I actually think this level of control over notifications is a GOOD thing. Trash apps will mix spam and useful notifications without a way to filter out the spam ones. Nextdoor is garbage for a lot of reasons, but granular notifications controls are not one of them. Arguably, defaulting all of them to “On” is scummy, but if they didn’t, most users would probably never know they existed in the first place without UX handholding.
Look into mutual insurance. You actually get back money for the payouts they didn’t have to do that year. Northwestern, Amica, USAA, etc.
Cache-like storage, private user-specific data, blobby or otherwise schemaless data. Stuff like that. But IMO it’s a matter of time until you find a need to operate against this data relationally, and then you regret using document storage. I’ve made this mistake twice now and do not intend to make it again. I now consider document storage architecture to be a performance optimization with significant tradeoffs, and not a choice to be made by default for nearly any scenario.
Well this guy really doubled down on that thought
I really hate these awful “puzzles”. They only work by the asker intentionally withholding what, if any, constraints exist in the problem space leaving it totally vague, but of course there ARE secret constraints revealed if you violate them with your answer.
Me: “I do it without flipping any switches. I just ask the lightswitches which one controls the light, and they tell me.”
Interviewer: “That’s not allowed.”
Me: “Well what exactly is allowed? Can I pull the cables out of the wall and see which connects to the bulb? Oh, I bet that’s not allowed. How about I open my smart home app and just check which of the smart switches is labeled for it? Oh, I bet it’s not a smart switch so I can’t do that either? Oh, then the bulb has a chime that boops when it comes on, so I just listen for the boop. Oh that’s not allowed either? Wait wait wait, the walls are glass, so I just watch to see when the bulb comes on when I flick the switches.”
Even the canonical answer makes a dumb assumption. Ordinary LED bulbs don’t get hot.
Peremptory challenge, no reason needed. It’s one of the six I get for the case. Next.
Post it to neither, do something more enriching with your time
Prosecution will strike them. Next.
I don’t see anything political anywhere these days from adding filters and blocks over the past year or two. Whenever I very rarely do, I just block the user or community in Boost, or add another keyword filter to get rid of more spam. Similarly for regular feeds like my phone’s builtin Google News, I started marking them as “Don’t Show Content From [Source]”.
If enough people do this, perhaps publishers will learn that spamming people with misleading ragebait is a losing strategy. Probably not, though.
Money is a transferrable form of debt, and debt is emotion. You do something for someone or give someone something. They are then “indebted” to you. Or the reverse - you’ve been issued a fine, meaning some of the “debt” others owed to you for something valuable is now void because you did something interpreted negatively.
The physical money symbolizes the feeling of indebtedness, and standard currencies allow people to recognize one anothers’ debts as something commonly valuable and transferrable for symbolizing new debts.
It sounds kind of like karma, but because money is just symbolic for debt and not actually the real manifestation of the emotions associated with the causes of the indebtedness, having a lot of money, or vice-versa, doesn’t translate to a karmic judgment of a person. Someone can trick their way into making others feel indebted to them, at least at the point in time of the emotion to money exchange. Or, they can literally steal the “debt markers” that others accrued. Or, one can decide that one kind of debt is not worth as much as another kind of debt - foreign exchange rates, employment wages, etc mediate this mostly in the sense that human time is not valued identically depending on where a person lives or who they are.
And you can be “wealthy” without money, as long as enough people feel indebted to you and you can “exchange” that indebtedness for the things you want. The money is just for easy debt accounting and transfer.
Not exactly aimed at language keywords (although it is aimed at the language designers who decided abbreviations in keywords are acceptable):
I hate abbreviations in source code so fucking much. Reading is more of software engineering than writing. If you cannot be bothered to type a whole word because typing is hard for you, find a different job. Do not force others to engage in mental gymnastics to understand what the fuck a variable or function is supposed to mean.
His head is so far up his own ass he can’t bear to consider admitting he was totally, absolutely, inconceiveably wrong.
You put the opener on the top, not the side of the can. 
I disagree. Someone doesn’t return their shopping cart…? No remorse. No hesitation.
Played too much Pokémon, now I run a bet-fueled dog fighting operation
You think the QA was done by a person? I’ll bet this was Vibe QA’d.
Information
This is the real winner. Changing culture from the outside is way harder than on the inside, let alone collecting evidence of crimes committed by other gang members.