I *always* tell older people looking to switch into tech to start at agencies/contracting firms for this reason.
They are much more likely to hire people without experience, invest in your training (even if it's training by fire), and because they are usually heavy cert-driven, they'll pay for certs as well.
It doesn't pay well, and the work can be brutal (nights and weekends; on-call) but it's a great way to get the experience needed to get the job that does if you're starting from zero.
Not to say they cannot learn that, but worth being aware if you're building something long-term and does hiring for that sort of project, to be upfront that the development process will likely be very different compared to what they're used to.
Many years ago, some famous developer said, "Always write your code as if the person who's going to maintain it is a violent psychopath who knows where you live." As I fixed my poor design choices one by one over endless late nights, I sometimes felt the anger of a violent psychopath toward the former, ignorant me who had stupidly plagued current me with all these problems.
When you learn the hard way, you know exactly why good design decisions are considered good. In later jobs, one of my fundamental goals for every new project was "I never want me or anyone else to have to answer a 3 a.m. call about why this system isn't working."
sadly that's a non-starter for a lot of people in this economy. doubly so if you have kids.
90s early internet/BBS punk rocker/computer nerd. Hated school angry.
Dropped out to work as a bike messenger for 5 years before packing a bag and moving west randomly. Couldn't sit still. Rode freight trains around the country for a few months.
Washed dishes and landscaped to cover my cheap rent till that fell thru. Discovered shop lifting. Covered food and beer stealing from local progressive grocery store chain. Stole goods to sell on CL to cover my rent. That scam went tits up and narrowly escaped serious charges after the head of loss prevention from a regional retailer caught up to me
Was sleeping in the park--this was pre super meth/fentanyl crisis so street living was a bit more stable and low key. Didn't want to wash dishes or dig holes any more so looked around on CL. Found a small company trying to bootstrap a regional office for an established linux-related open source company. Worked for free / interned using a stolen laptop for a year or so while sleeping outside or couch surfing local punk houses.
Eventually got hired on for s but stayed for a couple years and made many FOSS connections. Eventually left to join a well known FOSS-centered company that was fully remote.
Told myself when I was young that I would never work in an office. ~15 years later and I never have ,but now work in bit tech, get paid too much, own a home and have a great family with kids who play at the same parks I used to crash at. We shop (and pay) at the same stores I used to crib from.
I'm respected and tenured at my gig but Imposter syndrome still holds me back. Nobody I work with knows where I came from and thankfully have nothing incriminating that would block a background check
34yo Patrice has a stable job, a fiancé and broadly speaking has his life in order.
Nobody in his circle knows he dropped out of high school, got in the wrong crowd and, inevitably, did time.
This archetype is a mix of several people I've met and I usually mention it when a younger person says this and that thing (e.g. dropping out of college) is the end of the world for them. In your 20s it commonly isn't and you can start from scratch - after a decade or so nobody will have any idea about this unless you tell them.
couple decades later lives in the burbs, wife, kids, regular coding job, etc.
Maybe folks should not just take passively morals from society or media but think for themselves? Society has been wrong uncountable amount of time, way more than it has been right.
Seriously, they seriously do. There's always someone as qualified as you applying for whatever job. Why would anyone choose someone with a record over someone without, all else being equal? It's a liability that can turn into a headache, so most employers will choose the person without the record.
*Providing the drug use was short lived.
you're ~35 and admit to smoking a buncha weed and maybe some other stuff in your college frat 10+ years ago? not much of a discussion topic, esp. if you've had a steady job, house, family, etc. since then. doesn't have to be short, you could have been called Mikey Pipes for all 4 years of school... just that it was a phase, and it's been long gone.
smoke weed and pop some lsd 1.5 year ago? that could be a problem, esp. if you're still living the same life essentially as then.
There are two aspects to the type of question that was asked. How do you prevent people from ha I g to make choices which are rational and good for their options but still really bad overall, and how do you convinve/educate people about available options they weren't aware of so they don't make outright bad choices when better ones are available that they are unaware of.
There are many possible answers to "why did you take off to the west and ride trains and sleep in parks and steak to feed yourself", but most of them aren't "well I just felt like leaving my entirely stable, loving and supportive friends and family." What to an outsider seems like a poor choice to a specific person imight seem like the decision that saved their life, even in retrospect.
Education is a very different story which ends with letting people make their own decisions after (hopefully) having more information about realistic outcomes.
I don't personally want a government preventing me from making my own choices. That line is blurry for sure, like if my decision directly negatively impacts someone else for example. But if packing up and riding the rails or sleeping in parks primarily impacts only me, the government shouldn't be able to stop me because they "know" its the wrong choice.
It didn’t need that level of sermon. Every reasonably educated person got your point after the first sentence.
When your choices include terrorizing businesses and being a public nuisance to everyone else, then yes, government should prevent people from making those choices.
Personally I'd rather gut the legal system and drastically raise the bar by which people are locked up as punishment, but that's beside the point.
You seem to agree that punishment and violence is the primary tool of American government, and then you want to use it to control more choices. Call me cynical, but I expect that's how it will be approached. Theft and vagrancy is already a crime. Maybe it was the punk music that led to those so let's criminalize that as well.
We don't have a honest discussion about the progression of addiction so the choices are not visible, until later.
The first beer is the most critical choice, yet it's made for us (in 99% of the cases) by our peers. So is it a choice really?
We're routine (addiction) prone herd animals and as long as we pretend otherwise (free will and the likes) we're stuck in repeating this.
Why isn’t the last beer the most critical one, for example?
In a healthy society there would be no need for intoxicants with so severe harms (BBC list for substances by harm is a good reference) and thus no exposure for a addictive substance.
Now the norm decides that, almost without exceptions, we must all be exposed.
This is true of coffee, sugar, alcohol, social gatherings, work, play, and everything else in life.
It's legal only because it's been grandfathered in, from before legal systems were created.
1. There have been plenty of other substances that have been banned which were legal and widely taken since before such laws existed. Demonstrating that governments are willing to control substances that were previously legal.
2. There have also been other drugs that have been legalized after they were previously banned. Proving that governments are willing to accept the risk of people taking drugs.
3. And your augment about alcohol specific actually did happen in some places. It is commonly referred to as "prohibition". And that decision never stuck.
The reality is drugs aren't legal nor illegal based on solely the harm they do. They are judged based on how easy they are to regulate (read: monetize and tax) and the subsections of society which enjoy them.
To expand on that last point: there's a reason cannabis was illegal in most countries while cigarettes weren't. And that reason wasn't because cannabis was considered more dangerous than tobacco. It's was because certain leaders wanted us to think that the people who smoked cannabis was more dangerous than the people that smoked cigarettes.
sticks pretty well in muslim areas.
They do it because the unhealthy effects are desirable.
Which is why moderation is the key. There's absolutely nothing wrong with someone enjoying a drink. But there is with people who need to drink. And that's just as true for sugar addition and caffeine addition too.
Now I'm not suggesting that the negative effects of all vices are equal, because clearly they're not. But suggesting that total abstinence is the answer completely misses the point of why people enjoy a drink to begin with. You're setting an unreal expectation that will never work with society. Just like telling people that they shouldn't ever eat cake or drink coffee would be an unrealistic demand on society.
We already have a mountain of evidence that prove the removal of said vice without solving the underlying problem only drives people will just switch to something else. Often that "something else" can be much much worse. So it's far better to give people outlets but ensure there is support to ensure they descend into dependence (and the vast majority of people do consume in moderation).
> What’s healthy isn’t complete abstinence, it’s moderation.
With alcohol this is well established to be false.
https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/04-01-2023-no-level-of-...
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h... (Headline: "Drinking alcohol is a health risk regardless of the amount.")
Actually no I wasn't. It was shrubby who mentioned "health" in the medical sense. I was replying to them using "health" in the social wellness sense. ie making the point that "health" is a nuanced term and shouldn't be used in an absolute way like they, and yourself now too, have done.
Health isn't just about physicality. There are social and emotional benefits. For example, enjoying a beer, or glass of wine, with my wife on a Friday evening when we rant about work is a great way to unwind for the weekend. It improves our mental health to have that shared experience. Our relationship is closer for spending time together. It has a net benefit despite it being an unhealthy treat.
You could replace the `wine` with `cake` in statement and have a similar point. But I don't personally enjoy cakes. Also take notice of how I'm not telling you that you shouldn't eat cakes because I don't personally like it ;)
> With alcohol this is well established to be false.
