> In 2016, the IEEE Computer Society kicked off the SWEBOK Evolution effort to develop future iterations of the body of knowledge. The SWEBOK Evolution project resulted in the publication of SWEBOK Guide version 4 in October 2024.
So the thing called "SWEBOK Guide" is actually the reference text for SWEBOK.
The idea that someone's response to being fired should be the same as a manager's response to one of their reports quitting is hilariously out of touch.
It kind of ignores the core asymmetry of capitalism, that those with the capital are the ones with the power. Nobody can do a background check on a company to see who they laid off or fired before they work there.
You can do a background check. That’s not where the asymmetry is, though. The pandemic checks have showed that the asymmetry can be flipped but then almost everyone working low-tier (flipping burgers) will quit his work. The Fed has then decided to re-enslave these people. Someone gotta take the garbage.
>The Fed has then decided to re-enslave these people. Someone gotta take the garbage.
What are you talking about? real (ie. inflation adjusted) wages have gone up more for the lowest quartile of americans[1]. Is paying people more to get them to work "re-enslavement" now?
> “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” - Anatole France
Too many focus on equal outcome instead of equal opportuniy.
That quote is one that calls attention to the limits of things that seem like they would lead to "equal opportunity." Maybe it's illegal for a rich person to sleep under a bridge, but then again, why would they want or need to?
A rule applying across the board to everyone doesn't really imply that it provides equal opportunity.
What do you mean? Information about previous layoffs is all over the news, social media, and dedicated sites like Glassdoor. Only a fool or someone really desperate would take a job without doing a thorough background check on the company first. And while I sympathize with workers who have to take whatever job they can get, that doesn't apply to most HN users.
Glassdoor itself encourages users not to post anything factual, only opinion-based, because of the legal consequences [1]. Glassdoor is more like a Google business review than a background check anyway.
Also your estimation of HN users is probably out of date with the current state of the employment market.
I worked at startups for 7 years. Interestingly, WARN acts are mostly irrelevant for startups because they are only triggered when a certain number of people are about to be laid off (100 or more, I believe). When an employer accesses your employment record, they can see very detailed information. A WARN act filing is neither comprehensive nor detailed.
Well yes. If you're at a startup you should assume you're always a few months from being laid off. Everyone should assume that. You're fighing to survive; the default is dead.
Dropbox, on the other hand, is not a start-up. It's had to file WARN notices [1]. "Nobody can do a background check on a company to see who they laid off or fired before they work there" is false.
Once again, an employment check is not like a WARN act filing. I want to know for a given startup exactly who was fired and why, when, etc.
It’s one thing to be laid off from a startup in general. Another entirely to be laid off right now.
The number of recent layoffs is everyone’s concern right now because of how hard it will be for you to find a job afterward. Layoffs always were going on, and always will for startups, but the days of turning down job offers due to small uncertainties are mostly paused or gone at this point. The demand crunch is very real.
> at least contain exactly who you worked for and the time period as well as possibly your title. None of that is provided in the WARN act
We're talking about the information asymmetry in hiring and firing. Why does knowing the titles and time periods of those laid off in the past help you estimate your lay-off odds in the future?
I thought the one and only thing HR would confirm when background check is employment dates. it's shakey on if they will delineate between termination, layoffs/RiF, or simply leaving, though.
>Why does knowing the titles and time periods of those laid off in the past help you estimate your lay-off odds in the future?
I don't know. Why does knowing my titles and time period help businesses judge how useful I'll be for this new position? It's the same issue but that's where the asymmetry is. People seem fine with big business being able to do that but not prospective employees who may care about retention rates.
But to answer your question: retentions rates let me know how hard the company will try to keep me during bad/down times. Someone who can't even retain for 2 years probably has smoke.
Good advice! A rule of thumb I use is that the sentence should make sense if it was read outside of a browser, which results in roughly the same thing.
but if the sentence makes sense outside of the browser where there is no place to click, why should the sentence read the same inside the browser where there is a place to click?
your (collective) POV doesn't need to be explained to me, I get it, it's a fun little intellectual puzzle to write a sentence which works both ways and magically the user intuits that clicking is the thing to do, but none of that says the other way is wrong. People choose to do it the other way because it makes sense to them. Who are you to say "no, it doesn't make sense to you"
> I do wish tree-sitter had a mechanism to directly manipulate the AST. I was unable to simply rename/delete nodes and then write the AST back to disk. Instead I had to use Jedi or manually edit the source (and then deal with nasty off-set re-parsing logic).
> LibCST parses Python 3.0 -> 3.12 source code as a CST tree that keeps all formatting details (comments, whitespaces, parentheses, etc). It’s useful for building automated refactoring (codemod) applications and linters.
> Finding Occurrences: The find occurrences command (C-c f by default) can be used to find the occurrences of a python name. If unsure option is yes, it will also show unsure occurrences; unsure occurrences are indicated with a ? mark in the end. Note that ropevim uses the quickfix feature of vim for marking occurrence locations. [...]
> Rename: When Rename is triggered, rename the symbol under the cursor. If the symbol under the cursor points to a module/package, it will move that module/package files
> Rename symbol: Renaming is a common operation related to refactoring source code, and VS Code has a separate Rename Symbol command (F2). Some languages support renaming a symbol across files. Press F2, type the new desired name, and press Enter. All instances of the symbol across all files will be renamed
Yeah, there `sed` and `git diff` with one or more filenames in a variable might do.
Because pytest requires a preprocessing step, renaming fixtures is tough, and also for jupyter notebooks %%ipytest is necessary to call functions that start with test_ and upgrade assert keywords to expressions; e.g
`assert a == b, error_expr` is preprocessed into `assertEqual(a,b, error_expr)` with an AssertionError message even for comparisons of large lists and strings.
You haven't experienced a whole lifetime. Every moment up until the current [whatever the smallest unit of time really physically possible is] is just a memory of an experience. Subjectively from your perspective there's absolutely no difference between having actually experienced all that and merely having memories of having experienced all of it. You could materialize into existence for exactly one moment and believe you've lived an entire lifetime, but in reality you're just a brain floating in space experiencing one brief moment of a lie told by the chance arrangement of the molecules that make up your being.
Now that's an existential crisis right there. There's no way to determine if I've literally flashed into existence and am remembering this sentence, and am thinking of how to continue it, versus actually existing on the timescale of a human life.
There's another way to look at it: you can think of yourself as having just come into existence this instant, having inherited all memories and evidence of any previous existence.
Now you are blessed with the incredible gift of spontaneously coming into existence, plus a vast treasure trove of inherited experience (both good and bad) that you can explore and try to understand, and of inherited skills and knowledge that you can put to use however you choose.
I came to the same realization at about 12 years old. The mechanics were different than the Boltzmann brain. I saw it as that there are only two things that define the current universe: matter and energy. How could I know the universe wasn’t _just_ created? Every atom of my house, every atom of my body, created or placed in just the spot it is now, with just the energy it has now. My memories from five minutes ago are exactly what a brain that looks like mine would “remember” from five minutes ago.
Looking back, this realization became a feeling and this feeling became the backdrop for much of my growth as a person. Sometimes I was filled with fear. Sometimes I would shed all responsibility because it didn’t feel real.
At the best times, it fills me with a profound sense of agency, balanced with responsibility. It’s like teleporting into someone else’s body. Some things you choose to play along with, taking care of “his” mother. Other things you abandon, changing direction in your life as you need, despite what anyone might say.
It's more likely a Boltzmann brain would be a microscopic quantum computer, dreaming up planets and people and you to get over the boredom of being alive for a picosecond.
Permutive is hiring Scala Software Engineers (100% remote, full-time, optional London office)
Permutive is powering the future of targeted advertising on the Open Web today. As the only Audience Platform built on edge computing, we enable premium advertisers and publishers to plan, build and activate cohorts — all while keeping everyone’s data safe.
We’re a remote-first B2B SaaS company with 180+ people—centered around our London and New York hubs—and growing rapidly. We have received funding from some of the world’s best investors, including a recent $75m Series C led by SoftBank Vision Fund 2.
We’re hiring for Scala engineers in a number of teams. To find out and apply for each one, visit the links below:
