My reading is that this was included in point #7, i.e. access to the customer service is conditional on identity verification.

On the contrary, sticking strictly to the lane markers when everyone else is blindly straddling lanes seems the worst of all worlds.

Right, but I’m arguing that the correct behaviour for everyone is to pull over and wait for conditions to improve — robots and humans alike.

If you want to talk about bad faith arguments, calling the AI a "hellsystem" is showing your bias just a bit.

Hackers deliberately create strange circumstances, it's the primary way to find exploits. Any code that relies on a lack of strange circumstances is a time-bomb.

There aren't too many strange circumstances for a properly written split/test routine. Described more precisely:—

  1. Split on @
  2. Get last string from array
  3. Convert to lowercase
  4. Perform exact string compare against target domain

It's possible that there's some window for obscure unicode hijinks, but I'd posit that a regexp parser or a "proper" email parsing library is just as at-risk. Possibly more so as those would be significantly more complicated and involve significantly more code.

0.1-1% hire rate based on applicants, or based on candidates interviewed? 0.1% hire rate of candidates interviewed doesn't seem compatible with your described growth rate, even if you very conservatively assumes you spend 1 hour interviewing each candidate, thats 25 weeks of straight interviewing per candidate hired. And thats 1 hour of time across the whole company, if you have 2 interviewers spend an hour each, thats now 50 employee-weeks, or an entire year. To double the company size in 5 years, you would have needed to spend 1/5th of your entire tenure interviewing. If you go up to 10 total hours spent per candidate (including all interviewers, recruiters, and time spend in discussion and negotiation) it becomes straight up impossible.

Surely it's not based on interviews. You'll lose the will to live if one in a thousand interviewees gets the job.

Based on applicants it's ok, went all seen how any job ad attracts piles and piles of spam applications.

Oh, for sure, that would be nuts. 0.1–1% of applicants.

So to be clear for a given position you get 100 to 1000 resumes, then interview how many of those before deciding on 1 person? I am curious what the funnel looks like.

It depends entirely on the size and quality of the candidate pool, but I'd say very roughly:

* Initial candidate screening reduces the pool by 85–95% (leaving 5–15% of the initial pool) * Interview #1 reduces the pool further by 50–66% (leaving ~3–4% of the initial pool) * Interview #2 reduces the pool further by another 66–75% (leaving ~1–2% of the initial pool) * Final chat usually doesn't reduce the pool, but it's one last pass for additional signal * We choose a single candidate of whoever remains

For a position with 400 applicants, it could look like

* Initial screening leaves 40 candidates for interview #1 * Interview #1 leaves 15 candidates for interview #2 * Interview #2 leaves 4 candidates for final chat * We pick from those final 4

Most people don't start shopping at grey/black markets in order to avoid paying sales tax. Most people don't pay their employees under the table to avoid paying income tax. Most people don't move or de-value their own homes in order to avoid paying income tax. Those taxes make up most tax revenue, and wouldn't get caught in that definition.

So it's only those with the means to avoid the taxes are those who suffer under terrible taxes?

Not OP, but a fan of Warp.

> I - and I get the impression that's true for many developers - learned early to minimize the custom config.

I get the exact opposite impression. My understanding is that as developers become more experienced, they tune their setup more, and have more and more persisted customizations. I consider sshrc[1] a critical part of my workflow for this reason.

> But why would one need that? Is your environment that random?

Most shells by default will occasionally spew out "garbage" text into the terminal like ^[[A. If you know why this happens it's possible to fix, but it's definitely a pain. Personally I consider it very important that all the places that I input text work consistently (e.g. move cursor by word, move cursor to end of line) and Warp providing that is a huge selling point to me.

[1] https://github.com/danrabinowitz/sshrc

Yes. Mozilla is a non-profit, pretty much everything they do is out of charity.

Sort of true. To know what a non-profit's motivations are, look at the biggest donors and donations. Some of the Mozilla Foundation's money comes from the Mozilla Corporation, which does get a lot of money from the big tech companies.

It's also entirely plausible that every apartment DOES have high VOC levels, but she is the only one reacting to them. Or that other people are also reacting to them and haven't figured out why yet.

The map also explicitly lists "number of homes that would be illegal", presumably for that reason. If you make it illegal to build anything smaller than a duplex, on a lot that currently contains a single family home, the "number of illegal homes" on that lot is still zero.