Again, you're missing the point. People enjoy stuff that isn't healthy, but sometimes that can still promote other benefits. Such as mental health. "Health" is a broader term than you give credit for.
Also the links you shared do not prove your point. There's no actual data in either of them. It's just pop-science articles with zero substance designed into scaremongering people. For example their arguments that it takes just one drink to become an addict is just laughable. The real statistics they don't print show a very different story where occasional to moderate drinking is not going to significantly increase your risk of cancer nor anything else. You're talking about fractions of a percent in the change of risk -- and that risk was already a low percentage to begin with. This is where understanding how statistics actually work makes a difference ;)
For example, some studies studies only show a correlation in 5% of cancer cases being related to alcohol consumption and that was proven against heavy drinkers. And the percentage of drinkers who have that cancer are < 1%. eg
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/a...
And a lot of these studies exaggerate what I'd classed as a "light drinker". Take that link I shared:
> Even light drinkers can be at increased risk of some cancers. For example, women who have just one drink per day have a higher risk of breast cancer than those who have less than one drink a week, and risk is increased even more in heavy drinkers and binge drinkers (3-7).
If you're drinking 1 drink per day then you have a dependency. That isn't occasional consumption. I would not class that as demonstrating moderation. If you need to drink every single day then you fall into the category I described in my previous comment when I said there is an underlying problem that needs addressing.
Most people do not drink every day.
---
So to summarize:
- light and occasional drinking is a rounding error of 0 in terms of physical health risk. But it can have much more significant positive effects on mental health.
- understanding the actual statistics and how they work matter if you're going to argue about the risks to health
- people don't become alcoholics from one glass of wine
- if you don't want to drink then I agree nobody should force you. But please don't share bullshit pop-science articles claiming we're all going to become cancer-riddled addicts from an occasional drink just because you don't understand why some people do enjoy the occasional glass of wine. That just demonstrates you don't understand the subject matter.
- and please don't ignore the parallels I made about coffee and cake. They demonstrate the hypocrisy of comments where people claim absence is the only smart choice.
(and no, those bullet points were not AI generated)
edit: sorry for all the crappy grammar. I'm multitasking...badly it seems haha
If we perform a cost benefit analysis on alcohol the downsides are plentiful and then some.
And the pluses are practically masked versions (taste, buzz,...) of the two major things that make human do anything: what others are doing and what I'm used to (which are pretty shit reasons to do anything IMO) it basically boils down to addiction. Not chemical, but functional and social.
Then we return to the cost benefit analysis and start figuring out how far the lying disease has progressed. The fierceness of the debate feels like a good indicator of this usually.
I'd be tempted to explain this more in depth, but I have stuff to do.
Let me put it another way: banning something that most people use sensibly and enjoy in moderation isn’t a society that anyone wants to live in nor should live in. I'm sure you'd be the first to complain if the government went after something you enjoyed that caused harm to a minority of other people.
Which is why I keep coming back to the cake analogy. The only reason people eat cake is because of the buzz and taste. Which are pretty shit reasons to do anything in your opinion. And people do get addicted to sugary snacks. Some people even eat for comfort. But a lot of other people do have self-control. Should we ban cake for everyone regardless? Of course not!
As I said in my earlier comment, the problem with substance abuse isn’t the alcohol. The alcohol is just a tool. If you banned alcohol today then people who want escapism will switch to something else. And we’ve seen this trend time and time again throughout history. And it's what any experienced doctor of medicine will also tell you.
So if you want to understand the problems of alcohol abuse better, you need to first understand what drove people to abuse alcohol. Banning alcohol isn’t a shortcut to solving that problem -- despite how much you might like it to be.
Also accusing all people who drink, even those who only do so occasionally, as being addicts (as you literally have done) is so far wrong that it’s just insulting.
Yeah but we don't live in a healthy society. We have more abundance and more advanced healthcare and drugs than ever before, but we are sick in terms of missing social connections and family unit, even in big cities. Hence why mental illnesses and substance abuse are going up.
People don't thrive on GDP line go up and cheap large screen TVs. People need friends, family, and a support network.
First the close ones see the problem and the individual in question is the last to see it. Thus a lying disease.
In retrospect? It's really not hard to determine before the fact that petty crime is not a road to good things.
We have ways to prevent people from going down this path. It's called enforcement. He was more or less allowed to steal and sleep in the parks. If there was strict enforcement, this wouldn't have been a medium term viable option. Doesn't have to be throw the person in prison for the rest of their life, but either accept help, go through the criminal justice system or figure out another way to contribute to society in a positive way. It sounds like the author at any point could have found some kind of employment, but chose this because it was viable. And society wasn't doing him any favors by looking the other way
While one might say strict enforcement would discourage particular behavior choices. I would not disagree and add that suppression of behaviors is not as effective as replacement of behaviors.
So for instance I'll happily tell my kids that marijuana is enjoyable and relatively harmless in and of itself, yet you end up smelling bad, it ruins motivation, hurts your short-term memory, gives you the munchies, and is just generally is self-escapism, like most drugs. Gotta work on my exact pitch there, but that's the spirit of the point - honesty. They will make plenty of bad decisions in life, but I'd rather that with each one they see I was right, rather than see that I was lying or exaggerating - driving them further away from everything else I taught them.
I am not a parent, but I have observed that the best style of parents adapt to the natural personality of each child. For example, I was very contientious from early childhood (I assume that part was genetic), and my brother was exactly the opposite. My parents really had to work with him to get him to take school seriously. Fortunately, he has a naturally high IQ, so it wasn't so hard for him.
grew up around the military, ended up enlisting out of HS.
buncha my friends, all army/navy brats from outside of DC, all went off to college. easily 1/3 drank themselves stupid or otherwise went nuts.
off the leash they decided they'd rather be in a band and work part-time at the grocery store than keep going down the path they were forced. Most of them have since graduated and several are doing pretty well. Had to do that freedom thing, tho.
better choice than the one I made, too
"Do whatever you want and things will work out because it worked out for me" is not a good (or honest) message for children.
[survivor-bias-airplane.jpg]
Why do you think they'd know it? Working out in the end for you was the less likely option. Everything is possible but if you manage to explain the likelihood of each outcome compared to the expected payoff it could make the case clearer. Not an easy thing when dealing with small kids. It's hard because even adults are blinded by survivorship bias. Kids are easy victims, they can all become Cristiano Ronaldo, they can all launch the unicorn startup after dropping out of school, etc.
> I have nothing to offer.
Kids need guidance whether you think they'll take it or not, especially at that age. It's up to you to strike the balance between guidance, trickery, heavy handed rules, something works. Your teachers probably didn't care enough and your parents couldn't find the right button because it's not an easy job but it doesn't mean you can't or worse, that you shouldn't even try because you "have nothing to offer".
You need to stop seeing me so hard rn
I dont know if you intended to reply to the OP/author or my reply. In my case, I dodged hard drugs for $reasons and can safely say that I chose my own adventure. I was had anxiety and apprehension about status quo and what was expected of a HS graduate circa 2000 so I said F it and did my own thing.
No, mostly just American 90s suburban boredom and at-home dysfunction.
At around 12/13 my old siblings drug addiction began tearing my house/family apart. The only escape available to me at the time in my town was a nascent, opioid-fueled high school party scene. Other kids might have followed their brothers footsteps but computers and music really interested me. I retreated to my bedroom and dialup modem for the next 5 or so years. I discovered the local BBS scene and (via that) the internet. Likewise, discovered a lively punk music scene in my region. Both connected me to other like minded ppl in my region and beyond. Very thankful for that.
My experience (and impression of others) is that sure, it's incredibly good by certain very basic metrics but that doesn't mean all participants find it desirable or even tolerable. I slogged through it for no reason other than that's just what was expected and I didn't see any realistic alternative but in retrospect I think I would have been better off dropping out and attending a community college (of course I could be wildly wrong about that).
This is exactly where I zagged. To this day, I still think avoiding college was the best decision I've made in life. Both from the POV of finances and personal growth. I learned so much about the world and life between the ages of ~18-26. I did not own a computer or have internet access during any of it, and neither did most the ppl I knew. Feel very lucky I spent those years YOLO'ing it and not in front of a screen.
