Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | occitan's commentslogin

I live in SF and can get door-to-door to a friend's house in San Diego in 3 hours.

Assuming both you and your friend live in the actual, respective airport terminals.

Otherwise, your numbers just don't jibe with the reality of typical fight and check-in times (let alone the time cost of, you know, actually getting to and from the airport).


Don't know what to tell you; I've done it plenty of times.

15 mins to the airport (I live close to a freeway entrance), 10 mins to the gate, 40 min wait time till takeoff, 90 mins in the air, 10 mins out to the curb, 15 mins to my friend's house near Hillcrest.

Sure, if I'm traveling at the height of rush hour, the car trips to and from the airport will be longer, but the solution is to... not do that.


Well done on your optimized flight routine, but a true 200 MPH+ bullet train from SF to SD wouldn't take much longer.

Cross-country express trips could be done in less than a day.


If climate change is truly the harbinger of the apocalypse,

If you start your argument with an extremified and overly emotional premise, then sure, you can make just about any point you want.


The above comment is misinformed, but in no way obnoxious.

There was no reason to downvote it.


Downvotes are allowed to express disagreemnt.


Actually there are no guidelines about voting whatsoever.

However arguably it's a bit rude to ding people simply for being (mildly) misinformed.

And the guidelines do ask us not to be rude.



Doesn't mean it's a good idea.


If pg says it is a good idea, I am inclined to agree with him.


It seems what they really forget to tell you was "if you don't like Math - you don't have to study it."


"The most surprising thing, indeed -- despite always -- being repulsed by articles with click-baity titles, in the past -- suddenly I found myself overcome by an irresistible urge to start posting with titles as gimmicky and catchy as my imagination could come up with!


Thanks, but please close your quote!


maybe that title is better ;-)


Actually, there's plenty of information to inform such a decision:

While the other students were allowed to leave, Ajjawi alleges an immigration officer continued to question him about his religion and religious practices in Lebanon.

So it looks like they deported him because, first, he was a raghead...

“After the 5 hours ended, she called me into a room , and she started screaming at me. She said that she found people posting political points of view that oppose the US on my friend[s] list.”

and second because he has friends (or random associates) who disagree with U.S. foreign policy.


@hourislate's point is that this is a "he said, she said" story in which only he has said anything. USCIS, as the article said, can't say anything.


USCIS should not be involved at all. It should be just CBP.


Please read the Crimson article. Only CBP was involved, both in the interaction and in the public relations around this.


"he said, she said" is only useful when both he and she have relatively equal power. When one entity can hold a metaphorical gun to the other person's head, it no longer works.


Wow, his wife left him too.

Might have had something to do with the 80-hour work weeks.


No - not for having a YT channel (per se) but for engaging in communications that FB considered to be a conflict of interest. And probably (as with most firings), a whole whole bunch of other stuff (besides the nominal "reason").

Nonethelsss - my heart goes out to anyone dragged into a "friendly chat with HR" under any circumstances.


He was hilarious as always: he said Facebook wanted him to start presenting himself as an Ex-Facebook Tech Lead and not only an Ex-Google Tech Lead, and the fact that he couldn't because he worked there represented a conflict of interest that benefited Google over Facebook, and so they fired him making it now possible to claim that he is also an ex-Facebook Tech Lead.


> No - not for having a YT channel (per se) but for engaging in communications that FB considered to be a conflict of interest.

What was the conflict of interest?

> And probably (as with most firings), a whole whole bunch of other stuff (besides the nominal "reason").

Probably, but not certainly.


What was the conflict of interest?

Dunno - whatever was running through the HR people's heads.

The whole point is - it wasn't simply for "having a YouTube channel".


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: