I'd imagine the opportunity cost and man power. Even though McKinsey should do the work they will need access to people and information to accomplish it.
Id argue that at this point, Microsoft isn't selling Windows. They're selling everything/anything touching their platform.
Copilot, Office, Azure, gamepass. Almost all of these have a yearly subscription price that exceeds or is close to that of a Windows license. Windows just happens to be the platform they use to get you in.
Part of being a Nazi means the sincere believe that the Aryan race is superior to all others and that eradicating them is a sensible goal.
Thats not a political view. Its one of racism and finding genocide acceptable. I would sincerely hope that any sensible person would refuse to hire someone like this.
I can't say that I have seen any party documents floating around, but I'll take your word for it here. A person having those views or beliefs still isn't a crime, acting on them is.
A person in a workplace can have whatever views they want. Holding a view in no way prevents them from being able to do the work well. Its a different story if they cause a problem at work, but that is viewpoint agnostic - anyone starting political fights or worse at work is a problem.
A person is entitled to hold any political views they wish, and a business is entitled to not hire them for those views. Just like freedom of speech does not entitle you to a platform or give you immunity from the consequences of saying things.
> I can't say that I have seen any party documents floating around
There are quite literally millions of well recorded documents, pictures, movies, personal accounts of affected people available about what Nazism did and does. If you do need a place to start, feel free give the Wikipedia article a read and use the underlying sources to learn more.
The Nazi Party no longer exists and you're linking to ideology in Germany at the time. We could similarly link to pretty terrible political party views of Republicans or Democrats over our history.
By no means am I defending Nazism here, I would take huge personal issue with any holding those views. That's entirely separate from the topic here though, and I don't agree with discriminating hiring processes based on political views regardless of what they are. If someone can go to work, get the job done, and be a net-positive member of the team I have no reason to act against them.
Not hiring people only for personal views they hold is just a weirs bar to set. Judge people by their fit for the role and their actions. Attempting to both uncover and judge a person's beliefs is a losing battle at best.
It is not a weird bar at all when the "personal view" here is being a Nazi. The action of believing in Nazism is actually a disbarring for any role of trust, integrity, or value in our society.
Being a Nazi is not a protected status (yet) and you should expect to be fired immediately if you espoused those views anywhere, at all.
Not sure how they are involved in this discussion nor do I know their current ideology besides the media reports, but collaborators were/are not uncommon. Abraham Gancwajch, for example, seemed to have no issue with betraying his people.
Be careful with your reasoning. Remember that the current ruling party in America (as well as growing movement in Europe) is using the same rhetoric to go after liberals and trans people.
The problem isn't that any sensible person supports genocide, it is that insensible people can get to power and trick normal people into thinking genocide is necessary or not happening at all. They do the former by saying "if we don't commit genocide then they will commit genocide against us".
The problem is who gets to pick who is right and not? The problem is that if you limit the right to limit speech then good rulers won't abuse that power but evil ones will. It's because they are the ones who pick and choose. It's why you have to protect the rights of those you abhor. Because if you don't you build the powder keg of Turnkey Tyranny. Doesn't matter how many signs you put up, eventually someone will light a match. My accident or because they want to watch it burn.
So yes, to protect those groups being persecuted (trans, minorities, and Jews alike) you need to protect the speech of abhorrent groups like Nazis. You don't have to like it. And you don't have to, and shouldn't, protect the actions of Nazis, but you do have to protect the speech. It's exactly why the ACLU has done this in the past because every authoritarian loves to use abhorrent characters to justify overreaching laws.
We're on Hacker News for fuck's sake! How often have we seen the same play but replace "speech" with "encryption" and replace "Nazis" with "pedos and terrorists". It's the same stupid game!
> The problem is who gets to pick who is right and not?
we all do, collectively, as a society
> So yes, to protect those groups being persecuted (trans, minorities, and Jews alike) you need to protect the speech of abhorrent groups like Nazis.
there is actually a categorical difference between advocating the persecution of minorities, and advocating the persecution of nazis. and furthermore it is actually possible and good for a society to say one of these things is bad and should not be allowed, while the other one is good and should be allowed.
I agree. But at the same time do you not recognize that collectively, as a society, Nazis decided to attack Jews, trans, disabled, and others? It's not an easy game to play and I think that's what most people here are trying to convey. In the end very few people think they themselves are evil.
> there is actually a categorical difference between advocating the persecution of minorities, and advocating the persecution of nazis.
This line is clear to you, but think harder. Abstract just a little and you can see. You program so I am confident you can handle abstraction. (if you can't program, well you're probably on the wrong forum)
Have you ever listened to the right wing talking points these days? I'm not saying you need to believe them, but "know your enemy". They are justifying their hate of minorities by making claims that those people are attacking them. They frame it as self-defense, not offense. It is absolutely critical to understand this, because that's how they have brought people to their side. It is the same way the Nazis did. But again, think carefully, were no one to actually act on said beliefs then how do you know? If you make a "preemptive strike" then you only empower their claims of acting in self-defense. Even if you can justify your "preemptive strike" as a self-defense measure too!
I think you are oversimplifying the problem because you are relying far too much on the obviousness of Nazis being evil. But if you make that mistake you'll have missed the important lesson of how the Nazis gained power and got support from so many people. If you truly believe that evil is trivial to identify then you'll have to conclude that the entire country of Germany one day decided that they wanted to be evil and then the next day they didn't. The ability to flip such a switch would be gravely concerning in of itself, and if unique to Germany then should you not conclude that they should not exist because they have such capacity for evil?