That said I also felt that many of the people I encountered there most likely weren't gaining enough for it to be worth the cost in time, money, and effort. I know some people who went the trade route straight out of highschool and provided that jobs were available it seems to have been a very good choice for most of them.
> Feel very lucky I spent those years YOLO'ing it and not in front of a screen.
Even in a STEM program I only spent a small fraction of study time in front of a screen. That said, the degree was indeed a huge time commitment overall.
Nah, just throwaway here. A few tech/work friends know of it, most of my non-tech friends know of my background but most them have crazier stories. And those folks dont really understand what I do for work or how much money I'm making. I'm too much of a dirt bag for the tech world and too much of a yuppie for my old punk friends. Its double-sided imposter syndrome.
(Yeah, armchair doctor and all that. But doesn't make it wrong or at least worth a look.)
Fwiw, I didn't mention it because of your writing style at all, I wrote it because you literally said
> Couldn't sit still.
Also, for anyone curious, drug use and being in prison is much more common amongst adhd folk than the general population. A staggering 25% (approximately) of prison population is ADHD [1], far higher than the general population.
To get the whole discussion of “I have seen this behavior before. I know an addict when I see one”. It was embarrassing. And then to hear “you’re 16 and acting out your puberty”.
Adults are silly sometimes when they are convinced of something, and fucking persistent.
Let's say they are correct. What would the solution look like from there?
As an example, and this is only 1% of it, but I have had my utilities turned off several times for not paying bills, while having $400k in the bank.
It took me five years to actually get to a point of a) having a diagnosis and b) getting medication. Most of that was due to the perverse way this process works in the UK, where to get a diagnosis of executive dysfunction you have to do a ton of personal admin, after which you’ll be handed another todo list in order to be able to get drugs prescribed.
I’m now on a good dose of drugs and I honestly mourn for the decades of my life I could have been feeling how I do now had I known. They don’t make everything better, it’s still an effort to make myself focus on the things I should be focusing on, but once I am focusing on them I’m able to continue doing so, and I no longer find myself having done no work for the last week because I was putting off a ten minute task I didn’t want to do. Despite spending 12 hours a day with a steady stream of amphetamines being released into my blood stream my blood pressure has dropped significantly since starting the drugs because I’m no longer in a constant state of low grade panic at all the things I’m not doing.
Please, go get a diagnosis (or not, maybe they’re all wrong). Talk to whoever you’re referred to about options, decide whether drugs are something you want to try. Give yourself options at least because it is possible to stop playing life on hard mode.
And I'm saying this as someone who lost circa 120k in work I never invoiced because of ADHD
If you get your utilities shut off due to ADHD, and that is only 1% of it as you claim, your instinctual coping mechanisms obviously aren't enough to prevent a pretty bad impact on your day-to-day life. As you would seek help for acute medical problems from professionals, you should seek help for chronic mental problems from professionals.
> without the drug addiction
and
> beer stealing
doesn't compute.
No disrespect, but this is not at all comparable to the situation described in the article. A few nights sleeping on the streets is much (!) easier when not addicted to substances.
That every time he came down from his high and was lying in bed unable to sleep, the guilt was like an ocean devouring him. That tonight would be the last time he would ever touch anything.
That he wanted to stop, knew he should stop, but when you wake up sweating & shaking all logic leaves your mind and the only thing you can think of is where to get more.
That it's not your (or anyone else's) fault, you did nothing wrong, and quite probably everything right. Some of us are just born with demons on our shoulder that won't stop whispering in our ear.
He would tell you of all the the plans he had come up with over the years, to make up the lost time with you and the rest of his loved ones. Doing things that YOU want to do, just to make you happy, because he had been selfish enough and you were owed at least that much.
That when things were their darkest, and he felt his lowest, one of the few saving graces and safe havens in his mind were the times he spent with you, before he fell into this pit of darkness.
---
I am, genuinely, sorry to hear that. Not in a "my condolences way", but in a grief-ridden and deeply personal way.
I lost my father and several of my closest friends to fentanyl. I know your grief. I know the feeling of anger that also gives you guilt, that they should have robbed the people that loved them most of the opportunity to experience them, and robbed themselves of the bright future they were capable of having.
Nothing I, or anyone else says, can make it any better.
I shed tears while writing this. Nico mourns for you as much as you mourn for him.
Also, Preston Thorpe (who Gavin mentions as inspiration) has an interesting story as well: https://pthorpe92.dev/intro/my-story/
<3
Key insight: relying on AI for writing assistance helps neither the author nor the audience.
You're absolutely right! Would you like to delve into more issues like this one?
Not saying it is, just pointing out how messed up the world we live in now is.
But... was it?
Even LLMs have better sense of humor than HN readers.
I still crack jokes, anyway. Get the occasional downvote, but life’s too short…
Wish and reality aren't in alignment here but some places like HN or /r/AskHistorians are my refuges.
She's been trying to get anything, even an unpaid internship, doing sound design, going to local meetups, online conferences, and hasn't had much luck.
But I told her: it's just a matter of persistence and time. If you're agreeable to be around, passionate about something, and just show up everyday, eventually something is likely to happen.
Successful people in the music world (both on and off stage) HAVE to mingle with musicians (not other engineers) heavily to get noticed and recommended
I applied for about 50+ jobs as a graduate engineer in 1991. Back then you wrote letters. Hmmm: You printed letters - mail merge was a thing.
You signed each one by hand, with a quill pen and used a wax seal and cast a Spell of Engagement.
OK, you signed your covering letter with a pen (might be a Biro but I did use a Parker and Quink, myself) You also had to put your covering letter and curriculum vitae (CV == resume) in an envelope and pop a stamp on it (2nd class) and post it. None of that Linked In bollocks.
Your covering letter would be bespoke to the company approached. You did some research and mentioned something pertinent.
Nowadays I'm the employer.
I applied over and over using Monster dot com.
Would recommend joining a local film club, and get a few small projects done. Additionally, volunteer with local church events, or regular city music festivals.
Also, could join the local union intake for the production studios. It will be awful until one gets the base hours completed, but it is a feast or famine kind of work schedule some can tolerate. Fine work if you are still a kid.
Finding stuff online is usually a fools errand these days mostly due to "AI" data mining operations, or outright cons. Best of luck =3
It allowed me to "get my hands dirty," and experiment, as well as build a portfolio.
To this day, I have a large amount of public code. It's a habit that I've had, all my adult life.
The other part of this is why it's so frustrating for me to find the right person. Everybody's resume looks perfect for the role, and I have to waste 30-45 mins digging into their actual experience. You have done yourself a great disservice by wasting that time sitting in an interview you were not qualified for, and worse still I always feel there are other, more qualified people, who I have missed/passed over their resume since it wasn't AI tuned.
Sincerely, I don't know how t make this better.
One of the 3 jobs require hiring other developers. I don't find it difficult at all. I have my own intuition and technique I rely on. If you are wasting 30~45 minutes on a resume, you are probably chasing the wrong signals. It's not my fault.
> You have done yourself a great disservice by wasting that time sitting in an interview you were not qualified for, and worse still I always feel there are other, more qualified people, who I have missed/passed over their resume since it wasn't AI tuned.
How can I know if I meet the prospective employee's criteria or not before I do the interview? How am I to be held reliable for other people's failure to make themselves visible or your frankly your lack of skill at recruiment?
It's convenient to blame AI for any shortcomings these days but if you don't know what you are doing, you were always going to reach for something external something imagined to deflect your own areas that need improvement.
Or maybe there really are people who think its okay to use AI to hire/filter candidates but not when candidates use AI to optimize to get around that screen. Using AI, I've been able to land several interviews and work 3 jobs remotely currently without much effort.
17 interviews
5 offers
I accepted 3 of them and work 16 hours a day. So thats roughly 5 hours of deep work per day. if I wasn't remote working then the extra 3~5 hours would've been spent on commute, figuring out where to eat, silly banters with coworkers or office politics and just non-essential stuff that anti-remote people advocate for.
I would accepted all 5 if I could but its just impossible to fit more than 3 stand up meetings in different time zones. It's also tricky at times to manage schedule, you have to keep your work space segregated.
So it's a combination of Resume strength (don't spend too much time on polishing it with AI as it can't replace experience) and market demand (really question if you have anything special)
Don't get discouraged brother! I hope this can help you.
