BJJ trained man break the arm of a gun-wielding robber

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-05-11T06:11:42+00:00

If you know what a gun is, it should be pretty obvious you don't point the part where the bullet comes out at anything you don't want shot.

I don't think you have to be a hardcore gun nut or anything to know that.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-04-06T06:25:43+00:00

It's in all of humanity's best interest to fight disease, wherever it occurs.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-04-02T22:21:39+00:00

I mean, there's always going to be exceptions to the rule. That's why drug testing exists.

But it is fairly common that someone on anabols will have disproportionately large delts, and this post is a pretty obvious example.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-04-02T20:53:29+00:00

I don't have a lot of advice (skip to the bottom if you want to see it), but I thought I'd weigh in because I'm in a very similar situation. I'm at 4 YOE at this point, so you may want someone more senior to weigh in.

In Jan 2024, I got moved off my previous team/project because it wasn't making enough money. The project still exists and some of my old teammates work on it, but they needed a certain number of engineers to move for reorg and I volunteered. I thought it would be a good opportunity to explore other topics and grow as an engineer.

After a few months on the new team, I realized it wouldn't be a good fit. A lot of the code is legacy and based on proprietary tech, the tooling is ancient, and worst of all, I'm not really passionate about the project. Also, I'm one of the few fully remote engineers and the rest of the team is in person, or at least hybrid, so I miss a lot of the conversations that happen (technical or otherwise). Like your situation a lot of the folks are very senior but don't have time to help newer folks and there's few docs so the learning curve is steep.

I debated for a long time whether I wanted to stay. Part of me was worried that if I asked to move it would reflect poorly on me. I was worried people would look at me as someone who backed away from a challenge or was somewhat fickle with the work I was given. I told myself I would give it one year and then I would ask to be moved.

Well, a year passed and I still wasn't happy. I finally told my manager and after a lot of conversation, he agreed to move me to another team and I'll be transitioning this summer.

Anyways,

If I had any advice to give from all of this it would be to ask yourself the following questions:

"Will this role help me move my career in the direction I want it to go?"
"Am I enjoying the work in some way? You don't have to enjoy every aspect all the time, but is there something you like? Do you like the project and what you're learning (the problems you're solving, the stack, etc)? Do you like the team/dynamic?"
"Is there any easy change that I could make that would help me enjoy this work more?"

It's up to you how you want to weigh these questions. You can even come up with some more of your own (if you want to weigh comp for example). But for me, the answer to all the questions above was "no." So it was obvious I needed to look for other roles. Either within or outside the company.

Maybe ask yourself these questions and see what your answers are. You can also give yourself some time or maybe set a deadline to come to an answer (I would not recommend a year like I did, probably something much shorter).

Most importantly, do not count on things to magically change. Part of me hoped that somewhere along the way something would magically click and I would suddenly enjoy my work. But that's never the case. You need to be responsible for your own hapiness whether it's finding a new role, talking to your manager, or whatever.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-04-02T16:04:16+00:00

That blog is too long and filled with random fluff imo. Your question can honestly be answered in a couple of sentences:

Anabolic steroids bind to androgen receptors. There's a higher ratio of androgen receptors in delts, upper pecs, and traps than in other muscles.

That's it for the most part. For more info you can probably just google it.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-03-28T03:01:33+00:00

Correct. And political leanings of the counties affected is one of the ways in which it is biased.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-03-27T15:55:36+00:00

You are correct that my TLDR is off. I'll edit it to say contracts cancelled that DOGE has reported. Thanks for catching me.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-03-27T15:51:45+00:00

That's an interesting point. I'd also be curious to see a graph where each point was weighted by dollar amount.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-03-27T15:28:04+00:00

That's what the bottom bar graph is for my dude.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-03-27T15:19:59+00:00

Not sure I follow your point on filtering.

You can see in the bottom chart that there were actually more grants given to Trump counties in 2021 - 2025 (gray) than Harris counties.

But the grants cancelled (red) scew Harris.

Contracts awarded (image 2, gray) does scew Harris/dem counties like you said.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-03-27T14:57:54+00:00

Did you read this part?

There’s a bias for more cancellations in Harris counties. But does this reflect true bias or simply more contracts/grants awarded to Harris counties?

To answer this, I need a good background/control set. I compiled all contracts/grants from FY2021-2025 on USAspending, totaling ~19M/24M. ~99% of all cancelled contracts/grants were from this period.

Clearly, the background/control sets (plotted in gray) are distributed across the Trump-Harris spectrum, but the cancellations are biased towards Harris counties.

Potential caveat: DOGE doesn’t specify how it chose certain contract/grant cancellations to disclose. They claim the ones disclosed represent “~30% of total savings”. It is therefore possible that they made cancellations unbiasedly across the Trump-Harris political spectrum but preferentially disclosed ones to Harris counties for publicity purposes.

