> It's been kept around because they treat their customers ok, but they absolutely exsanguinate their developers.
This is true, but "treat their customers ok" goes a long way. When everybody else severely abuses their customers, the one company that doesn't generates a lot of goodwill.
People routinely overestimate how much can get done in 5 minutes. I ran a live coding challenge at our company's booth at a language conference. 5 simple problems, how many can you do in 5 minutes? We had a PC with IDE open and ready to go, function signatures pre-written with empty bodies, unit tests running to color an icon red/green next to your function. The first problem was return "hello world". They were things covered by the standard library like reverse a list, or filter, or map. Everybody thought it would be too easy.
Nobody could get more than 3 of them. Most people were shocked that 5 minutes was up already. My coworker who did interviews for our company was shaken that he had been judging applicants too harshly after he couldn't finish.
They were trivial problems. But 5 minutes is a very short amount of time.
The parent was talking about different passwords, not different emails. But I'm curious, what does it mean for a company to consolidate accounts? How would that be done to your separate accounts automatically, and what trouble does it cause? And what is the normal case where people have multiple accounts all with the same email?
I just don't understand the circumstance you're describing.
I think this comment is referencing the government's recent announcement[0] to shut down the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder. They do climate research at the Mesa Laboratory there.
It's open to the public for visits. They have a small science museum, offices, a library, etc. I highly recommend anyone with interest and opportunity to visit the mesa lab soon. It may not be open much longer. The view alone is worth the trip, and the building is cool too.
In the US, letting your children walk to school is taking a non-negligible risk that you'll be charged with a crime or have your children taken away. Their deaths from a motor vehicle are assumed by all to be a certain eventuality, and parents are more likely to be blamed for it than drivers.
That's not how people use it, such as the person I replied to. There was no consent, explicit or otherwise. They use it to mean "I want things to be this way, so people should be obligated to a rule I made up because 'society'".
Imagine you have a strong deference to authority and an incredible fear of confrontation. It would be very easy for someone in a position of authority to take advantage of you.
People don't always do what's in their best interest. People talk to the police without a lawyer all the time. People sign away their rights just because they don't want to push back on things. It takes guts to stand up for yourself.