You're the reason companies are pushing return to office and putting candidates through gauntlets of interviews and homework - because otherwise they end up hiring someone who lied on their resume and is trying to collect 3 salaries until they get caught and fired.
how am I to blame you cant work remotely ? I dont even know if you work!
Working 3 jobs is almost certainly defrauding the employers, your employment agreement likely forbids this due to IP ownership issues and expectations that you're, ya know, working for them when they're paying you and not secretly collecting a paycheck while working for a different company during the time they're paying you to work for them?
Also, unclear if you're also fraudulently claiming experience you don't have by having AI write a resume tailored to the job posting rather than representing what you've actually done.
If your 3 jobs are actually part-time jobs, with clearly delineated and compartmentalized time and work tracking and the employers are aware and the contracts allow that, then fine. But your description definitely reads like someone bragging that they're hacking the system to get away with tricking multiple employers into thinking you're working full time for them.
Not paid hourly rate and we are about delivering milestones on time
Everyone is satisfied with the rate of PRs closed and fine with AI use
I'm still waiting to hear what part of this is fraud?
> Also, unclear if you're also fraudulently claiming experience you don't have by having AI write a resume tailored to the job posting rather than representing what you've actually done.
Where have I said to use AI to fabricate experience? Do you actually believe that will work and thats what people are doing before background checks ?
Programming is by definition technical work that requires a significant amount of brain power and focus and if I am an employer (a good one!) I would intuitively expect a certain level of focus from each employee that also entails a certain amount of downtime in order to stay fresh and alert.
This is my attempt at a steel-man of their argument. If your employer(s) is happy with your output and you aren't lying about your availability in order to juggle everything, then there is no harm imo.
Thus 3 laptops and sometimes there are meetings which can overlap and that is always a challenge.
Yes nobody is complaining about the output and they are getting their money's worth.
I just think that as a modern day salaryman its silly to rely on one employer now or have any sort of loyalty.
It's okay to ** over the average working guy but not okay when they do anything to position themselves away from that arrangement.
where did i say this ? this is getting weird now. can you please follow HN guidelines and keep discussions relevant ?
I was reminded of the book when I recently watched the origin story [1] of the Differentbreed TV channel on youtube that gives attention to the trench war in Ukraine. The channel owner went from serious alcohol addiction while working in a liquor store, to going in a coma when deciding to go cold turkey. And then a journey to almost becoming a policeman, then a firefighter, and deciding based on training and certifications gained there, to become a combat medic in Ukraine. Then fought in the International Legion and Azov brigade. And then settle in Ukraine running the channel, and be involved in all kinds of activities that help the defense of the country. Very interesting to hear the story told from first-hand experience.
[0] https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/montyn_dirk-ayelt-kooiman/3291...
I could've never imagined long-term-thinking like this from a former addict.
I know a couple people who recovered from addiction (and lost a few who sadly couldn’t).
They’re just people from all walks of life. There are a lot of stereotypes about addicts, but drug addiction can hit anyone. The first few people I knew who became addicts were actually from good families, were educated, had good career prospects, and were happy people. They thought addiction didn’t apply to them because they were too smart or happy or wealthy. In my opinion, those stereotypes made them more vulnerable to letting their guard down and thinking they were going to use the drugs smartly.
Most of them are recovered now and back on track, minus a large chunk of their younger years and a trail of destroyed relationships and wasted opportunities. You wouldn’t peg them as former addicts, though. They’re just people.
Nothing personal, but you are part of the problem here. You are why these stories are so rare and difficult to achieve. Not out of malice on your part, most likely. But addicts are not humans to you. Please rethink some things.
I also found the article written so well (I suppose we don't encounter native English speakers in the blogosphere as much as we think we do), that it was a joy to read, if I can say so considering the subject matter.
We're trying our very best to support and guide without shaming. The difficult part is the influence of friends, specifically a boyfriend, that were convinced led to much of this. Forbidding the relationship is not going to have the right effect. So we're trying to manage it with rules to try and prevent the opportunity to make bad decisions. And talking a lot about honesty, values and respect. There's still respect in our relationship, and I feel that's the key for us to be able to support her.
> I'm curious how many with similar stories think they would have or could have taken a different path with better or different parental support?
I only respond to extreme, repeated negative reinforcement. Positive reinforcement never did anything for me.
If your child responds to positive reinforcement in any way, there's a good chance you can support them through it. But if they're like me, they may "only learn the hard way."
And I don't mean negative reinforcement as in physical punishment or being talked down to, but having to live through direct negative consequences of your action.
Sometimes I think "what if I could go back in time, and tell myself not to do XYZ", but I know myself well enough that I'm sure I would not listen.
I sincerely hope that things pan out for your family.
If you want the nuclear option, can you move away from the current environment? If they're young enough not to have a car, that's one way to at least guarantee a "fresh start" where they can't actively go down the current path. They'd need to find a new way into trouble, which is still wholly possible but requires more effort at least.
The common refrain here is usually they can find a bad environment anywhere so just moving won’t solve the problem. Unless it’s really remote, and home schooling. Which would not be healthy for anyone imo.
That reflects how many people's experiences, especially in this job market.
I’m a software engineer née scientist, but my spouse is a therapist who specializes in addiction. They (and I!) cherish stories like yours because we had seen up-close the struggle that so many people face.
> people willing to judge me by what I could do next instead of only by what I had done before
I think this is a really tragic take so common in the United States. It feels like, at least to me, that societal trust has broken down so much that people are broadly unwilling to take a chance on anyone.
Jail is supposed to mean you paid your debt to society. It's supposed to say 'okay, you've made a mistake, have had time to ruminate on it, now go forth and prosper.' It's not retribution or vengeance, or at least it shouldn't be - especially for non-violent crimes.
I'm truly glad you were fortunate and strong enough to climb out. I wish that this was a more common story.
We need a bigger emphasis on rehabilitation. It ultimately costs LESS for society.
I can also tell you from my 3 years in prison + jail that the grand majority of people in there do not have the innate desire or intention to change.
But for the small percentage that do, they deserve the resources and opportunity.
A good felon buddy of mine has been out now for 4 years. He slowly built a car repair business, with steady clientele, and got his life back on track – including reasonable sobriety and a steady relationship. He and his girl would cruise around often, enjoying their newfound happiness.
Last week he totaled his Harley and his body (destroyed bike, multiple broken bones). Total reset. He now gets PTSD whenever a Harley revvs by passing... physically cannot work.
Please don't get a motorcycle.
(fwiw i agree regardless, don’t get a motorcycle, lost too many friends to accidents or the following addiction)
I'm just offering real-world advice after witnessing all the broken bones and jerked roadrash upon this tattoo'd convict's broken body. Shouldn't be alive.
Putzing around an urban center on a cafe bike is not what it means to "ride a motorcycle" in the US.
Not to mention all the junk on the streets: the oil, anti-freeze, gravel, wet painted turn arrows.
When freeways become unsafe is when the loose nut behind the handlebars decides to wick it up and just "go around all of these big slow things". But that's not the freeways fault.
First year/10,000 miles is the hardest. But the foundational rules apply: Wear the gear, slow down, don't ride impaired (drunk, high, tired...).
Lightning strikes, it sucks. But, anecdotally, my worst motor vehicle injury was while a passenger in a modern car when my friend drove into a left turning vehicle. "Fender bender", "no biggie". Chronic, notable, back pain ever since. Worst than anything I've ever suffered on a motorcycle.
The relevant factor is that a street where motorcycles, cycles, pedestrians, and small/slow cars are dominant – all of which move at generally slow speeds – is of far, far, far less danger than a street (freeway or not) where the primary form factor is large automobiles traveling quickly.
You're describing American cities, while GP (to whom I was responding) was clearly describing the huge number of foreign cities (e.g. SE Asia) where motorcycles are the dominant form of urban transit.
The relevant factor is that a street where motorcycles, cycles, pedestrians, and small/slow cars are dominant – all of which move at generally slow speeds – is of far, far, far less danger than a street (freeway or not) where the primary form factor is large automobiles traveling quickly.
> First year/10,000 miles is the hardest
This is typical Intermediate Syndrome. The median rider involved in a motorcycle accident has nearly 3 years of experience.
No, road defects, obstacles, and weather are almost never the cause of motorcycle accidents.
I live in Thailand, and I can assure you that while scooters dominating city streets increases awareness by car drivers, it doesn't make accidents less likely.
