Can we all just agree that cyber criminals suck? Especially if you are a legit developer who wants to offer useful apps to the world?

Don't get me wrong, I can't stand surveillance, and I think age verification is virtue signaling and will have very little affect on actual cyber crime. We need a better way to stop online abuse.

But certificates, GateKeeper, app certification, app stores etc. are all supposed to mitigate serious harm from bad actors.

We need to get much better at security in general if we want to have nice things.

The worst cybercriminals are allowed on the app store. Facebook and Google are two obvious examples.

Even if avoid installing their apps, take a look at all the third-party data harvesting malware that iOS apps bundle. You'll find you have plenty of stuff installed from them, and even worse actors.

Linux doesn't have any of this developer certification bullshit, and it has (almost) none of these issues.

How exactly are you turning my comment into defending Facebook and Google? If that's how it comes off then I believe it is being misinterpreted.

I would also argue that Linux does have it - at least in Ubuntu it does with snaps. And package maintainers do a lot of unseen, thankless work as well.

As a developer, I do not like having to deal with certificates. But the few times I have seen them prevent serious problems, I was glad they were there.

Why coders rule and droids drool

Does anyone else ever think "that code I just pushed into my repo just took down all of github..." whenever it goes down around the same time you sync your changes?

> we will end up being governed by corporate billionaires

I think it's a little late for that.

I feel like this is why the communication medium matters so much to how things are perceived. There is like this extra layer nuance and detail that is critical in email/chat and must be accounted for. Like the "Thanks!" thing. It's darn near impossible to hear the tone of someone's voice in email. So for me, the "Thanks!" ending kinda defaults to sounding like "Ha ha! It's your problem now!" in my head. Which may, or may not be completely wrong.

Because it demonstrates flexibility. But I can imagine contexts in which impeccable punctuation is far, far more important.

You know what they say about walking a mile in someone else's shoes? By the time they realize it, you'll be a mile away. And you'll have their shoes!

Because it was. Was probably this person's 10th interview of the day. They probably only need the simplest of infractions to weed someone out given the absurd volume of applications they receive.

> Because [arriving 15 minutes late to a 30-minute interview] was [nothing].

I'd expect over 95% of both interviewers and interviewees to say that arriving 15 minutes late to a 30-minute interview is very much not nothing; it's a serious breach of what is expected – on both sides of the interview.

If you show up late for an interview, no matter which side of the table you're on, you ought to apologize and, if you're more than a few minutes late, have a good explanation. To do anything less signals that you are an unreliable person. And, when you are representing a company, it makes the company look like it's run by people who don't even understand how to do something as simple as show up on time. It suggests that one of the company's unspoken core values is Dysfunction.

If I had shown up fifteen minutes late for the interview then they likely wouldn’t make an offer and they likely would have called it out during the interview. No one seems to call out companies when they do this shit.

They wouldn’t care if I had a really bad day beforehand, and they certainly wouldn’t assume that I had a good excuse for it.

Would you want to work with you? Maybe yes. But if I am making a choice about who to work with, I would prefer someone who has enough empathy and awareness to realize that it's possible that the interviewer might be running behind through no fault of their own. I would extend that to the my team members, and I hope they would in-turn, extend that to me.

You sound to me like someone who sees "please be direct and straight forward" as a free pass to nit-pick every little thing. Like maybe it's your duty to criticize even when it has little to no bearing on future success.

If I showed up late halfway through the interview, I would almost certainly not get an offer, and if the hiring manager called me out on that fact then no one would call that manager an asshole.

I am not “nitpicking every little thing” and I feel like there’s a lot of extrapolation going on there. I do think it’s extremely disrespectful to schedule a meeting and show up very late so that the interviewee doesn’t have time do do the full interview. In fact I think it is categorically more disrespectful than a snarky comment about lateness.

One of the best people I have ever worked with was somebody I interviewed and recommended be hired. She missed her first interview entirely. I was waiting for her to show up, annoyed that she was late, and she called me and said she needed to reschedule. At the time, she was hiking in the greenbelt on a beautiful day. I said, sure, we rescheduled, and she was a huge asset to the team. I kept the details of having to reschedule her interview quiet - because they had no bearing at all on her ability to do a good job.

I dare say that you are an outlier. When I have shown up significantly late for interviews they often cut it short before it even really starts.

Have I not established quite thoroughly that I am an outlier in many ways? Also, outliers exist. Also, being an outlier does not automatically equal "incorrect".

If the manager told you

"You don't value our time, you show up late, how do you expect us to value your time?"

Or something to that extent, that would be extremely rude. It's like a line out of Wolf of wall street or those trump movies - "You're fired!".

I have had hiring managers tell me that, almost verbatim actually, when I forgot about the interview and showed up significantly late.

I was embarrassed and yeah I admit that it wasn’t exactly fun to be called out like that, but I would much rather they say that than for them to pretend everything is fine, let me leave the interview thinking I didn’t annoy them, and then have it be a mystery as to why I am declined.

I felt embarrassed in the moment, and I should feel embarrassed. It is very rude and inconsiderate to not show up to meetings that you agreed to show up for and it signals that you don’t take the other person’s time very seriously.

To be clear, it wasn’t like I was being pedantic to the second; I know Zoom and Google Meet can be finicky so I understand being a minute or two late for a meeting and I generally don’t say anything if they are within the “my fucking microphone isn’t connecting gotta fix it” threshold.

Oooh this is good! So - I agree with part of this.

When a conversational partner chooses to communicate a certain way because of how they want to be perceived, they are living out their values. And I admire that, and I think it is an important component of a healthy organization.

But, if you would, allow me to describe the distress I feel when I have to take in "extra words". Because I personally do not feel it as extremely minor.

My mind operates almost exclusively on language, mostly in text form. I do not absorb input in paragraphs with overarching or underlying emotional content. I don't even absorb it in sentences. I process language word by word - and when reading code it's character by character. Each chunk I take as input explodes into hundreds of possibilities of meaning that each must be thought about in turn, and then dismissed as probably not what the person meant. Some of these are quite funny, and if you are one of the dozen or so people close to me, I might even share them out loud hoping for a laugh. In a real-time conversation, this has to happen in milliseconds. It never turns off - the language parser/analyzer occupies a large chunk of my brain's processing continuously, even when I wish it didn't. If I am under some stress - even normal everyday work stress, and I feel like I need to force myself to process even more words, when they are not hyper-relevant to the stressful situation at-hand, I often find that I have not enough capacity left for managing my emotional state. Fear, uncertainty, risk evaluation all get heightened. Fight-or-flight can kick in too. What if the time I just spent socializing with this person and managing their emotional needs too puts the project over-budget? What if I loose my place on this team because of that? Depending on lots of things, this can either spiral into questioning my very existence and place in the universe, or it can fizzle out and you'd never even notice it.

So just be careful when you evaluate how distressing something is to another person. Unless you know them quite well, you might not have the clearest picture.

Given that you literally started your response with a pleasant agreement and affirmation on my point makes feel like you are arguing this in bad faith, but if statements like, "how was your weekend" included in an ask cause you distress then you are so maladapt to society to the point that you should have close to zero expectations for others to accommodate your needs in public spaces such as a work environment. You almost exclusively have the responsibility to regulate your emotions or not expose yourself to situations where people might include a hollow inquiry into your weekend in their written communications.

Asking people not to include minor pleasantries in their written communication isn't a "reasonable" request for anything larger than a small group of people.

Indeed. I am quite maladapted to society. That's my point - thanks for making it more obvious!