I can't afford to buy a Ferrari, however I would really like to have one. Does my need is less important than a need of those who can afford it? Does this mean that now all Ferraris should cost (let's say) $1000?
It's all about negotiation really. Being a junior doesn't give you enough leverage to make this kind of demands IMHO. Juniors have this weird tendency towards overestimating their value. Don't make this mistake in the beginning of your carrier (been there, done that).
A lot of companies these days create "Best practices" guidelines just to boost their online recognition. Very often I find these guidelines useless or even harming.
Basically every statement that says "Never do A" or "Always do B" without providing any justification for it. Documents like this only contribute to holy wars between junior developers by creating an impression that they should blindly obey some random set rules rather than forming balanced opinions.
This document should rather be called:
"Some practices for JavaScript projects that work for devs at Hive but might not necessarily work for you."
> they are clearly exactly what the community rejects
aka. "HN herd mentality." It feels me with sadness when I see the same trend over and over. People who have different opinions on certain political/social matters are being silenced by this whole "community rejects" bullshit.
This is an excellent point. Sadly, people who share less popular opinions will (probably) never get to the point when they can start up/down voting. So the only way to get these "superpowers" is to join the HN circle jerk.
That's only True if you constantly make unpopular opinions, such that they outweigh your regular ones. There are all sorts of neutral comments that can be made, a point a piece..
It always amazes me when someone just assumes that US companies are somehow superior to the rest of the world. I've worked for a couple of US based companies and the experience was shit compared to other non-US companies I worked for.
I wouldn't say "superior". I don't know anybody who'd have assumed that at all. You must have gotten that wrong somehow. Especially in my business, people assume German companies to be far more superior (which is also not really true based on my experience).
However, you do expect some kind of "business culture" especially because the company usually forces the advertisement for it onto you whether you want or not. Our floor are plastered with Fremdscham posters and phrases in english. Often you also hear a manager in a meeting praising some new trope from the East Coast regarding office layout or similar.
What really sticks with is the informal "you" though. It's really helpful most of the time.
This is not about being "tired". It's about resetting your nervous system which for different people works differently. I often think about it as about a distinction between sprinters vs. marathon runners. Some people have biological predispositions to perform better in one of those.
I don't think that making any type of generalisations (eg. "people shouldn't be that tired") makes much sense.
If the speed of yes is bounded by memory speed, doing anything useful will almost certainly consume that data at a far lower rate. Putting it on a disk, pushing it over a network, etc. will almost always be slower than yes is able to generate data.
The typical use case is piping it into another running program. Maybe someone wants to do that really quickly rather than putting it on disk or pushing it over a network.
I'm well aware of the techniques they use, but my point is that no matter how much an advertiser tries to influence you into buying their product the final decision and action is always your own. You could argue that people with poor impulse control should be protected from advertisers, and I would agree with you to an extent, but that's a separate issue.
It's not only about poor impulse control. A lot of those techniques work in such a way that people don't even realise that something is trying to influence their behaviour. Usually, these techniques "catch" people when they are off guard. There is a lot of psychological literature describing how unreasonable people behave for the most of the time.
Sadly, when it comes to manipulation, human kind has already lost this battle.
I think you overestimate the power of these techniques. They don't add up to making people buy things they don't want. They just change the perception of the goods' value or cost. No matter how many ads I get shown, I'm not going to buy a McDonalds unless I'm hungry and want something quick and cheap that I don't have to cook. They just use adverts to position themselves as a good choice in that situation, or to improve the public impression of the meat they use (and such claims are legally required to be true so they can't just say "we use great beef" and cook you up a rat burger).
> relying on attempts to place yourself as an informed authority
I've spent 5 years studying psychology at uni so even though I don't consider myself as an authority, I think I've got enough knowledge to know what I'm talking about. I don't give a flying fuck if the person reading my comment will be convinced or not. With that said, if they at least do a research on the subject, we'll all be better off.
> In contrast to your comment, an ad for Viagra is straightforward
Care to elaborate a bit?
How discussing with someone anonymously on the internet compares with a situation where a company is using all kinds of techniques to trick people into spending money on their product?
If you're strongly motivated by money, London is probably the worst choice for taking a permanent job (unless you have enough experience to make a nice 6 figures salary and all that).
