Authoritarianism is the oldest form of effective government. Just as curious note, dictatorship was introduced during the Roman epoch and was used as temporary measure during war times. Look for example in Ukraine where the same ruler is avoiding elections since some time due to war, in the root sense of the government-style it is possible to describe it as a dictatorship today, if it hadn't been for the negative connotation of that term in the last 100 years.
The ruler is not "avoiding" elections due to war, he is prohibited by the constitution to hold them during wartime (not to mention the feasibility of letting the inhabitants of occupied regions to exercise their voting rights). So it is not a dictatorship in any sense.
Yes, was noticing the same. It was easy for them to sell the car and get a new one, so this meant a lot of connections and underground "jobs" for the extra revenue.
Anyways, fantastic story. First time reading despite living relatively close.
For offline-first the money isn't on the software, it is on the hardware and maintenance. So it isn't something that VC or other wild speculators would enjoy.
You'll make a living, maybe build a team and that is likely as far as it can go.
Nope. Uses only one frequency that quickly gets crowded and if you are in urban areas you'd be lucky to get more than 200 meters.
It is a toy. A cheap Quangsheng/Baofeng for 20 euros can reach a few kilometers in urban area, use multiple frequencies and go for 100 kilometers easily on LoS. They even reach Australia from Europe when using a wire antenna large enough.
Anyone giving you sincere advice will get downvoted and that will keep in ignorance, so I'll bite the bullet because it is more important you understand what can be happening.
There are a lot of cheap immigrants (mostly from India) that are super-motivated and more aggressive than you to find a job. This happens because of the open doors policy of previous years and now they are on a bad visa situation, likely got fired from other large companies and now need to send money back home or get settled. So competition is fierce, has more experience and cheaper than you.
Most women like yourself never went beyond the minimum curriculum at MIT. Never applied for mentorship from professors and specialization on relevant tech topics.
I'm also guessing you have never developed open source projects on your own and the CV has literally zero practical experience. You had a year, and yet remain without practical experience on open source projects. Guys have an advantage over you because they tend to write tools and tech even (and mostly) whenever they have free time. Maybe software just isn't the thing for you, especially when times are hard and engineers are more needed than managers.
Does this mean you'll never get out of there?
Nope. Join the weekly/monthly meetups in the bigger cities next to you. The key thing is networking when the CV/experience doesn't do the talking for you. As others mentioned here: either create a startup or join one that exists. You need to show initiative, energy and if possible, passion, for topics that you choose in tech.
As others also said: maybe tech isn't the thing for you. Try to ask yourself what is really in deep of your heart that you want to do. Just note that there are computers and tech everywhere, so even on the topics you love best might be a good chance that you find an area where your tech knowledge can be useful. What matters is that you do it motivated. Even if there is no salary involved, do it as a volunteer, offer to be there for two months so they see how it goes. Other here also volunteered to see your CV and provide honest advice, they will also help.
Depression on this situation needs to be kept at distance. You need to remember yourself through actions that you have value, that you know how to do things. Good luck, and all the best.
If it were shadowbanned we wouldn't be able to comment on it. People have flagged it, it triggered the flamewar detector, or both. That's why it got downranked.
If you think the topic of his death has been "shadowbanned" (for some non-standard definition of shadowbanned), check the front page. There's another discussion there about it.
> This topic is not on the front page for me, yet it was on the front page for you.
I'd suggest checking again. It's around #12 right now. I suspect you didn't actually look and just wanted to make something up to complain about. Which is a strange thing to do, but there are stranger things people do on this site.
Due to discrimination and bullying. There goes freedom of expression out of the door. Fortunately that crazy ship has long sailed and nowadays he'd have enough support to resist and publicly voice his opinions without personal attacks.
I think there is a very large difference between citizen activism (i.e. boycotts which can lead to resignations) and government authoritarianism. I have no problem with people exercising their right to free speech - including both Brandon Eich, and Firefox users.
No government official spoke up to have Brandon Eich fired, or bullied him or anything like that. His defenestration wasn't driven by government. Brandon Eich said some things, and the community around him judged those things and reacted to it. That's means that we're not talking about free speech any more. You have no right to speak and force other people to listen without social consequence, you do have a right to speak without the government retaliating. But other people are free to react to your speech as well, and to speak out in opposition to you.
A lawyer once described what you are calling Free Speech as merely "Protection of the First Speech." You believe that Brandon Eich should be able to speak (the first speech), but that the other people around him should not be able to say what they want in reaction to it (the second speech). Brandon Eich did say things without any government retaliation- and the people who worked at Mozilla didn't want to be associated with that, and so he chose to resign before the organization fell apart. Because those people around Mozilla have free speech rights as well, they are not forced to associate with Mozilla.
Similarly, a company choosing to fire an employee because of their speech is not really a free-speech issue. The company can fire you for pretty much any reason (at least in America- some countries have stronger worker protections), because they don't want to be associated with you any more. On the other hand, if a Government official suggests that you should be fired for something you said in your private life, then your free speech rights are being violated, even if the company does not fire you. It is only when the government gets involved that it becomes a Free Speech issue.
Obligatory XKCD to help you understand why you are wrong about what "Free Speech" means: https://xkcd.com/1357/
No need for "government official". There were plenty of non-government official branches such as media and social networks that were demonstrated to work as shadow tools for imposing heavy censorship around specific agendas. Up until the recent election so was the case for the large majority of mainstream social networks and legacy media.
The whole corona fabrication wasn't that long ago when governments directly mandated to silent dissident voices (even the scientific ones) and push a whole group of normal people into burning anyone who'd point out the obvious inconsistencies.
The First Amendment right exists in large part to enable and encourage non-governmental news reporting - to avoid a world in which government officials can dictate "reality" or "truth."
The Guardian is actually a British publication, which is a bit orthogonal from the original discussion of US free speech. It might be more accurate to say that this was part of an international political conversation. This is because Bradon Eich, the leader of an organization which provides products internationally, made public donations to political groups that seek to strip rights from others. He has a first amendment right to do so.
As OP states, the rest of the world has a right (in the US, legally; elsewhere, perhaps morally) to respond to Brandon Eich, and Mozilla. If they believe that his views may influence the organization negatively - either due to bad press or through his other behaviors within the organization - they are also granted free speech to call out this behavior.
What we are seeing now is actual government agencies and officials working hard to remove people from their jobs - both in the public and private sectors - in response to views that don't align with their own.
It's not clear to me what your argument is exactly.
My argument is that he contributed to a ballot initiative that passed (meaning the majority supported it), but he was still targeted and lost his job because media platforms targeted him.
To quote Andrew Sullivan
> "McCarthyism applied by civil actors".
When people with large platforms target you, you're just as screwed regardless of their status as elected officials. To be outraged by one and excuse the other is laughable.
Indeed what we do was never about the code, it is about the result and its usefulness.
There is an old German proverb that applies: "A fool with a tool is still a fool". For those who know how to use these tools, they'll see their own output grow by x25 when needed. Those who weren't good at structuring their thoughts before, they will certainly improve their output but likely won't do them much when compared to others.
Authoritarianism is the oldest form of effective government. Just as curious note, dictatorship was introduced during the Roman epoch and was used as temporary measure during war times. Look for example in Ukraine where the same ruler is avoiding elections since some time due to war, in the root sense of the government-style it is possible to describe it as a dictatorship today, if it hadn't been for the negative connotation of that term in the last 100 years.
reply