Most accidents worldwide happen on low-speed streets, not highways. On highways, the speeds are higher, so the rare accidents that occur are more damaging, but the opportunities for accidents are also much, MUCH lower. (No/few turns, no/few stops, similar speed levels, better visibility, etc.)
That's the thing. On a bike you can do everything right and still lose.
California is one of the safer places to ride given how many bikes are here and I've still had too many near misses as a trained, experienced, and conservative rider.
Most people put 1-2k miles a year on their bikes, when I was riding often I put on 2-3k/ month.
Same with anything in life.
Same with a car, just less so. Of course you could also stay at home, wearing protective bumper suit 24/7 (and can still die from any number of things anyway).
At some point there's a tradeoff people make. Some people make it where the tradeoff slider says "motorcycle", rather than stop at "car". And I'm not talking a tiny niche, but about 1-1.2 billion people globally.
- Licensed motorcycle driver
That is to say, those comparing car v motorcycle are doing the wrong comparison here. You'd be evaluating (car + substitute activity of drugs/crime/etc) vs. motorcycle -- rather than merely car v motorcycles.
So not the same?
> Of course you could also stay at home, wearing protective bumper suit 24/7
Quite an extreme and useless comparison. There's a large spectrum of transportation and entertainment options between motorcycle riding and home bound bumper suit at all times.
Does it have to be the same?
Do you discourage people from riding bicycles too, lest they be hit?
If someone uses the word 'same' followed by a 'but' for a significantly different case then the word 'same' is losing its meaning.
> Do you discourage people from riding bicycles too, lest they be hit?
I don't, and my point is these things all have wildly different cost-benefit tradeoffs. So it's unproductive to jump to some extreme risk averse example that no one was suggesting or implying.
It's the same risk dynamic as driving a car to work, just more so. Of course you could also stay at home, wearing protective bumper suit 24/7 (and can still die from any number of things anyway).
Same with a car, or anything really.
The point of parent stands, globally there are billions of people going through their lives with motorcycles as their main vehicles, yet aren't involved in any life-changing accidents.
Some places are more dangerous than others, probably places that doesn't have this already motorcycle-heavy culture, like other countries in the world, has a higher incident rate and more severe accidents, as drivers aren't aware of how motorcycles usually operate.
Promote language of responsibility and accountability.
Look into auto lobby and this "accident" term history.
Use the language of accountability.
I still think "accident" is more accurate, so I'll continue to use that. Thanks for explaining though!
Only by a very lose definition of "fault", chosen for moralistic purposes.
Of course people saying what you say, if it happens to them, they'll suddenly swear theirs was a real accident.
I have seen what happens to motorcycle riders when there are accidents and I have seen what happens to car drivers when there are accidents. I won't get into the gory details but I avoid using bikes as much as possible.
Hard disagree.
Both pedestrians and motorcyclists are raw to the elements, entirely. At least when on roadways an automobile provides a chassis/rollcage.
In America it's the perfect crime.
"I'm so sorry officer I never saw them."
Case closed Lou.
Which is why yesterday, in my mid-sized Southern City: after a motorcyclist hit&ran off the Interstate (dead, into a guardrail; 35, helmet'd/licensed, obeying traffic laws), the local biker clubs put down their swords and rallied in the median well after the accident occurred (as my local newspaper noted).
With all these millions already-spent on Flock cameræ, and T-DOT having dozens more (of their own)... you'd think we'd'a'already caught these guys.!?
----
It's so sad that lack of accountability results in fleeing manslaughterers... but here we are.
The "besides the point" is that the point I was raising was how common motorcycles are, globally. Is that what you're disagreeing with?
Quickly: we seem to agree that motorcycles are dangerous and worldwide their predominance is mostly correlated with poverty (unlike US outlaw/biker culture). I had associated your beside the point with a biker being more-safe than a pedestrian -- is that what you meant?
----
I have done 120mph in both vehicles, car and motorcycle – and won't ever go over 55mph on a dirtbike (only, offroad); never again on-road riding.
Huh? No, it's mostly correlated with working class and below, hardly "correlated with poverty", at least the places I'm familiar with.
I do agree they're dangerous. I don't agree that everyone should always avoid everything dangerous simply because it's dangerous.
There's a reason the term accident is used (I know at least 10 countries where the meaning is the same).
Google crash not accident will give many resources.
https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/travel/safety/road-users/crash...
> there's a reason
Yes, the auto lobby.
Saying "accident" implies that the tens of thousands of road deaths every year are an unavoidable consequence of the convenience of driving.
That's just not true.
What? Where is that conclusion coming from? There can be thousands of "accidents" and they can all be preventable, calling it "crash" or "accident" doesn't imply if it's preventable or not.
Talk about arbitrary hill to die on, very inconsequential. Why is this somehow so important?
FWIW, countries like Sweden call them "accidents" yet treat them as preventable and something to aim to minimize, not sure why it'd matter so much if someone call it accident or not.
I had two accidents during my 5 years of commuting, and both times I only got minor scratches and had to replace my shoes. Both happened at speeds a determined bicycle rider could achieve, but I suspect I wouldn't be as well protected on a bicycle (both the machine itself and the protective gear tend to be much lighter there than on a moped). If I needed to do that again, I'd buy a model with two wheels at the front, which would have prevented both accidents - though I'm not sure if added stability wouldn't encourage me to ride faster.
So it's pretty specific, but if you're somewhere where driving culture is not too cutthroat, the roads can support single-track vehicles, and the traffic rather than actual distance is the limiting factor - owning a bike can be an objectively better option.
I've always thought it made more sense that instead of large metrobuses the local transit authority operate more like a locals-only taxiservice – similar to their already-existant handicapped-access services (which send a solitary transport driver, with ramped single-occupant van/vehicle).
If every scooter rider in Taipei had a car, the city traffic would move a meter a day.
It's also about convenience, btw, not just cost. It's basically impossible to park a car here. Scooters are also difficult but at least possible.
A huge chunk of people here just take public transit now, as it should be.
This makes everything so far apart as to make walking inconvenient. Add in unbearable weather for half of most years (whether hot/cold), and it just isn't convenient to grab something "on a quick walk" from the grocery store that is miles away from most homes.
Thankfully (some) cities are beginning to realize this, and are changing (IMHO: stupid) zoning/regulations. My favorite example has been of my own hometown's (Austin) reduction in required parking spaces for most commercial activities. This increases density, and encourages more walking. ATX's buslane-onlies leave a lot to be desired... but at least they've gotten rid of (most) downtown oneways.
Not all bike owners and riders have a shady history or risk taking behavior (aside from riding a motrobike).
It's not bad advice, just unlikely to land. Thrill seekers seek thrills.
Closest feeling you can get to flying and a helluva lot cheaper.
Bike costs are line noise, (cheap!) planes I fly are better part of $200 an hour.
I get what you're saying though. Barely been on bike since latest baby and wondering if I should just sell them for now.
As much as I miss riding and wife misses riding with me, if the worst were to happen, yikes.
I’d say this is a strong case against getting one for anyone who has struggled with addiction. In my experience a part of the constant battle is a difficult relationship with sources of stimulation.
Having said all that and despite being in recovery for many years... I still lust after the feeling of completely unfettered freedom being on a bike on an open road. Before I bought my bike a friend had warned me that once you ride, you’ll never not want to ride. He was right.
This, is wisdom.
Glad we both made it (so far).
While it probably sounds crazy, owning a tractor is almost as good. There are even more mechanical widgets to play with and it is dead simple and easy to work on like a motorcycle. I still miss the motorcycle but now I can actually do useful work while somewhat scratching the itch.
Absolutely. Broken bones, and all.
----
>wondering if I should just sell them for now
>if the worst were to happen, yikes
Listen to yourself, Papa.
----
It's a young (dumb) man's game.
This has been my favorite sentence (so far) in this discussion – whatever one's opinion is on motorcycling. Capital 't' Truth.
----
Thirty years ago, my mother gave me some small amount of money to NOT ride a motorcycle on roadways until after she died. Being young and broke, I took the money. stopped riding.
After she died, I had aged just enough to realize that I didn't actually want to ride motorcycles on-road, anymore. Even after decades of wanting to...
Somehow mama-up-there knew I'd eventually grow up, and it only cost her a few hundred dollars [to not have to witness my motorcycle accident (while alive, nor ever from-above)].
What are your thoughts on Roller Coasters? Hit a good theme park, ride maybe 6 with your eyes closed within a couple of hours.
