And there we go again. 'optional activity'. And people wonder why there are few women in tech and the situation is not improving. The post above is your answer.
Have a family, it's the end of your career, because you engaged in productivity limiting 'optional activities'. Yes, the tech sector IS that toxic.
I was not uncivil. This kind of belittling of family has to stop. Software development has a major problem hiring women, older people, and minorities. People in the sector belittling things like children and families by using terms like 'lifestyle choices' ARE part of the problem, and the industry has a very serious one. These people need to be called out for the poisonous garbage that they're spouting, and that calling out rarely happens.
The gender gap is not going to get better while these attitudes are accepted. Women avoid tech to a large degree because it is rational to do so. The entire sector is so immersed in brogrammer culture that half the participants aren't even aware of it.
Ageism is so rife in the tech sector in the US that people don't even notice it because it's omnipresent. I would go so far as to say that in the Bay Area, actively discriminating against anyone with the appearance of being over 40 is the default behavior for tech companies.
For example, if you look over 40 and not a tech lead/manager and haven't been one, you won't be hired, as you will be seen as having a lack of career trajectory. The entire 'career trajectory' premise is inherently ageist.
There are vast amounts of land, even within American cities, that is very cheap. The amount of usable land for urban purposes might as well be infinite.
Land is only expensive in a few select locations that have specific infrastructure and industries. It is the infrastructure and industries that provide the value; even the most picturesque accessible fertile land is quite cheap if it's not in a city.
Nope, definitely systemic within the company. The engine is a system that must meet certain requirements. The standard way of meeting those requirements is to have a urea injection system. That's what the competitors in the US do; it's also what Subaru, for example, don't do, and they don't sell into the US market.
In order to pull off this little 2-person hack that Horn alleges, those couple of software engineers would have to have a major say over the entire engine design. I call bullshit. This little hack ONLY makes sense in the absence of other major engine components.
The company culture is clearly absolutely rotten and their execs are liars. Employee morale, especially in engineering, must be through the floor.
Overly loose credit, the decisions of companies to centralize, and NIMBYism is driving up the cost of pretty much everything. People just move to where the work is.
I have coworkers from Oregon in the Bay Area. Some would say that by moving here they're 'driving up the price of everything'. At this juncture if they move back, they'll then be 'driving up the price of everything' at home. It's meaningless.
Yup. You being born in a state that is not California and moving to Portland makes you very superior to those living in Portland but born in California. You should put on your very superior hat and feel good about your total authenticity and unquestionable non-yuppiedom.
Rah Rah Rah! If your startup is not winning, just pivot, and be positive enough, and you will inevitably win. Selection bias doesn't exist and was made up by negative Nancys.
Seriously though, stick a fork in HN. It's over. Enjoy the echo chamber that this place will inevitably become.
There have been very large wars fought over this. Be careful what you wish for.
The right to be a bigot, and to have one's bigotry projected by a company one creates, a company whose rights are enforced by the state, is not worth defending.
You keep saying this over and over... that they are not 'new', or that they are 'mundane'. I don't see a whole lot of explanation from you as to how they are wrong.
Edit: as for your 'appeal to authority' idea, it's an opinion piece, and clearly marked as such by WaPo. By your standard, every opinion piece ever written by anyone powerful or popular is an appeal to authority.
Why does the argument have to be 'new' or 'deep'. Many of the best arguments are extremely old (perhaps timeless would be a better way of saying it), and are also very simple in their logic.
On this one, I think both shard972 and gotothrowaway are both equally correct.
Business isn't a monolithic entity, nor is the 'business community'. I'm not sure arguing down this line makes much sense, as it's very very easy to construct straw-men.
Remember that Tim Cook and Donald Trump are both in the business community. I wonder how much they have in common...
Looks like the HN mods are also part of the problem. Please hellban me, and enjoy your echo chamber.