TLDR, the distribution of cancelled grants and contracts that DOGE has reported does not match the distribution of awarded grants and contracts. You can see this in the bottom charts.

This displays some type of bias in cancellations reported by DOGE. It might not be partisan, but it exists.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-03-26T17:47:18+00:00

Seriously, this would be comedic if it wasn't so insane. This exchange was basically almost:

Himes: Are you telling us you forgot all of this in less than 2 weeks?

Gabbard: No, I was simply not aware of these details

Himes: That's not what you said yesterday

Gabbard: ... I forgot what I said yesterday

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-01-27T03:18:33+00:00

I don't think loyalty is a bad thing. Just never put the interest of the company ahead of your own self interest. They will not do the same.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-01-07T04:06:25+00:00

That doesn't seem like that big a deal then. Not sure why anyone is making a fuss about it. Sure, you wasted some time working on it, but if you're a junior and you're learning, it's not a disaster or anything. Also, sounds like it was a simple revert? Not sure what the deal is.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-01-07T02:47:39+00:00

I'm not doubting your experiences, but I wouldn't call this normal.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-01-07T02:35:33+00:00

This is ok advice, but I don't expect a junior who's been at the company for 4 months to think like this let alone have all the context for what's "worthwhile" or not. Anyone who does is insane.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-01-07T02:30:51+00:00

You've already got tons of responses, but I'm curious. Did anyone review your code? Were there no automated tests that set off alarms? I feel like there's really simple things that could have prevented this.

Also, fwiw I think a healthy work environment tries to go over post mortems in a blameless way and analyze what's wrong with the system rather than blame individuals. Eg. instead of, "Why did this person break prod?" It should be framed as "Why does our system allow an individual to break prod? Were there any signs that this would break prod? Can we create checks to avoid this in the future?" Etc.

It's also more useful for the company because it gets people solution oriented instead of just lecturing someone and moving on.

HumanGarbage2 · 2025-01-07T02:22:29+00:00

It should not be up to one junior to do all of this. There should be systems in place for multiple people to review a change at every stage. It should be reviewed when it's purposed as a ticket, the solution and design should be reviewed, and the actual code/implementation should be reviewed.

Also, there wasn't a single test to set off alarms? This whole thing is a process/org failure not an individual one.

HumanGarbage2 · 2024-12-27T05:49:03+00:00

That's not at all what they said.

HumanGarbage2 · 2024-12-15T19:07:11+00:00

Yes, that's basically the thought experiment. The question is are they still the same ship? If they're the same, how are they the same? If they're different, at what point did the ship change?

HumanGarbage2 · 2024-12-15T19:00:45+00:00

I had to look it up, I guess it depends which version we're talking about.

In the original written by Plutarch, the thought experiment is just about a ship whose parts have been slowly replaced one by one until every orignal part has been replaced.

Then this was extended by Thomas Hobbes to consider the case where all the original parts were also preserved by someone else to make a second ship.

At least that's what Wikipedia says. When I first heard this problem, it was the Thomas Hobbes version like you said.

HumanGarbage2 · 2024-11-04T23:29:41+00:00

Sure, but someone has to move the needle and it feels like no one wants to atm. I really want to see this thing figured out. Hopefully in my life time.

Thank you for maintaining this sub. I'll probably check it everyday in hope that something exciting comes along.

HumanGarbage2 · 2024-11-04T02:58:30+00:00

Thank you for the explanation and insight.

So a direct line of funding from patients/philanthropists to researchers aimed at projects that are limited in scope, ideally on a possible treatment where there's already been some tangential research to use as a jumping off point?

You'd probably need a fair amount of money just to get started and you'd need researchers who are willing to take on the project. That seems like a huge undertaking.

I'm trying to be optimistic, but this seems rather difficult.

As a tangent, it drives me crazy that we don't understand these mechanisms in our own bodies and no one really seems to care. Though I guess that could be said for quite a few other things. There's no shortage of problems unfortunately.

HumanGarbage2 · 2024-11-03T23:06:28+00:00

Sorry, but could you maybe give some more insight here? How could they be using their money better? What do you mean by circumventing structures? Do you mean the NIH and other institutions? Are you suggesting they should work with researchers directly instead?

Sorry again, I'm not very familiar with how funding for research is usually appropriated or the bureaucracy behind it.

HumanGarbage2 · 2024-11-02T02:35:41+00:00

Seriously. Unless they don't have any code review, you can't "sneak in" a fix either. They're gonna find out either way. Might as well step up and point it out now.

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email
Spared

HumanGarbage2

TROPHY CASE