OR you can believe that things are more complicated. That evil creeps and infests. It disguises itself as good, tells you half lies so you have truth to found yourself on (even if that truth is distorted). That the road to Hell is paved by good intentions and that evil can be created by good men trying to do good things.
This is an underlying philosophy to those that acknowledge Turnkey Tyranny. And I say acknowledge, not believe, because look around you. Do you not see these leaders abusing their authoritarian powers? Look at the origins of many of those powers, especially with Trump. They don't all come from right wingers who were playing some long game. He's exploited powers brought in by Biden, Obama, and Clinton, just as he's exploiting powers brought in by Bush, Bush, and Regan.
Evil loves to convince people that everything is simple and evil is clearly identifiable. Why would it not? Do you really believe the snake isn't going to be a snake?
> do you not recognize that collectively, as a society, Nazis decided to attack Jews, trans, disabled, and others? ... in the end very few people think they themselves are evil.
yes, I agree with you, that society made some pretty bogus determinations, and they certainly didn't see themselves as evil. but in the fullness of time and history their position has been understood as wrong.
> I think you are oversimplifying the problem because you are relying far too much on the obviousness of Nazis being evil.
my point isn't about nazis or the obviousness of their evil. my point is that advancement as a species requires delegation of moral authority to collective government i.e. society. and transitively that the possibility of pathological negative outcomes doesn't somehow invalidate this idea outright. we don't throw away the concept of a judicial system because innocent people can be declared guilty. we work towards eliminating those failures in what is otherwise an essential component of government.
zoom out. think larger. be more empathetic. nazis and maga and all of this garbage are bugs in the system, which we're fully capable of stamping out, in the long term.
... Wait, how would the US government block ESA from launching stuff? ESA has its own rockets, which launch from its own facility and which are not drastically more expensive than Falcon 9 (this is a _fairly_ recent change; Ariane 5 was far more expensive than 6).
> ESA has its own rockets, which launch from its own facility and which are not drastically more expensive than Falcon 9
ESA's launch cadence does not permit populating a LEO constellation. On this, currently, America has a monopoly. (Soon, I expect, to be shared with China.)
Developing a reusable launch vehicle is not needed for a fast launch cadence. The expendable Soyuz family has had 2006 launches since 1957 [1]. That's one in just over 12 days, and in reality, the cadence has been a lot faster at times (for long, continuous stretches).
I think that always depends entirely on the docs and how people are instructed to use them.
From a software engineer standpoint, we have a larger collection of docs for the internal platform we run. The docs for other engineers follow the diátaxis framework [0] for documentation. Its the best approach we've found so far and the overall questions and guidance my team needed to provide reduced by a significant margin while the PRs we know receive have increased in quality and quantity.
Agreed, but I would say talking to someone isn't a magical fix here.
OP, I would be interested in knowing if that's the case, why are you posting here on HN, getting up in the morning, doing the things you do etc?
Are you depressed (if so) in a physiological or psychological kind of way (because of something external?)
I will say I am not doing too well, but still, if I look at things objectively right now, I'd still rather wait and see what happens in this world rather than choosing nothingness. My rock bottom is someone's heaven
This is good advice, but needs to be bookended with through research about your rights, and the consequences of discussing this with a medical professional, and all the various ways in which you can be fucked over.
Because there are some incredibly serious consequences to it.
This might work if you already have a network, but otherwise good luck getting through to people on the phone.
HR will answer the generic questions, but tell you to apply online. Cold "calling" people on LinkedIn is a shot in the dark. Some people don't mind you doing it, most will ignore you.
You can start building a network by reaching out to alumni, former colleagues, open-source contributors for projects you're contributing to [1], etc.
Hardly ideal, but it's a start.
[1] And if you're not contributing to an open-source project, please do it, it's a great way to learn stuff, improve your CV, network and of course give back.
I find this kind of advice underspecified. The people struggling the most to find work are juniors: what projects are big enough that the applicant would a) know and care about them and b) get a benefit out of the network but also c) have fruit low enough for a solo junior to reach?
I tried this way-back-when and ended up submitting fixes to projects that were open source but had no real path to accepting patches from people outside the cathedral.
If you just graduated college or have no network, you can reach out to alumni and mention that connection. Or, you can ask personal friends/family for contacts (will probably be local companies, which may be a first step job).
Or you can reach out over social media. "Hi there, I follow you on X and am just getting started in the industry. Do you mind if I ask a few research questions?" A friend of mine just used this technique to land a role in an industry where he had no contacts.
If the situation is "good luck getting through to people on the phone", then that probably means this person is not a real friend of yours, they are a stranger, and you shouldn't try. You should be reaching out to people who actually know your name, or you have a mutual friend.
You can buy reusable metal straws online or from a variety of retailers today, and you can remove (or refuse) the lid to a cup, at which point it can be used without a straw.
Another option would be to buy canned beverages rather than fountain drinks.
That's true, and as far as my quick research has gone, the plastic is burned off during the smelting process of aluminum recycling.
Because of the small amount of plastic in each can, and the high heat of the smelting process, odds are good the thin plastic liner will be almost fully combusted, which should greatly reduce the amount of microplastics.[1]
https://github.com/24eme/signaturepdf?tab=readme-ov-file#sig...