I can't help but feel riding one (Roller Coaster) is much more optimal than $200/hr flying a plane, and much safer than a motorcycle, even if you rented vs purchase one.
That’s like telling a skydiver to go ride the Drop Tower (or whatever the ride is that drops you straight down).
Not only is the experience different, but you aren’t in control. You aren’t controlling what’s happening.
For me a big part of the enjoyment comes from being in control of the bike.
Personally I would get zero enjoyment riding as a passenger on a bike. The thrill comes from riding and maneuvering the bike, not just going fast.
Yes. Chasing perfection every time.
How smoothly can you roll out of this corner. How perfect a line can you take. How smoothly can you shift up or rev match and shift down.
I don't think I've ever been a passenger. My young wife enjoyed riding with me before our youngest came.
Either stand-up (small one-rider) or a 3-seater; each has its perks.
You can waterski behind a larger HP machine, and it's always nice to have a fellow beloved rider saddling-up alongside your antic't britches – whatever the hell that means, to you.
Or go be stupid and jumpwake on a crotchrocket standup jetski #LifeIsShort #CrippleLife #DontGetRunOver
It's a thrill for sure. Mostly on the smaller coasters thee days because of the kids.
Hah, that's funny for someone who got into FPV quadcopters recently and just passed his motorcycle license. I might have a problem.
They could have just-as-easily landed on the barn I built, a decade ago – years of work.
Pilot's stupidity (flying in such known weather conditions, inexperienced) could have killed more than just he & his pickleball passengers.
----
The part where I start getting upset is when others' lives are put into risk (particularly when: no fault of their own, bystanders).
there’s lots offered near the bay area (where I’m from) and they don’t cost that much for what you’re getting in return
This has been a very terrible and very real lesson in mortality. Wish we had some basic social safety nets for middle-aged unemployables (e.g. single-payer healthcare).
But somehow no old bold riders.
In other countries they are a huge means of transport.
"Oh, but this is acceptable risk"
Well, for billions, a motorcycle is too.
E.g. the most common motorcycle in Vietnam is the 110cc Honda Wave with a top speed under ideal conditions of ~60mph. It literally would not be called a motorcycle in the US.
I don't think any city in Europe is as anti-human as your standard American metro, suburb, or small town.
Also: European metro areas are full of two-wheeled not-motorcycles, like the Honda above.
Agreed
> Also: European metro areas are full of two-wheeled not-motorcycles, like the Honda above.
Not the European metropolitan area I live right next to and travel to/from, they are proper motorcycles, who also travel on the highway, which isn't legal for the "two-wheeled not-motorcycles" you talk about.
It's OK to not be aware of how everything is everywhere in the world, no one thinks less of you for that. However, being so confident about something you obviously can't know, isn't as harmless and does indeed make you look slightly weird for being so combative about it.
Your point is that there are cities that are full of motorcycles. My point is: sure, but most of those in most cities are not the 1000cc+ motorcycles Americans are typically referring to, and even if they are, a city full of motorcycles is a completely different risk environment from a city that is not full of motorcycles.
The bikes, usage patterns, and environment are all totally different. It's obviously silly to act like they're not.
Apparently the numbers for bicycles are a bit better, even in adjusted terms, but still. They're very unsafe in general.
The effect on physical and psychic health largely outweighs (sometimes to x30) the risk of accidents and pollution disease.
(2012, french) https://www.ors-idf.org/nos-travaux/publications/les-benefic...
I haven’t ridden on the road since. Just no joy in riding anymore if it just takes one careless individual on a cell phone…
Every so often I think about linking up with a group ride again or even going to a spin class, but I just don’t see the fun in it anymore.
It's laughable how proud some cyclists become when they think a painted stripe will somehow protect them from cellphoned sharks.
Obviously US bicycling infrastructure is laughably dangerous, and nobody deserves full-blame for exercising their legal rights upon roadways -- but e.g: biking up Lookout Mountain's shoulderless 2-lane highway is. stupid.ly common. These are tourist roadways winding through a mountainrange – are you cyclist's suicidal, or just hubric? Nobody knows where they are, and your dumb_ass is in the blindcurve going 2mph.
Your legal right #RIP
I sometimes lament that I wish I could ride in a group again, but it’s such a hurdle to get over mentally for me.
It is a lot of fun having camaraderie with similarly skilled riders hammering it out in the big ring for two hours, but just never have been able to get back to that place where I’m comfortable enough to do it.
Edit: oh, rereading your comment… my friend was not at fault in her crash. She was a careful rider just out for a spin and happened to cross paths with the wrong idiot who was distracted and veered onto the shoulder. I was expressing sadness that that is all it took to end her life.
Even as a pedestrian, I hate crossing a small road using crosswalks at a 4 way stop.
More than once, I’ve been nearly run over — even by vehicles that came to a complete stop.
Others were too distracted and plowed nonstop going 40+mph through the 4way stop.
I actually prefer to cross in the middle of the road on my own terms.
I live in a non-California state and I'm shocked whenever I see a motorcyclist who doesn't illegally lane split, who maintains a standard following distance (ideally 3 car lengths on an interstate), etc. Plus, most of them aren't even good at choosing leather jackets (not enough schotts or even made in Japan actual horsehide, lots of slop non-protective because most of these people are poor from the Harley purchase) and they don't wear proper protective heavy bottoms (i.e. leather/kevlar pants or HEAVY selvedge denim like 25 oz+). Many don't wear helmets because doing so might make them look like "fairies" to their friends in the outlaw biker gang.
Similarly, half or more of the cyclists in your average complete streets/walkable cities liberal area either 1. actually don't have a drivers license and are thus oblivious to road laws when they routinely get on the road, 2. refuse to use a helmet/put lights on at night/hand signal when turning, and 3. refuse to use perfectly good empty sidewalks (yes its legal here to bike on the sidewalk) to cycle on when possible.
I see this shit all the time, and I understand why they end up as roadkill time-and-time again. Keep winning Darwin awards. My heart goes out to those who legitimately did everything right and ends up squashed anyway, but the myriad number of idiots ruins it for the victims.
I actually don't know which makes me more scared to see on the road, a clapped out Nissan/dodge, a Harley rider, or a cyclist. At least the cyclists and nissan drivers are probably young and thus far more alert than the average geriatric who thinks they're so cool for owning the worlds most gaudy motorcycle.
>Many don't wear helmets because doing so might make them look like "fairies" to their friends in the outlaw biker gang.
I now live in a state which requires helmets for all riders.
This is a good idea – for exactly the reason you stated.
3 car lengths is a ridiculously too close following distance at freeway speeds.
So sad to see; I am walking his dogs; last time I saw him I said "I am just worried that this will make you spin out, again."
Definitely helped me continue deciding not to get a motorcycle, myself.
A freaking motorcycle with 300+ kilos moving ate highway speeds or more.
----
Certainly speed was a factor but isn't that why ya'll ride?
~30% of deaths involve drunk riding
~30% of deaths involve not wearing any helmet (let alone full face ECE 22.06 rated ones or any other gear at all)
~30% of deaths involve someone with no motorcycle licence.
These aren't all mutually exclusive obviously, rather the Venn diagram probably looks rather...circular.
The issue isn't so much everyone trying to kill you, you can fix a lot of the visibility issues and you have some additional options if someone is about to hit you. The problem is that two wheels make for a VERY dynamic system and you're managing two different brakes with weight shifting between two wheels based on your inputs. To that end ABS and TCS are absolutely huge, IIRC something like >60% safety improvement.
Tldr don't buy an old retro bike with no safety systems and ride it drunk without a license or gear, you'll continue to pad the numbers.
This rider (I described above) was
~sober
~helmetted (fully faced)
~licensed
1. I fell over at a stop sign on a canted hill while stopped because the rented Harley was so fucking big. I immediately returned it and will never ride a Harley again, those things suck.
2. I stupidly stopped just before the crest of a gravel road because I couldn't determine the best path (should have just trusted my tires and picked one), started sliding backwards. Rather than spin my tires and risk shooting off, or slide backwards into the unknown, I just tipped over and rolled off the bike.
No injuries either times. No at speed near misses. I have a simple rule: if I'm not 100% sure, I don't do it. A pass, a light, an intersection, when in doubt, I slow down, or stop, or hang out where I am in a lane.
