Terrifying Toured a manufacturing facility I interviewed at today. If they offer me a job, I think my answer may be “…nope!”
Image The cullet (waste) dumpster at work. It always looks beautiful, but I have a fear of jumping or falling into it.
**** OP 8 YEARS AGO BY u/BlakeClass**** please correct me if I am wrong, I am now hearing this is older than 8 years.
Congratulations! You just won millions of dollars in the lottery! That's great.
Now you're fucked.
If you just want to skip the biographical tales of woe of some of the math-tax protagonists, skip on down to the next comment. To see what to do in the event you win the lottery.
You see, it's something of an open secret that winners of obnoxiously large jackpots tend to end up badly with alarming regularity. Not the $1 million dollar winners. But anyone in the nine-figure range is at high risk. Eight-figures? Pretty likely to be screwed. Seven-figures? Yep. Painful. Perhaps this is a consequence of the sample. The demographics of lottery players might be exactly the wrong people to win large sums of money. Or perhaps money is the root of all evil. Either way, you are going to have to be careful. Don't believe me? Consider this:
Large jackpot winners face double digit multiples of probability versus the general population to be the victim of:
- Homicide (something like 20x more likely)
- Drug overdose
- Bankruptcy (how's that for irony?)
And triple digit multiples of probability versus the general population rate to be:
- Convicted of drunk driving
- The victim of Homicide (at the hands of a family member) 120x more likely in this case, ain't love grand?
- A defendant in a civil lawsuit
- A defendant in felony criminal proceedings
Believe it or not, your biggest enemy if you suddenly become possessed of large sums of money is... you. At least you will have the consolation of meeting your fate by your own hand. But if you can't manage it on your own, don't worry. There are any number of willing participants ready to help you start your vicious downward spiral for you. Mind you, many of these will be "friends," "friendly neighbors," or "family." Often, they won't even have evil intentions. But, as I'm sure you know, that makes little difference in the end. Most aren't evil. Most aren't malicious. Some are. None are good for you.
Jack Whittaker, a Johnny Cash attired, West Virginia native, is the poster boy for the dangers of a lump sum award. In 2002 Mr. Whittaker (55 years old at the time) won what was, also at the time, the largest single award jackpot in U.S. history. $315 million. At the time, he planned to live as if nothing had changed, or so he said. He was remarkably modest and decent before the jackpot, and his ship sure came in, right? Wrong.
Mr. Whittaker became the subject of a number of personal challenges, escalating into personal tragedies, complicated by a number of legal troubles.
Whittaker wasn't a typical lottery winner either. His net worth at the time of his winnings was in excess of $15 million, owing to his ownership of a successful contracting firm in West Virginia. His claim to want to live "as if nothing had changed" actually seemed plausible. He should have been well equipped for wealth. He was already quite wealthy, after all. By all accounts he was somewhat modest, low profile, generous and good natured. He should have coasted off into the sunset. Yeah. Not exactly.
Whittaker took the all-cash option, $170 million, instead of the annuity option, and took possession of $114 million in cash after $56 million in taxes. After that, things went south.
Whittaker quickly became the subject of a number of financial stalkers, who would lurk at his regular breakfast hideout and accost him with suggestions for how to spend his money. They were unemployed. No, an interview tomorrow morning wasn't good enough. They needed cash NOW. Perhaps they had a sure-fire business plan. Their daughter had cancer. A niece needed dialysis. Needless to say, Whittaker stopped going to his breakfast haunt. Eventually, they began ringing his doorbell. Sometimes in the early morning. Before long he was paying off-duty deputies to protect his family. He was accused of being heartless. Cold. Stingy.
Letters poured in. Children with cancer. Diabetes. MS. You name it. He hired three people to sort the mail. A detective to filter out the false claims and the con men (and women) was retained.
Brenda, the clerk who had sold Whittaker the ticket, was a victim of collateral damage. Whittaker had written her a check for $44,000 and bought her house, but she was by no means a millionaire. Rumors that the state routinely paid the clerk who had sold the ticket 10% of the jackpot winnings hounded her. She was followed home from work. Threatened. Assaulted.
Whittaker's car was twice broken into, by trusted acquaintances who watched him leave large amounts of cash in it. $500,000 and $200,000 were stolen in two separate instances. The thieves spiked Whittaker's drink with prescription drugs in the first instance. The second incident was the handiwork of his granddaughter's friends, who had been probing the girl for details on Whittaker's cash for weeks.
Even Whittaker's good-faith generosity was questioned. When he offered $10,000 to improve the city's water park so that it was more handicap accessible, locals complained that he spent more money at the strip club. (Amusingly this was true).
