neatchee

I’m trying so hard not to hate this post but you have given me so many reasons to

• use of UwU in something I absolutely need to share with others

• mismatched fonts

• comic something font

• no human readable data next to the QR code

• mismatched gradient radii in the corners

Make it stop 😭

EDIT: For those who care, this comment falls into the category of “said in jest, meant in earnest”. I know it’s all on-brand and comedic, but my gut reactions are what they are 😂

EDIT: In the US this is covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act, which is extremely simple when defining what is considered on-the-job work. If it is mandatory, work-related, and for the benefit of the company, then it is on-the-job work and you should be paid for the time. So congratulations; you’ve likely participated in wage theft by onboarding people who aren’t being paid for their time. Obviously it wasn’t knowingly or with intent, but that doesn’t change the fact that, based on your response, your employers have had you or your coworkers participate in failing to pay people what they are owed.

Except for the other reply that starts “you are right. you cannot onboard a new job before you leave your old one”??? They may go on to say that accepting an offer isn’t onboarding but since I never tried to argue that it was, that’s kind of irrelevant.

Lots of people don’t know their rights or their obligations. Wage theft is the #1 from of theft in the US by a lot. Coordinating with an IT department for onboarding without getting paid for it is straight up wage theft and being taken advantage of. Doing so while still employed by another company is moonlighting under most contracts.

People do shit like that all the time. Doesn’t make it right. Doesn’t make it safe.

If you’re talking to the IT department about workstation configuration without signing a contract and getting paid for it, you’re being taken advantage of.

Yes, it’s reasonable, and smart, to ask people during the interview process about their tech stack. But there is no way I’m coordinating with IT on the setup and configuration of my workstation without a contract in place or before my start date.

I didn’t say you had to quit before accepting the offer. I said that the onboarding process itself is considered part of employment. If you’re talking to IT about setting up your workstation and not getting paid for it I feel bad that you’re being taken advantage of

Not only is this definitely true in the US but I know it’s true in other countries like the UK and Japan as well.

Communicating with IT is absolutely part of the onboarding process. And the phrasing of the email clearly states they are rescinding an offer acceptance, as in they had already accepted and begun onboarding.

In the overwhelming majority of situations you cannot begin the onboarding process with IT while still working for a previous employer. Especially at this level of software engineering that would run afoul of moonlighting policies.

is what your describing technically possible? sure. Is it even remotely probable? Absolutely not.

EDIT: I am absolutely flabbergasted at how many people don’t know their rights.

In the US this is covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act, which is extremely simple when defining what is considered on-the-job work. If it is mandatory, work-related, and for the benefit of the company, then it is on-the-job work and you should be paid for the time.

Stop perpetuating wage theft, people. It’s the #1 form of theft in the US by a wide margin. Learn your rights and demand pay for your work.

Logically terminating resources does not imply a terminating logic loop. Clever wordplay, though.

Recursion has a specific definition. It means solving a problem by breaking a process down into smaller and smaller self-similar pieces until reaching the “base case”. In programming, it (almost) always means a function that calls itself as part of its internal logic. Depending on what the function does and the conditions for returning a value from the function, it may do that one time, many times, or not at all. A classic example is the Boggle solver.

I did say I was being pedantic :P

Not to be pedantic, and I do appreciate the humor, but that’s not recursion either :3 Recursion doesn’t need to be endless. Recursive functions can absolutely have logical termination.

My point is simply that you’re being fingerprinted and re-banned, rather than these accounts triggering some independent “no 2fa comments” rule and getting individually banned. Whatever the trigger is, the system is recognizing you as an already banned use and re-banning you as soon as you cross their radar

If you’re not rotating your IP every time then you’re getting hit for ban evasion triggered by keyword detection or reports

If you’re not rotating your IP every time then you’re getting hit for ban evasion triggered by keyword detection or reports

As I said, they care about how you think. Do you ask all these questions?

if I were given this interview question I would immediately start asking questions: Do I have my phone? Can I bring any objects into the room? Do I know the construction of the light? How far from the room is the light switch panel?

Asking “what are the limitations and conditions of this situation” is literally the thing they want to see. That’s my entire point.

This is often exactly what the interview question is testing. Many of these questions are not about the solution but about how the applicant approaches problems

Site-to-site and individual client setups are not mutually exclusive. They can co-exist.

I have Wireguard on both my phone and laptop - and tailscale should work the same way - which I only activate when I’m away from my home network.

You could even set it up where each “roaming” device is always connected to their “home” network by VPN, which uses site-to-site to further route the traffic where it needs to go.

I recommend looking into setting up site-to-site VPN configurations between routers at each location. I have this set up between my home network and my parents’ network.

Once you have it properly configured you can simply have the router itself handle routing of specific traffic over the VPN connection, instead of needing each device to connect to the VPN individually.

it’s a bit more complicated to set up and maintain but not anything outrageously complex, and absolutely worth it for your use case IMO