Maybe one day I'll get taken out at a stop light or something random like that but the joy that riding has brought me I just can't give up. Exploring the world on a motorcycle is just amazing.
All activities come with risks. Motorcycling is up there but so is rock climbing, kayaking, rafting, hiking, bicycling, swimming - all activities I personally know someone who has been severely injured doing. You take precautions but you gotta live.
I agree. Among my fondest (and 3rd-most-painful) memories is sitting atop my Honda XR80 – FREE – pondering what my adolescent mind might eventually wish to accomplish.
----
>all activities I personally know someone who has been severely injured doing
My twin's friend, an experienced multi-pitch climber, recently perished in a freak-drowning accident (while leading amateurs) on a simple repelling expedition (single-pitch, lots of attention-to-safety). Somehow he slipped, fell into rainstorm-capture... and nobody knew how to help him quickly enough.
Obviously he should have had another experienced buddy, but it apparently "all happened so quickly" that nobody thought otherwise (was possible).
#RIP, assailedclimberbro
You can be the best rider in the world and still have a bad day/week/month/year/life.
I am back on the horse. It is just a zen and still relaxing time, albeit more anxiety while riding, than before. Thankful I can still ride, and I do.
I'm glad you're better. Tenacity.
More likely you're belted in your cage and surrounded by airbags.
Apples to orangutans.
THIS is the major difference, protecting even the best motorcyclist's abilities.
Some US highways are posted at 85mph [137km/h] – unprotected flesh doesn't stand a chance!
I'm sorry, but from a European perspective, this is the problem, not bikes. If your roads and driving culture encourage driving a tank for safety, that's a bit less than ideal.
I commuted to work for 5 years on a moped. I never used a highway, almost never exceeded 50km/h, and had 2 accidents during that time; both resulted in just a few scratches and bruises.
In another post, you said: "maybe speed was a factor" - actually, it's the only factor. If you never go too fast and never use roads where others may go too fast, you're safe - at least from life-altering tragedies.
If, on the other hand, it's generally impossible to get where you want to without using highways, or the sheer distance forces you to step on it - then yeah, don't buy a motorbike. Just note that it's not the bike's fault!
While you're right about slower generally being safer, you should still treat it like a life-altering tragedy could happen at any time and like you're going 200 kph.
It's still worth noting the relative probability: death or life-changing injury is basically what happens in every single accident when you're going 200km/h on a highway surrounded by (what could as well be) steel walls moving at the same speed; in my use case, when not exceeding 40-50 km/h and using roads where other users basically stand still most of the time, you need a pretty specific conditions and a lot of bad luck to even have an accident, much less die or become permanently disabled as a result of one. Still, not a zero probability, but the difference between 100% and 0.01% is kind of noticeable.
Half of the group rides I see are to "honor" or "remember " a rider who died doing something stupid as well.
Had to look away to stop from tearing up in Panera a few times at the end.
Sending this to my sister who has had struggles like this. She recently finished her BS and hopes to be an counselor or therapist after finishing her masters.
Can relate. Been 45 years, for me. Got my act together at 18, but before that...
I've not had nearly the adversity of the author, but I do know a little bit about what it's like to have an alternative background that makes companies not want to take a chance on you. It motivates you to take advantage of the chances you're given. The first time someone gave me a job, I felt so utterly grateful that I worked twice as hard as most and complained half as much. You could cynically call that exploitation, but I didn't see it that way.
When I came into a position to make my own hiring calls, I tried paying that forward, and I got some great employees from it. Arguably a couple duds as well, but I never regretted giving the chance.
Shout out to Hasura as well, btw. I've encountered their leadership team a couple times and everything about them has screamed integrity. It did not surprise me to hear that they are part of this story.
> When I came into a position to make my own hiring calls, I tried paying that forward, and I got some great employees from it. Arguably a couple duds as well, but I never regretting giving the chance.
Had to read this a couple of times, to let it sink in that he is cutting with scissors and placing this paper document in a manilla folder.
Thank you for sharing. It’s refreshing to see that there are people who will take a chance on you. Your story helps with the burnout of pushing through with little to no results and exponentially diminishing resources.
I haven’t been so lucky, I joined a tiny startup in 2018 that shut down a year later, landed contract work in 2019 that was meant to convert into full-time, but was let go due to the pandemic right before converting. My most recent employer fired me on christmas of 2022.
I had a falling out with friends because they wouldn’t refer me for any role including tech sales. My uni wouldn't consider me for a master's degree because my microprocessor architecture professor wasn't "comfortable" writing a rec letter despite me sitting front of class and getting an A, all while practically begging students to apply (all 2/2 people that applied got into the program). Even in grade school my 2nd grade teacher was fired for lying to my parents that I was underperforming in school and that I needed to get kicked out of the talented and gifted program and repeat the grade. I still don't know what to make of all of this.
I haven’t been able to land phone screenings, let alone a first round interview anywhere. I am having a hard time getting minimum wage work due to being "over-qualified". I've been priced out of my hometown. I’ve completed web development, data science, and cloud infra bootcamps as a way to up-skill while also having a degree in electrical engineering. I would consider myself adaptable: I've worked in designing/improving electrical hardware, reverse engineering, web, mobile.
I am first-gen American, grew up homeless, but received a world-class education. Sometimes I wonder if I’m on a blacklist somewhere, or if I need to fall further for something to finally click. I guess I’m just having a really long bad luck streak, so here’s to hoping something better is around the corner!
(More helpfully: when applying for job's you'd be called over-qualified for, just lie. Especially jobs that don't require a degree anyway, just leave it off the resume. Had to do that for a bit during the pandemic slump).
So a combination of looking at what I had done to myself + everyone around me and going "what the fuck." and my ever-vigilant wife who knew I had the capacity and desire to get better.
For me it really took literally losing everything.
It was definitely a process (that included multiple jail stints and only god knows how many treatment centers), but 10 years later life is pretty awesome.
I think the stigma around methadone is causing a ton of harm. Having a program where you quite literally have to show up every day, take drug tests, and get counseling was really important.
"Just say no"?
Sadly, it doesn't work. If you're an addict, you'll end up manifesting in one way, or many ways. Drugs aren't the only way that it expresses itself.
I hate alcohol. I always have. The taste makes me sick. The best way to ruin a dessert, is to pour expensive booze on it.
That didn't stop me from becoming a prize-winning lush, though.
The thing about addiction, is that it just doesn't make sense. It can't be understood, when looked at, through a rational lens.
That's a big reason that Recovery is difficult. It's also often badly supported by family members, who don't understand the mechanisms.
But that's a long story, for other venues. I am happy to read his story, and sincerely wish him luck.
Right now, the reason why you need humans in the loop is because you need someone with deep domain expertise and understanding of the particular nuances and architectural history behind a software product.
The reasons LLM's can't do this job currently is not an INHERENT limitation -- it's a technical one around context window limits and documentation.
There will always be people who don't want entirely autonomous development (who do you blame/fire when things go wrong) though.
I realize that it's not PRACTICAL advice, but I really do think if building software is what you're INTERESTED in, you should still give it your best try.
You spend the majority of your experienced life at work. Doing something you don't want to do, or find uninteresting, for most of your life (even though for many people this is the case) is a depressing and bleak prospect.
You may as well spend your time and energy trying to do something you like, because you're sort of stuck with it.
Open source has changed the life of so many, from so many situations. We should be proud of our industry. Together we built something beautiful
You know, I had a similar experience, but in my case I got an appointment with a psychiatrist afterwards, described the experience in detail, was given a computer test, diagnosed with ADHD, and then given a prescription. (Also in my case, I learned Adderall doesn’t actually feel great or help you if you take too much).
Take care of your kids. The war on drugs is stupid. Etc.
Sending a 14 year old convicted of drug crimes anywhere but a location that will help them is bizarre. Sending them to a max security anything leaves me speechless.
I have to know: how is your (now wife) doing?
It wasn't until years later she told me this.
We were able to send her back to university a second time to study something she is passionate about; she has a great support network of friends and (my) family. (Her family are drug addicts and gang members, so my family has sort of adopted her. It's a bit sad but none of her family were invited to our wedding.)
She's unemployed, but she's trying, and she says she never imagined that she could be so lucky in life.
It easier to get paid, you can be in a flow state for hours. Enough to forget about other addictions. and less likely to be high always while programming
> and less likely to be high always while programming
It will even get to the point where you feel dependent on them to focus and "get things done", like being sober is a handicap.
