You got 'em. Google rarely reveals why they killed someone's account.
So we can't prove it was due to email content. For all we know it could just be a dude named Richard who throws darts at a board full of usernames all day.
In fairness to those learning through YouTube or other modern sources: I learned from books and after finishing the exercises in the books I also had no idea what a "super simple project" was, or at least what one step up from the book was.
Ultimately I learned by starting projects that were too large, hitting a roadblock, and stepping back to learn about that thing. Then starting another project and repeating.
This process took years and years before I was reasonably confident in estimating the size of a project. And to be honest even now, nearly 25 years after writing my first tiny cli trivia game, I still get it wrong sometimes, especially in a new domain.
At the end of the day estimation is hard even for veterans of the software industry.
Now he did put a disclaimer on one of his videos. But in many other videos he’s been talking about this kind of mission as if it might be something that the viewer might wanna do herself. “If you’re planning a straight-line mission…” Stuff like that. So he might not have been encouraging it, but he has been talking as if his videos might inspire the viewer to do them themselves.
> Hardware volume x Windows master volume x Windows app volume x In-app volume
> No one wants or needs that level of control.
I don't have a separate hardware volume relative to the Windows master volume, but otherwise I want and need that level of control.
- Windows Master Volume: I turn the knob on my headset or keyboard and things get quieter or louder. This is the thing I adjust most frequently.
- Windows App Volume: I turn games down, usually to 10-20% or so. Then I turn everything but comms (discord, zoom, etc) down to 80%. This ensures that I hear live communication over all else, and that my games aren't drowning out whatever I'm watching in the background.
- In-App Volume: Here I adjust balance in games. Music unfortunately gets set to 0 because I'm rarely just playing a game these days. Voice lines get set higher than sound effects until I'm sure I can distinguish them clearly.
I'm just sad that treating someone like a human being is considered a positive
Sure. Everyone should be sad about that. There are plenty of people out there who don't have any willingness to treat people in service jobs like driving a taxi with any sort of humanity. Too many people will just ignore the fact that these people are living, breathing human beings with feelings of their own, and treat them as if either they don't exist, or that they exist to serve them. It's quite appalling.
Treating someone like a human being means having kindness, respect, and empathy for them. It means not expecting them to demean themselves just because you're paying them to do something. It's treating them well even without knowing them.
It's quite a high bar apparently, and a lot of people out there don't manage it.
There's no room for "We had an interesting conversation" or "They gave me some good advice" or "I think I made a new friend"? Not even "They seemed like a good person"?
The maximum is "They treated me like a human being" which is somehow above "They were OK"?
I can't speak for the Parent commenter, but I get the feeling you are taking what he said a little too literally. Those were simply examples of what could be said during the process. Their reply was not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the responses.
Again, can't speak for OP, but I doubt it was intended as an example of a positive interaction - rather it's meant to be an indication that there was NOT a negative interaction. Again, those words are just examples of what could be said. They weren't saying "This is absolutely the words we used and built an entire decision of someone off of" or even anything close to "This is the range we specifically had".
I get the impression everything was relatively informal in the process they described. In forums like these, it's about looking at the spirit of what they were trying to say and get across.
I was thinking the same. I get the whole Hacker News "being a contrarian just to be a contrarian" thing, but this specific thread has gone much further than I thought it would.
Wait I'm an asshole? For being upset that treating taxi drivers "as a human being" is considered a positive interaction instead of the absolute bare minimum of a respectful member of society?
1. Neither I nor anyone else in this thread has accused you of being an asshole.
2. Have you interacted with many human beings?
We'd all love it if being treated as a human being were the bare minimum, but quite a few people didn't get the memo and fall quite a bit below it. You really do want to filter out those folks in your hiring process. Unfortunately, here on HN, some commenters view any sort of hiring filter, much less one like "don't be an asshole", as a personal attack.
1. Apologies, the posts you replied to were shitting on me so I misinterpreted your comment as agreeing with them. ("you must be fun ~~at parties~~ in taxis" is a common dismissal + insult online)
> And what if I’m not tracking that in such detail or even thinking about viewing it like that because it’s a side project?
Make it private like you are doing?