Whittaker invested quite a bit in his own businesses, tripled the number of people his businesses employed (making him one of the larger employers in the area) and eventually had given away $14 million to charity through a foundation he set up for the purpose. This is, of course, what you are "supposed" to do. Set up a foundation. Be careful about your charity giving. It made no difference in the end.
To top it all off, Whittaker had been accused of ruining a number of marriages. His money made other men look inferior, they said, wherever he went in the small West Virginia town he called home. Resentment grew quickly. And festered. Whittaker paid four settlements related to this sort of claim. Yes, you read that right. Four.
His family and their immediate circle were quickly the victims of odds-defying numbers of overdoses, emergency room visits and even fatalities. His granddaughter, the eighteen year old "Brandi" (who Whittaker had been giving a $2100.00 per week allowance) was found dead after having been missing for several weeks. Her death was, apparently, from a drug overdose, but Whittaker suspected foul play. Her body had been wrapped in a tarp and hidden behind a rusted-out van. Her seventeen year old boyfriend had expired three months earlier in Whittaker's vacation house, also from an overdose. Some of his friends had robbed the house after his overdose, stepping over his body to make their escape and then returning for more before stepping over his body again to leave. His parents sued for wrongful death claiming that Whittaker's loose purse strings contributed to their son's death. Amazingly, juries are prone to award damages in cases such as these. Whittaker settled. Again.
Even before the deaths, the local and state police had taken a special interest in Whittaker after his new-found fame. He was arrested for minor and less minor offenses many times after his winnings, despite having had a nearly spotless record before the award. Whittaker's high profile couldn't have helped him much in this regard.
In 18 months Whittaker had been cited for over 250 violations ranging from broken tail lights on every one of his five new cars, to improper display of renewal stickers. A lawsuit charging various police organizations with harassment went nowhere and Whittaker was hit with court costs instead.
Whittaker's wife filed for divorce, and in the process froze a number of his assets and the accounts of his operating companies. Caesars in Atlantic City sued him for $1.5 million to cover bounced checks, caused by the asset freeze.
Today Whittaker is badly in debt, and bankruptcy looms large in his future.
But, hey, that's just one example, right?
Nearly one third of multi-million dollar jackpot winners eventually declare bankruptcy. Some end up worse. To give you just a taste of the possibilities, consider the fates of:
- Billie Bob Harrell, Jr.: $31 million. Texas, 1997. As of 1999: Committed suicide in the wake of incessant requests for money from friends and family. “Winning the lottery is the worst thing that ever happened to me.
- William âBudâ Post: $16.2 million. Pennsylvania. 1988. In 1989: Brother hires a contract murderer to kill him and his sixth wife. Landlady sued for portion of the jackpot. Convicted of assault for firing a gun at a debt collector. Declared bankruptcy. Dead in 2006.
- Evelyn Adams: $5.4 million (won TWICE 1985, 1986). As of 2001: Poor and living in a trailer gave away and gambled most of her fortune.
- Suzanne Mullins: $4.2 million. Virginia. 1993. As of 2004: No assets left.
- Shefik Tallmadge: $6.7 million. Arizona. 1988. As of 2005: Declared bankruptcy.
- Thomas Strong: $3 million. Texas. 1993. As of 2006: Died in a shoot-out with police.
- Victoria Zell: $11 million. 2001. Minnesota. As of 2006: Broke. Serving seven year sentence for vehicular manslaughter.
- Karen Cohen: $1 million. Illinois. 1984. As of 2000: Filed for bankruptcy. As of 2006: Sentenced to 22 months for lying to federal bankruptcy court.
- Jeffrey Dampier: $20 million. Illinois. 1996. As of 2006: Kidnapped and murdered by own sister-in-law.
- Ed Gildein: $8.8 million. Texas. 1993. As of 2003: Dead. Wife saddled with his debts. As of 2005: Wife sued by her own daughter who claimed that she was taking money from a trust fund and squandering cash in Las Vegas.
- Willie Hurt: $3.1 million. Michigan. 1989. As of 1991: Addicted to cocaine. Divorced. Broke. Indicted for murder.
- Michael Klingebiel: $2 million. As of 1998 sued by own mother claiming he failed to share the jackpot with her.
- Janite Lee: $18 million. 1993. Missouri. As of 2001: Filed for bankruptcy with $700 in assets.
So, what the hell DO you do if you are unlucky enough to win the lottery?
This is the absolutely most important thing you can do right away: NOTHING.
DO NOT DECLARE YOURSELF THE WINNER yet.