I'm a recovering addict, felon, and have depression (lucky me). And though there were times where I could work an entire weekend without stopping, it was always followed by 2-3 days of doing absolutely nothing because I was so dope sick/depressed. The worse my addiction got, the shorter the "flow" period and the longer the recovery period took.
Thanks for sharing this part of your story dude!
> How can someone get up in such a difficult situation?
You can help cultivate "luck" to a degree by increasing your number of experiences. Every person you happen across could be the one to change your life, and every job application could be the one that calls you back. You never know who is standing next to you in line.
And "support" you can tilt in your favor by trying to be a genuinely good person and being pleasant to be around + making others feel good. Humans gravitate towards people that they like being around.
No part of the prose was machine-generated. You will not find machine-written prose on this blog. I consider it deeply disrespectful."
I really like this disclaimer, by disclaiming that a single small thing was done with AI, you make very credible and notable that you did not use LLMs for the important parts.
similarly, i loved the story of the guy who got busted for running an illegal sports streaming site and was able to build himself back up.
hats off to you for your sobriety
Sometimes it felt like I'd never get a break, things wouldn't get better. But I tried to tell myself "Every occurrence in life is a numbers game. Against tiny odds, eventually enough attempts statistically OUGHT to pay off."
And the alternative is bleak, sort of sulking in this pit of despair without hope for tomorrow.
Every time I read stories like this my heart hurts. And I feel like I've been punched in the gut.
Every single time I read stories like this all my shit comes to the surface. Thank goodness for mental health professionals and prescription drugs.
No matter how I feel about your experiences, I want to know more. I want others to feel like they can share with people who are ready to listen and be supportive however we can.
I had estranged my mother, didn't really talk to my adoptive father, and purposefully kept my maternal grandparents (who I am closest with) in the dark because I didn't want them to see me like this.
I also have 3 much younger sisters, who I didn't talk to for the same reasons as the grandparents.
I've made a HUGE effort to reconnect and make amends with my family. I'm on good terms with my parents and talk to both of them regularly, I explained to my grandparents after I got sober and visit them at least once a year, and I reconnected with my siblings who I now text regularly and we host a "sibling trip" where we get together over a weekend once each year.
I am very grateful that they saw my efforts and gave me a second chance. My oldest sister in particular was very wary.
Myself, but I was just depressive until I got a PC, then I became a half-Hikkikomori until by brain exploded and seeked some nice metalheads around.
Logos/God/whatever bless that guy who gave me a Glam Rock/Metal CD at age 19/20, it changed my life a little for the good.
Metal and computers saved my life.
Except that I'm still unemployed even if I did tons of stuff after the advance trade (basic OOP Java/C# courses, Lisp, a bit of Docker and such...)
I even did some pre-college Math (calculus, discrete Math...) but no luck. Living and growing up in Spain sucks because almost no one would believe you that people can be a self-apprentice, here people it's very social-bounded (X does course-> Y joins it too). That's it.
My mentality it's more Atlantic than Mediterranean and I always had tons of conflcts.
"a legal "Research Chemical" with effects similar to MDMA (Methylone/bk-MDMA)"
Someone that is quick to assume without reading could easily make this mistake.. there are my research chemicals that are not technically categorized and not MDMA.
Read about Sasha to start https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Shulgin
RIP Sasha, PiHKaL and TiHKaL were, stereotypically, staple books on my shelf during adolescence.
No it's not. It's absolutely not personal responsibility that gets people through addiction.
And if you read the entire article, this should stand out:
> I don't tell this story because I think it is clean, heroic, or universally applicable -- It isn't. I made TERRIBLE choices. I hurt people who loved me. I wasted chances that other people would have killed for. And even when I finally started doing the right things, I still needed luck, help, timing, forgiveness, and people willing to judge me by what I could do next instead of only by what I had done before.
That doesn't sound like personal responsibility that sounds like having people around you that stick around even after you mess up.
I've been an addict for over 20 years (and spent the last 10 clean). I've been in close to a dozen treatment centers. What set me apart from the others (and why I technically "made" it) had very little to do with me. What set me apart was having an insane support system and grace from people who loved me.
I could not have climbed out of the hole I dug on my own, that I am almost CERTAIN of.
At the same time, if I had felt as though I were owed "more", and indignant about being "wronged", I think it would have made me slightly vindictive and less-positive.
To me, "Libertarianism" is about the power of personal-effort and opportunity. Not everything will pan out if you "just try hard and long enough", but at least THINKING it will (even if you know it's unlikely) feels like a better mindset to me than the alternative.
I was pretty fortunate in that while I may not have had the picture perfect childhood, my family was always there for me and in no way shaped my decisions to use. So even if I wanted to feel like a victim, I'd get snapped out of it pretty quickly.
When I look back at what set me apart from most others (I've been in numerous treatment centers, jails, and hundreds of NA meetings), the one thing that stood out to me the most was my support system. Others probably had a greater desire or more to lose, but because desire alone isn't enough, didn't always make it through. One example, my mom would drive hours each weekend to come visit me in treatment. That just didn't exist for the others I was there with.
I'm not political, but I would consider myself left-leaning Libertarian.
My mother is an Ayn Rand-loving die-hard Libertarian that was very active in politics. She gave me a lot of her books that I read in my youth.
I was raised in a very "The world owes you nothing, you only deserve what you earn." and "by your bootstraps" capitalist family.
(Family did not pay for my first car, my community college, etc. "Go get a job, you bum!")
He’s essentially telling this guy that he wishes he had been executed.
where did i say those words? Are you saying the victims of drug trafficking should suffer like OP did, make bad choices and die ?
Why not apply the same empathy for terrorists? Maybe they can turn their life around too.
It's incredibly sad to see people not realize that drugs can do enormous harm just as a terrorist would inflict upon the population.
The fact that people here are upset that other countries recognize the enormity of going easy on drug pushers but show no empathy for victims of drug use is quite telling.
> sobriety doesn’t guarantee that AI companies won’t kill off what’s left of your career
The ironic thing is, I work for one of those "AI Companies" ;^)
Claude Code and Codex have done most of my work for the last year, and with the pace of AI improvement, I'm not sure that you'd need (or even want) me in the mix.
From a business perspective, it makes a lot of financial sense, too.
I'm sure it's a limited amount of time before I'm dead weight, but I'll cross that bridge when I get to it, and I'll figure something out if/when it happens =)
There will be no change of course, sadly.
It's one way to process the negative feeling of being fined. But it doesn't really make the roads safer.
I've read many similar stories, in nearly all of them a couple of helpful friends always show up to save the day. I find it absurd that some people consider this zero.
I too was bullied during all my childhood, I haven't had a single friend in my life, I can barely imagine the possibility of being able to ask a favor from someone and even receive something.
Having someone to rely on sounds luxurious to me. My life has been a series of rejections. Apart from that I was always healthy, able to provide for myself, but I don't have a story. Somehow I feel like that if I could start a new life, I would choose one like this guy's rather than relive mine.
> I haven't had a single friend in my life
> I can barely imagine the possibility of being able to ask a favor from someone and even receive something
> My life has been a series of rejections
I'm going to say this, and I mean it genuinely, so please do not find this insensitive:
What if you went to lunch with someone, and the first things they said to you were those 3 quotes at the top?
You'd probably much rather hear something like:
> I haven't had much luck making friends, YET
> In the past, I've not been very good at asking others for help, and sometimes I get afraid if I did, they might not give it
> I've been through a lot of hardships, SO FAR
One of the most impactful things a mentor once told me is:
> "We are the stories we tell ourselves."
I want to genuinely ask you, to give "telling yourself a different story" a try. You might be surprised at how well you can "fake it 'til you make it!"
Sorry to hear that life has been a struggle for you and that you've not had a good support system to aid you.
But it doesn't have to stay that way -- every day you live & breathe is an opportunity to start the first chapter of a very different story...
Again, I'm sorry for venting. I was triggered, but didn't mean to downplay your experience.
I found that opening up to people about deep personal issues makes them steer clear even faster.
I really do think if you put your mind to shifting the framing/perspective of your feelings though, that you can have a much different future than past
Hoping things start to go your way, mate
(And yeah, definitely don't dump personal issues on new friends. I find that making friends is much easier if you ask thoughtful questions after listening to them and letting other people do most of the talking at first.)