I'm not arguing against the "20 years" argument, but Microsoft was successful in extinguishing both Javascript and Netscape (and Internet browsers at large).

It took Netscape open-sourcing its main product + many many years of dedicated work for Firefox to rise to the point it became a viable alternative. Microsoft could call it anything other than "great success".

The same goes with Javascript. For years, people couldn't tell "Javascript" and "Internet explorer's strange variant of Javascript" apart.

I hated Bixby so much, and was so annoyed by the fact that the only way to turn it off is to log in to it, which is the reason I didn't want it in the first place, that I installed LineageOs on it days after I got it.

There are many upsides to this (such as: I can use the "bixby button" to start the camera, and more importantly, not start Bixby), but one of them is that I did not get any notification about the Galaxy 10 in any way or form.

As soon as I saw them advertising on TV, I knew they were feeling heat.

a month is not unreasonable.

Couldn't agree more. A month, from CV reaching a company until a decision, is not unreasonable. Which means that 3 weeks to merely start the process is way too much.

If your main criteria for getting a job is how quickly they are able to hire you

I never said that was my main criteria, but performing the hiring within time constraint is a constraint I, myself, am subjected to. Otherwise, they might say "no" and I'll be left with no other options.

then you'll probably learn how quickly they're able to let you go as well.

Please cite your sources. Both common sense and my personal experience tells me that there is a positive correlational between how much a company is geared toward providing a good hiring experience and how much they appreciate their work force. This affects not only how (un)happy they are to get rid of you, but also how they treat you while you work there.

In fact, at some point, after having been burned, I started outright rejecting companies that their hiring process seemed off. I always made it a point, whenever talking to people who work for those companies, to ask about it (work conditions, termination policies, etc.). There has, so far, always been substance to that initial feeling. It wasn't always to the level of "keep away" (but enough times it was), but it has never turned out to be "no, I have no idea what you're talking about".

MagicLeap is a case in point. I gave them a pass based on bad recruiting process, but reviewing Glassdoor reports now shows me that practically all good reviews come from people employed there less than a year. All people employed there longer are neutral at best, and downright running away screaming at worst.

First, the three weeks started after the recruiter has already passed on my CV to the company.

But the bottom line is that this doesn't matter. When I am looking for a job, there is a limit to how much it is reasonable to keep companies waiting. A company making an offer typically wants an answer within three days of making it, so they can offer it to someone else if I say "no". They are, usually, okay with postponing making the offer for a while, but not indefinitely.

If your hiring process takes eight months to complete, and it really doesn't matter why, then you will only be able to hire those candidates who have no other choices. In other words, you won't be picking top talent this way.

You might have the best excuse in the world, but the bottom line is that I don't really care. I will not give up on other offers merely because your bureaucracy sucks. Quite the contrary. I find it is an effective filter to eliminate the kind of employers I'd rather give a miss on anyways.

So you can continue to feel free to make excuses why that rate makes sense, and I'll continue to find my employment elsewhere.

Because I have the choice.

Yeah, that's no way to retain top talent. Anyone who knows what they're doing and has a choice should shy away from such practices.

And it seems that Glassdoor agrees. At least from those reviews I've scanned, the more time people worked there, the less they are happy with the company.

TL;DR: I almost interviewed for them once

The recruiter was very enthusiastic, and truthfully, so was I. So I approved sending them my resume.

And I didn't hear back.

For three weeks.

I gave up on them, but the recruiter kept assuring me that this doesn't mean anything. I kept looking at other places, and was moving toward making a decision.

And then they called back. To begin with, the tone was... strange. It was "we know you're trying to reach a decision, but so you know, our process takes three interviews and take a while, so you (and, presumably, all my other potential employers) will have to accommodate that.

Oh well...

Then they asked me to sign an NDA as a condition to having the interviews. I'll remind you all that this is a product they have already launched. They were the only potential employer who asked for an NDA. Hmm...

So they send me a link to the NDA, and it contains restrictions on me telling people I am even interviewing for them, as well as a five years confidentiality agreement. I tried to negotiate this insane number, but they made it clear that the NDA was non-negotiable.

So I gave them a pass. And seeing this piece of news, I'm glad I did.

I'm sending this anonymously for obvious reasons. Ha! No I'm not. I am sending this under my real name because I did not sign any confidentiality agreements.

Shachar Shemesh

A while back I started having carpal tunnel pain in both my hands. Traction made the pain better, but my doctor sent me to a physiotherapist.

What I was told was that pain in both hands usually stems not from the hands, but from the neck. The instructions were simple and clear: stop slouching!

This required a total reorganization of my work environment. My monitor is now both higher and much closer to my face (to entice me to push my head back). I'm still looking for a solution for the keyboard (I need to further back than my monitor, which will probably require me to build a shelf). The chair, however, was a real problem for me. All the chairs I tried, no matter how I configured them, wouldn't push my back high enough.

Until I figured out that what I really need is a chair that has no back support at all. It takes about two weeks for your back muscles to be strong enough for you to survive a whole day of using that chair exclusively, but it is, I think, really worth the effort.

And when I searched for the best such chair, I found that what worked best for me was a simple piano stool. Cheap and effective.

Actually, I believe this statistics, on its own, is quite meaningful for "job stability".

Even if the market keeps many people more-or-less employed, but they are frequently laid off and have to find a new employment, then that is not a very good sign for the market at large. At the very least, you'd have to say the market is volatile.

Actually, there is a good technical reasons:

There are a lot of security companies in Israel. Probably in the thousands, if not more. It should come as no surprise, therefor, that some of them would be shady.

Shachar

It's not exactly the same thing.

If I make an effort to remember a detail, I can actually do it. I remember deciding that my daughter's eyes are milk-chocolate brown. I don't remember seeing the color, but I do remember what it was.

I remember that, however, like you'd remember how a place you've never seen, but had described to you, looks like. You know the facts but don't have the mental image that comes with actually having seen it.

My case is mild, but I don't think gray nondescript blurs is the correct way to put it.

The face is there, and if you ask me questions about someone I can answer them without a problem, so long as I am seeing them right now. Ask me to look at a picture, and then cover the picture and ask me questions, and I'm hopelessly lost. I can see the face just fine, but nothing from it registers in memory.

Like I said, my case is a mild one. People I see often do stick to memory, but not via the details. I'm hopelessly lost about those even for close family. I cannot reliably tell you my wife's eye-color. Instead, when I see here, the overall shape of the face suddenly fits in to the right place, and I can tell you who that person is with confidence and without fail.

I took an online test once, and I had no trouble identifying Rowan Atkinson and Ian McKellen (pictures were shown with the hair cut away). Ask me to describe either one of them, and I'm drawing a total blank on Rowan, and for Ian I'm going to go with "wrinkles".

So it's not true that I see the face as a gray blur. It is more accurate to say that that's what's left in my memory as soon as I turn my eyes away.

As a bearer of mild prosopagnosia, such an app would be useless to me.

First of all, raising the camera to people before approaching them (or, as it more often the case, they approach you) is rude. I much rather tell people I have face blindness and that I'm sorry but they'll have to be specific.

Even had that not been the case, the people I don't know are people who I rarely meet, which means they won't be in my app's database.

Today, my coping mechanism is to simply tell new people I meet that I suffer from face blindness up front, and apologize to them I may not recognize them the next time.