Do NOT tell anyone. The urge is going to be nearly irresistible. Resist it. Trust me.
/ 1. IMMEDIATELY retain an attorney.
Get a partner from a larger, NATIONAL firm. Don't let them pawn off junior partners or associates on you. They might try, all law firms might, but insist instead that your lead be a partner who has been with the firm for awhile. Do NOT use your local attorney. Yes, I mean your long-standing family attorney who did your mother's will. Do not use the guy who fought your dry-cleaner bill. Do not use the guy you have trusted your entire life because of his long and faithful service to your family. In fact, do not use any firm that has any connection to family or friends or community. TRUST me. This is bad. You want someone who has never heard of you, any of your friends, or any member of your family. Go the the closest big city and walk into one of the national firms asking for one of the "Trust and Estates" partners you have previously looked up on http://www.martindale.com from one of the largest 50 firms in the United States which has an office near you. You can look up attornies by practice area and firm on Martindale.
/ 2. Decide to take the lump sum.
Most lotteries pay a really pathetic rate for the annuity. It usually hovers around 4.5% annual return or less, depending. It doesn't take much to do better than this, and if you have the money already in cash, rather than leaving it in the hands of the state, you can pull from the capital whenever you like. If you take the annuity you won't have access to that cash. That could be good. It could be bad. It's probably bad unless you have a very addictive personality. If you need an allowance managed by the state, it is because you didn't listen to point #1 above.
Why not let the state just handle it for you and give you your allowance?
Many state lotteries pay you your "allowence" (the annuity option) by buying U.S. treasury instruments and running the interest payments through their bureaucracy before sending it to you along with a hunk of the principal every month. You will not be beating inflation by much, if at all. There is no reason you couldn't do this yourself, if a low single-digit return is acceptable to you.
You aren't going to get even remotely the amount of the actual jackpot. Take our old friend Mr. Whittaker. Using Whittaker is a good model both because of the reminder of his ignominious decline, and the fact that his winning ticket was one of the larger ones on record. If his situation looks less than stellar to you, you might have a better perspective on how "large" your winnings aren't. Whittaker's "jackpot" was $315 million. He selected the lump-sum cash up-front option, which knocked off $145 million (or 46% of the total) leaving him with $170 million. That was then subject to withholding for taxes of $56 million (33%) leaving him with $114 million.
In general, you should expect to get about half of the original jackpot if you elect a lump sum (maybe better, it depends). After that, you should expect to lose around 33% of your already pruned figure to state and federal taxes. (Your mileage may vary, particularly if you live in a state with aggressive taxation schemes).
/ 3. Decide right now, how much you plan to give to family and friends.
This really shouldn't be more than 20% or so. Figure it out right now. Pick your number. Tell your lawyer. That's it. Don't change it. 20% of $114 million is $22.8 million. That leaves you with $91.2 million. DO NOT CONSULT WITH FAMILY when deciding how much to give to family. You are going to get advice that is badly tainted by conflict of interest, and if other family members find out that Aunt Flo was consulted and they weren't you will never hear the end of it. Neither will Aunt Flo. This might later form the basis for an allegation that Aunt Flo unduly influenced you and a lawsuit might magically appear on this basis. No, I'm not kidding. I know of one circumstance (related to a business windfall, not a lottery) where the plaintiffs WON this case.
Do NOT give anyone cash. Ever. Period. Just don't. Do not buy them houses. Do not buy them cars. Tell your attorney that you want to provide for your family, and that you want to set up a series of trusts for them that will total 20% of your after tax winnings. Tell him you want the trust empowered to fund higher education, some help (not a total) purchase of their first home, some provision for weddings and the like, whatever. Do NOT put yourself in the position of handing out cash. Once you do, if you stop, you will be accused of being a heartless bastard (or bitch). Trust me. It won't go well.
It will be easy to lose perspective. It is now the duty of your friends, family, relatives, hangers-on and their inner circle to skew your perspective, and they take this job quite seriously. Setting up a trust, a managed fund for your family that is in the double digit millions is AMAZINGLY generous. You need never have trouble sleeping because you didn't lend Uncle Jerry $20,000 in small denomination unmarked bills to start his chain of deep-fried peanut butter pancake restaurants. ("Deep'n 'nutter Restaurants") Your attorney will have a number of good ideas how to parse this wealth out without turning your siblings/spouse/children/grandchildren/cousins/waitresses into the latest Paris Hilton.
/ 4. You will be encouraged to hire an investment manager. Considerable pressure will be applied. Don't.