If you don't want someone to perceive something about you, then don't make it public. If you do make it public and add it to a resume then don't be surprised if the person who manages programmers is interested in possibly looking at the programming that person has done.
I proposed that you can tinker in public if you make sure your tinkering won't be confused for your magnum opus. You dismissed that because a one sentence readme isn't needed on a public side project.
I didn’t say anything about adding a link to a resume. This thread has hints of people thinking “I’ll just look up their GitHub if they don’t include it” and other threads make that explicit.
> You dismissed that because a one sentence readme isn't needed on a public side project.
I don’t think that’s what I said. I was saying that tracking all the things one might be judged for is unreasonable, not that having a readme is unreasonable.
It’s good for teaching younger players who still have temper problems, but there’s only so much of the game you can experience this way. And don’t expect to get to advanced or expert strategies without the game balance falling apart.
One knock on effect I’d predict is higher mana value cards would be substantially more playable. I expect a deck of walls + counterspells + removal + big finishers like the Eldrazi or even just Baneslayer Angel to be much more effective than it is now.
On the other end of the spectrum super low to the ground aggro strategies also get a huge bonus by simply never having to draw a land again.
Probably Storm (play a bunch of cheap spells, typically with a discount or with effects that give you mana when you cast a spell) gets a huge boost as well as they can ensure they never fizzle out. Once the engine is going they’ll always win unless they get countered.
What lose out here are all the decks in the middle. The midrange, “fair” decks that are just trying to curve out with the best play each turn.
And all that’s not counting the rules headache with cards like Oracle of Mul-Daya, Fact or Fiction, Treasure Hunt, or Dark Confidant. Which pile does my Maze of Ith go in? Cultivate? Sol Ring? Faceless Haven?
With that said it’s also my personal opinion that variance just makes the game more enjoyable and widens the group of players you can compete against, as long as you have the emotional capacity to not take losses personally.
Variance is a critical lifeblood for card games, as demonstrated by the commander companion mechanic debacle, as a key lesson that mtg r&d has known but occasionally forgets. But not only at casual levels but many levels, mtg can definitely have too much starting hand quality variance that starts to reduce fun. Tournament mulligan rules and mtg arena starting hand sampling algorithms point to this.
I personally suspect that aggro would completely dominate a separate land deck meta if pushed hard enough. But I'm all on board for an alternative game design that invents new interesting questions to ponder, addresses a pain point of mtg design, and most of all makes it more fun for a kid.
> I personally suspect that aggro would completely dominate a separate land deck meta if pushed hard enough.
Agreed, I probably should have listed it first.
Even in the short term, look at when Arena ran their Treasure events where each upkeep that player would get a treasure token. By the end of the first day the event was dominated by “mono red” decks with 13 land and free splashes.
Fwiw, the amount of cards we have to play with is pretty limited to a few starter sets so very specialized decks don't really happen. I got rid of all of my cards from the 90s (still kicking myself there).
It's more that it keeps the game fun as he's just getting into it. You're guaranteed that both players are going to have playable draws.
For any setting with more advanced players there would definitely be side effects and a more polished set of rules in place for those special cards and circumstances.
It is actually the opposite. If you choose your pile then low cost decks are better because you can choose to spend fewer draws on land. Expensive cards are better if you get a draw from each pile each turn.
I did not order the list of effects by importance or impact, I ordered them by what came to mind while I was typing.
I touched on low to the ground aggro decks in the very next paragraph, and I agree that's probably the biggest issue.
However aggro decks becoming more powerful does not mean control decks cannot also become more powerful. Decks aren't a one dimensional plot of aggro to control with midrange in the middle. (though to be fair I did say "on the other end of the spectrum" in my initial post)
When I say higher mana value cards are more playable, I mean in the sense that they can be cast "on curve" much more often, because if you want to cast a 7 drop on turn 7 without ramp you can choose do so, while with a normal deck you might expect to hit 7 mana between turns 8 and 11. (Not a hard calc, just a gut check)
If you have to answer your opponents' threats 1-1 early you can refill with answers, and if you get ahead with 2-1s or 3-1s you can keep drawing land to play your expensive threat on curve.
So we can't prove it was due to email content. For all we know it could just be a dude named Richard who throws darts at a board full of usernames all day.