To quote all of the "don't submit" from HN guidelines:

Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

The definition of "interesting new phenomenon" has room for variance in interpretation, but the sentence following really scopes that down.

So, yes, participation is optional; however, if moderation can't keep it under control, HN will suffer, badly.

Who is to say it isn't under control? It is operating as desired, unless you have inside baseball. What you experience as an HN participant is the experience mods are tuning for.

If you believe they aren't doing their job, I would re-evaluate your priors and the mental model on the topic. If mods wanted you to have a different experience, it is well within their power to make those changes trivially, either through human or programatic actions. This is distinct from "I do not like the experience I am having and mods will not change the experience." But, if you are here, it is likely well within your control and capabilities to build your own tools to improve the experience to your liking if mods will not. It is theirs to operate as they wish, after all.

You're quoting guidelines as if they are law, while the law is what you experience constantly as mods tend to the site. "The purpose of a system is what it does."

So how do I get a Sr. Dev job in London from US public sector?

Generalized, noting there are always exceptions: many CS lessons seem to be needing repetition among Node.js users, in the general sense and where CS wasn’t really taught.

Mistake? Gah. Probably in a lot of cases. The ecosystem around it is both “robust” in the sense of projects and libraries, and “objectively awful” for permitting some of the recent security issues seen.

ECMAScript was never intended for where it’s at now, and all the lipstick Google applies won’t change that, even if it “works fast” “now”.

What I’d pick for a new project? It depends, tell me about the project. …it probably won’t be Node.js though.

And now some suspicion starts setting in. Granted, someone is going to have multiple runs of “bad luck”, statistically.

The kinds of things you want here, and that I think we all do, are hard.

Yes, ideally a trusted intermediary would do something like… read your digital ID (which stiLL doesn’t guarantee it’s you providing it, up to a point), examine a birthdate, and sign an attestation to a liquor store that “this user is 21 or older” without you ever having to fork over your name, address, or biometric details.

The will to enforce such measures, at least in the US, seems low.

This is why the EU is going the app route. You load your ID into an app, and can review on-the-fly what data you're sharing (including a simple "older than 18" token to buy liquor). The app also allows keeping a log of who requested what data, so if you find out in hindsight that your grocery store requested your full name illegally, you can report them.

Enforcement chances in the US, maybe outside of California, do seem low, but at least the "we cannot do it" argument is off the table when the EU has a ready-to-deploy suite on Github for anyone to access. If you don't like the EU, the Yivi (previously IRMA) project implements pretty much the same ecosystem, but in a slightly different way.

Wasn’t them finally implementing competent (if overly annoying) iCloud MFA the result of this kind of thing, with social engineering/photo leaks from celebrities or something?

It takes a public scandal, and all.

You don’t need the App Store to install most apps, and can just download .dmg or even .zip files with them; I feel like only a handful of developers go full-App Store-only (with good reason; it not only imposes extra restrictions on certain functionality but also takes a big cut of your sale).

Re: AI writing: AI tends to (and might be getting better) use commas for such claims, in the form of, “it’s not just X, but [optional:also] Y”.

Even if it feels sus, remember that AI is trained on what it sees: even the posts here will make it more and more effective at “writing like a human”.

As for the OP, the claims to exist and have published books, etc. are relatively easily publicly verifiable.

No, $500 isn’t a large amount, doubly so anymore. I consistently have to try to re-anchor, but $100 is the new $20 (sadly).

AI used em-dashes initially in that type of sentence structure, but more recently moved to a mix of semicolons and commas, at least from what I've been seeing.

I never claimed the author doesn't exist.

$500 is objectively a large amount for a gift card. Off-the-shelf gift cards with predetermined amounts are almost always substantially less than this.

Even a small claims filing in the US, which might have a $10k limit, does damage to Apple far enough above the effort it takes them to “just intelligently fix it” to make it worth their time.

If Apple doesn’t show up, they’ll lose and the filer will get a default judgement, for which they hopefully asked/made the case for $10k. I’m sure they can arrange to have it enforced against a local Apple Store to seize not product, but operational working assets, if they’re creative a bit. If Apple has anyone competent in Legal they won’t let it get that far, though.

Then again, if they do show up, they’ll pay a lawyer well more than an hour of time, probably by a lot, and still have to argue against a likely well-prepared person, with proof of purchase, etc., (legitimate) sob story of lost time, digital assets, and the like, and likely won’t endear themselves to the court.

And of course for a business, an actual court filing (or arbitration if it gets forced on them, with competent counsel) could be even worse.

What kinds of stacked cross-promotions like this exist, and even work out financially for everyone?

I don't think they'd work out if everyone used them. It's essentially companies paying for your shopping data. But a) they overpay to incentivise you, b) I'm buying the same boring things on rotation so it's close to useless to them.