I wonder if it's possible to come up with an alphabet where different sound clusters are addressed by individual letters. For instance:
'h𐑬se' and 'aut' - where 𐑬 is read as 'au' in RP, but as 'oy' in NI.
The downside is that the said alphabet would have more letters and it won't be always easy to guess the spelling based on pronunciation (still easier than currently in English), but the upside is that one can always read any word correctly in their accent.
It depends on the company. A few companies have a terminal level that is approximately equivalent to Dropbox's IC3/IC4. This level does not involve managing people, but it does require owning projects that can span across several teams.
The boom _during_ Covid has been crazy, but I think it's still possible to get a FAANG job that will get you to the US. The other route would be joining a FAANG in the UK and then changing teams after 1-2 years.
I'm honestly not trying to nitpick, but the explanation "they do X because they can X" is not a good one. Being able to do X is a prerequisite for doing X, but it is not a sufficient condition. Why do they choose to, though? Perhaps, a part of it is vanity, but
> nothing to do with your skills
is a bit much. I might assure you, a FAANG interview requires certain skills[1], and it's easy to fail or be "downleveled" to a lower salary.
[1] - not to discourage anyone from trying to, you just need to put in some time and work.
I have trouble discerning the author's point exactly.
- Yes, you can't rely on open-source project going in the same direction as you want.
- Yes, any process involving people has a phycological and interpersonal component.
> To this day we read about the war and it feels distant[...]
> [..]don't get blindsided, especially in times of war[...]
I'm glad the author is not affected by the war, but I supposed it's fair to say that it is not hard for the author to stay unbiased (or it might be just indifferent).
> Did people end up eating potassium permanganate? I think that would be pretty toxic.
It is definitely toxic and dangerous. Yet, we used a very light solution of it (I'm thinking <0.1%, a very light shade of purple) to cause vomit reflex.
> I’ve noticed that if I respond to people’s emails quickly, they send me more emails.
That's funny: when I learnt this, I have encouraged myself to reply with a delay so that give people a chance to resolve problems on their own and generate less emails for future me to handle.
Perhaps, in the second sentence, they meant total calories. More fat with protein is good, more fat with carbs - bad. According to this paper. But, yes, the abstract section could be greatly improved.
> The government recommends that free sugars – sugars added to food or drinks, and sugars found naturally in honey, syrups, and unsweetened fruit and vegetable juices, smoothies and purées – should not make up more than 5% of the energy (calories) you get from food and drink each day.
But even if the recommendation is added sugar -- what is the real difference between added and "natural" occurring sugar? Does this distinction invalidate my comment above? The point being that it's quite possible and even easy to consume several times, or even order above the reasonable amount of sugar by eating fruits. The apple is not even the sweetest one.
I don't have a citation either, but google search reveals the following points:
1) One serving, or one medium apple, provides about 95 calories, 0 gram fat, 1 gram protein, 25 grams carbohydrate, 19 grams sugar (naturally occurring), and 3 grams fiber.
2) Recommended amount of consumed sugar for an adult is 30 grams per day.
3) You can also find a lot of citations how increased sugar consumption increases chances of diabetes.
So two apples already gets you above the recommended amount. An apple is basically 80% sugar in terms of calories: 19 * 4 / 95 = ~80%
'h𐑬se' and 'aut' - where 𐑬 is read as 'au' in RP, but as 'oy' in NI.
The downside is that the said alphabet would have more letters and it won't be always easy to guess the spelling based on pronunciation (still easier than currently in English), but the upside is that one can always read any word correctly in their accent.