min with some back and forth. I've made one SVG in my life before this, and never written any DOM-based JS scripts.

Yes, it's a toy example, but you don't have to knwo what you're doing to get useful things from AI.

Source: new year's resolution to pick up at least 1 piece of trash per dog walk.

Cons: UI is bad, so you'll want to access through a client. 1 person shop. Not audited AFAIK.

They were a tape drive and hard drive manufacturer. I guess they still have the tape drive section, but they sold their HDD division to ... Maxtor, which then got bought out by Seagate, I think?

Your opponent has 21 life and you win when your creatures have at least that much power. You can’t attack.

Setup: dealer goes second and starts with 6 cards, opponent starts with 5 cards. Hand limit of 7.

On your turn: Either play 1 card or draw 1 card

Point cards (ace - 10; ace is 1) are creatures with power equal to their point number. Face cards (and sideways 8) are enchantments. No lands or mana costs. "Playing" a card refers to casting that card or channeling that card.

Every point card has “channel - discard this card: Choose a creature with lesser value. Destroy it.” (suit matters, spades > hearts > diamonds > clubs, e.g., 8 of hearts is greater value than 8 of diamonds or any 7 but less than 8 of spades or any 9.) Note that this doesn't target.

Most point cards can be played as sorceries for an alternate effect:

Ace: wrath of God

2: disenchant OR muddle the mixture (this is the only instant and does not count toward your 1 card per turn limit. Everything else is sorcery speed)

3: regrowth

4: mind rot

5: divination

6: tranquility / back to nature

7: mind’s desire

8: sideways as enchantment - glasses of Urza

9: aura extraction*

10: none

Face cards are exclusively enchantments:

Jack: control magic**

Queen: Privileged position***

King: reduce your opponent’s life total based on the number of kings you control for as long as they remain on the battlefield: 0: 21; 1: 14; 2: 10; 3: 7; 4: 5.

Notes: The card types are pretty explicit - muddle the mixture can only counter sorceries or instants, not creatures, enchantments, or channeling. Wrath of god only kills creatures, tranquility only kills enchantments.

Rules can differ, depending on the source:

* sometimes as "reflector mage for enchantments", sometimes as "unsummon for enchantments". **sometimes as "exchange control of target creature". ***sometimes as "all permanents you control have hexproof", I.e., including itself.

The actual article could be misleading (it's not obvious if setting their RTO status to "natural disaster" status means they expend their sick days or not), but this is so clearly petty micromanagement that there's really no ambiguity.

s/about/above, s/see/seen

If you pay people more because they've been at your company longer (the way the follow-up post by Ethena describes[0]), you're explicitly choosing to pay them more than they can get elsewhere. You don't want to pay more than you have to for talent, so this is a hard sell to whomever manages the budget.

On the flip side, if you're attempting to pay people in proportion to their worth to you as a company, you're going to be paying less than the competition, because the competition front-loads this money. A new engineer takes a few months or more to ramp up, so if you're making an attempt to pay engineers based on their impact, you will be outcompeted by companies willing to give sign-on bonuses and extra comp to convince people to switch. That's built into the plan of the four-year cliff - you pay them a lot to start with and hope you get the savings on the other side when they don't spend the effort to switch jobs later.

Lastly, turnover isn't as much of a negative for the company as everyone seems to ascribe. Being forced to keep up with industry best practices and technologies to be able to recruit talent, to onboard new devs when someone leaves, and to retire unmaintainable legacy cruft when the creator leaves are not strictly negatives - they are risk reduction. That's not mentioning the benefit of fresh eyes and fresh ideas.

(Honestly, I think all of this discussion on both sides ascribes too much rational decision-making to what is essentially cargo-culted hiring processes. The biggest companies copy decisions from each other to the point that it's literally collusion[1], and everyone else follows suit because they are smaller and don't have the economies of scale to make researching alternatives positive expected value. People at the top setting policies don't have lines of communication to front-line managers to be able to determine whether their particular company needs extra focus on retaining developers for business continuity reasons, so to the extent that it's a conscious decision at all, it's based on industry-wide studies or company-wide turnover statistics.)

[0]: https://www.goethena.com/post/a-public-and-transparent-formu... [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/24/apple-goo...

That's like saying "a tech job". Most jobs that require those things pay poorly. Big defense contractors like Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, etc. pay worse than most tech companies. I have over a dozen friends in defense (I used to work for a defense contractor) and none earn comparably to big tech. It's not a matter of clearance, to be clear - most of those dozen have TS/SCI and had to go through a full polygraph.

Unless you meant working directly for the government, not a contractor. That would put you on the GS payscale, which does not have carveouts for SWEs, meaning it won't pay as well as any private developer role.

If they really built the best site for playing MTG, even over paid versions, then there's no real way to hide the fact that it's magic-specific.

Having extreme difficulty taking this as a serious suggestion.

> Or you may have faced a similar reckoning in an unfamiliar shower, or standing before a seemingly ordinary hob. The relentless development of new ways to turn things on has led us steadily away from the intuitive and toward the wilfully [sic] enigmatic.

The rest of the article seems to be complaining about post-iPhone technology, but showers have been weird since at least the 80s (probably earlier, but speaking only from personal experience here).

Things they mentioned as being different from Armenian life:

* You pay federal taxes and state taxes to a myriad of different agencies with different limits or starting points on all of them. Property taxes, vehicle registration taxes, sales taxes, etc.

* The US is more focused on being procedurally fair (you have rights that must be ennumerated to you upon being arrested, etc) but not on being just (he mentions child neglect for latchkey kids, mandatory sentencing, a woman accused of kidnapping for trying to take her child away from his abusive father with a custody agreement)

* Poor federal safety net

* Suburban housing and little mixed-use zoning leads to required cars, homogeneity of America, lack of walkable anything

* Individualism (not knowing all your neighbors; he mentions that in Armenia if you had a test for a tumor multiple friends would take off work to weep in the waiting room with you; the idea of being an automaton in your company rather than a human with emotions)

> The lawsuit outlined how DraftKings advertised a bonus for first-time users of “up to $1,000” through a range of social media, third party, TV and radio promotions. But in order to ever receive $1,000 in additional bets, customers had to make a $5,000 initial deposit, risk $25,000 in real money within 90 days and bet on events with odds steeper than 1-3, according to the lawsuit. The bonus would also be paid out only in non-withdrawable credit.

The case has not yet gone to trial.