I always say I don’t know in interviews when I really don’t, rather than try to bluff. Some interviewers don’t like this though. As with the parent, perhaps that’s actually a good thing as you avoid having to work in a bad environment. Other times though, you may be being interviewed with a bad egg who you’ll never actually need to work with in the actual job.
I love it when interviewees say "I don't know", so long as they follow up with some sort of mental process explaining how they'd find out the answer/solution. So, "You know, I'm not exactly sure how the new payments API handles excessive requests, I've only glanced at the documentation. I can look at the docs more closely and get back to you.", or even "I don't know how the new payments API handles excessive requests, but honestly, if we've reached that point, I might wanna investigate that specific issue first, and try to figure out why we're sending so many requests." - either of those responses are great, IMHO. The response I'm NOT looking for is basically, "I don't know [shoulder shrug]."
Yeah this is basically how I see it, there’s a natural selection to it. If you practice deceit and politicking in interviews (and in the office), you’ll select yourself into, and only be able to succeed in organisations that value those things. If you practice honesty and candor in interviews, then you’ll expect the same (over time at least). In interviews I think you should just be guided by your genuine values and be yourself (well, whatever version of yourself you feel most comfortable bringing to the office every day). It probably doesn’t maximise job offer conversions, but in my experience it maximises being in working environments that I’m most likely to enjoy and fit into well.
Edit: By honesty in interviews, I mean to a point. There’s some things you absolutely should lie about in interviews (if you’re confident you can get away with it). For instance “what’s your current salary” is a great question to lie about, that they really have no business asking anyway.
I am a senior software engineer from Ireland, currently living in Berlin, with a decade of industry experience. I have shipped software professionally using many technologies and languages, especially Ruby on Rails, and Elixir.
It’s wild someone would call the police for this but it’s also wild that this would be in the news. Couple Freed From Car Park By Police After Losing Ticket.
For the majority of readers who probably won’t know what that is, ReBirth was a soft synthesiser that was the precursor to Propellerheads Reason, one of the most famous DAWs.
ReBirth was also notable for modeling its original functionality off of real hardware: two Roland 303s and an 808 (hence the full name ReBirth RB-338); they later added the 909. And if I recall, 808 sample patches were originally a community hack, but Propellerheads later embraced the concept (also for the 909), supporting audio patches along with GUI skins in later releases. I suspect this is part of what inspired the direction they took with Reason.
> For those sharks who have perished due to becoming bycatch, this allows a unique opportunity to have their livers provide valuable products like biodiesel, squalene, and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) –including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; also icosapentaenoic acid) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Afterall, the major constituents of WSLO are triglycerides (TG), diacylglycerol ethers (DAGE), and squalene.
Oh wow I caught a shark, conveniently enough though, I happen to have this factory with the exact processes necessary to extract materials out of the shark.
So sorry we accidently killed you. In order to give your life some meaning, we've come up with "unique opportunity to have their livers provide valuable products"
That isn't an argument that Capitalism is good, or better. In Capitalism, if you don't work, you don't eat. So finding a quote about communism that says same thing, is not making any point that one is better or worse.
The difference is in Communism, there should always be 'some work'. If you are willing to work, there is work. Even if it is some public works project.
In Capitalism, maybe not. Nobody is looking out for you. If you don't have the skills for what is in demand right now, then so sorry, go ahead and die.
sure. 'some work' under communism will yield you a bed and and a few bowls of gruel per day.
in the US, there are 'working poor'. under communism, there are 'working poor and starving'.
at the time when skilled blue collar workers in the US had two story houses and multiple cars per family, the same people in the USSR lived in communal apartments (with 3-4 people per room and 3-4 families per bathroom and kitchen) and commuted to work in overcrowded buses.
even towards the end, in the 80's, after several decades of relative peace and prosperity, even engineers and scientists had a standard of living far below the level of 'working poor' in the US. having a small concrete box in a commie block and a shitty car (that you had to wait several years for the privilege of being allowed to buy for a very sizeable amount of money) was the Soviet dream.
1. Often the failure of the USSR is used to say communism failed. This totally ignores the after effects of WW2, where the US had rapid industrial growth to supply arms, and critically, did not get bombed. And USSR had been pretty much destroyed. The starting lines were pretty different.
2. And. Different point. These quotes on working to eat, also are meant to apply to the rich. In the US, the rich can just sit by the pool and do not contribute to society. The communist quote is meant to mean, everyone contributes. Whereas in capitalism, you can live off inheritance or interest rates, and not contribute anything. Be a parasite.
I'm not sure it's possible to be "too cynical" in the commercial fishing space. If there is even the remotest financial incentive to do something, we should expect people to maximize profits and do it. The concept of "intent" doesn't really need to enter the discussion, I don't think.
There's no effort being made to avoid catching sharks, just catching everything in the area, and preventing anything else from living in the area anytime soon by environmental destruction
This idea really disgusts me. If an animal is “accidentally” killed then the first action should be to punish the people who did this and then take steps to ensure it does not happen again. Just allowing capitalism to continue to wreak havoc on our planet is so obviously not moral thing to do.
I agree it wasn’t light at all in the later parts. Very bleak. If it was ever supposed to be a comedy it didn’t end as one but I can’t think of other animated series you could class as a drama.
I think it is one of only about three animated shows that are genuinely outstanding as TV and not just animation or comedy. The other two being Simpsons and Futurama.