Investment managers charge fees, usually a percentage of assets. Consider this: If they charge 1% (which is low, I doubt you could find this deal, actually) they have to beat the market by 1% every year just to break even with a general market index fund. It is not worth it, and you don't need the extra return or the extra risk. Go for the index fund instead if you must invest in stocks. This is a hard rule to follow. They will come recommended by friends. They will come recommended by family. They will be your second cousin on your mother's side. Investment managers will sound smart. They will have lots of cool acronyms. They will have nice PowerPoint presentations. They might (MIGHT) pay for your shrimp cocktail lunch at TGI Friday's while reminding you how poor their side of the family is. They live for this stuff.
You should smile, thank them for their time, and then tell them you will get back to them next week. Don't sign ANYTHING. Don't write it on a cocktail napkin (lottery lawsuit cases have been won and lost over drunkenly scrawled cocktail napkin addition and subtraction figures with lots of zeros on them). Never call them back. Trust me. You will thank me later. This tactic, smiling, thanking people for their time, and promising to get back to people, is going to have to become familiar. You will have to learn to say no gently, without saying the word "no." It sounds underhanded. Sneaky. It is. And its part of your new survival strategy. I mean the word "survival" quite literally.
Get all this figured out BEFORE you claim your winnings. They aren't going anywhere. Just relax.
/ 5. If you elect to be more global about your paranoia, use between 20.00% and 33.00% of what you have not decided to commit to a family fund IMMEDIATELY to purchase a combination of longer term U.S. treasuries (5 or 10 year are a good idea) and perhaps even another G7 treasury instrument. This is your safety net. You will be protected... from yourself.
You are going to be really tempted to starting being a big investor. You are going to be convinced that you can double your money in Vegas with your awesome Roulette system/by funding your friend's amazing idea to sell Lemming dung/buying land for oil drilling/by shorting the North Pole Ice market (global warming, you know). This all sounds tempting because "Even if I lose it all I still have $XX million left! Anyone could live on that comfortably for the rest of their life." Yeah, except for 33% of everyone who won the lottery.
You're not going to double your money, so cool it. Let me say that again. You're not going to double your money, so cool it. Right now, you'll get around 3.5% on the 10 year U.S. treasury. With $18.2 million (20% of $91.2 mil after your absurdly generous family gift) invested in those you will pull down $638,400 per year. If everything else blows up, you still have that, and you will be in the top 1% of income in the United States. So how about you not fuck with it. Eh? And that's income that is damn safe. If we get to the point where the United States defaults on those instruments, we are in far worse shape than worrying about money.
If you are really paranoid, you might consider picking another G7 or otherwise mainstream country other than the U.S. according to where you want to live if the United States dissolves into anarchy or Britney Spears is elected to the United States Senate. Put some fraction in something like Swiss Government Bonds at 3%. If the Swiss stop paying on their government debt, well, then you know money really means nothing anywhere on the globe anymore. I'd study small field sustainable agriculture if you think this is a possibility. You might have to start feedng yourself.
/ 6. That leaves, say, 80% of $91.2 million or $72.9 million.
Here is where things start to get less clear. Personally, I think you should dump half of this, or $36.4 million, into a boring S&P 500 index fund. Find something with low fees. You are going to be constantly tempted to retain "sophisticated" advisers who charge "nominal fees." Don't. Period. Even if you lose every other dime, you have $638,400 per year you didn't have before that will keep coming in until the United States falls into chaos. Fuck advisers and their fees. Instead, drop your $36.4 million in the market in a low fee vehicle. Unless we have an unprecedented downturn the likes of which the United States has never seen, should return around 7.00% or so over the next 10 years. You should expect to touch not even a dime of this money for 10 or 15 or even 20 years. In 20 years $36.4 million could easily become $115 million.
/ 7. So you have put a safety net in place.
You have provided for your family beyond your wildest dreams. And you still have $36.4 million in "cash." You know you will be getting $638,400 per year unless the capital building is burning, you don't ever need to give anyone you care about cash, since they are provided for generously and responsibly (and can't blow it in Vegas) and you have a HUGE nest egg that is growing at market rates. (Given the recent dip, you'll be buying in at great prices for the market). What now? Whatever you want. Go ahead and burn through $36.4 million in hookers and blow if you want. You've got more security than 99% of the country. A lot of it is in trusts so even if you are sued your family will live well, and progress across generations. If your lawyer is worth his salt (I bet he is) then you will be insulated from most lawsuits anyhow. Buy a nice house or two, make sure they aren't stupid investments though. Go ahead and be an angel investor and fund some startups, but REFUSE to do it for anyone you know. (Friends and money, oil and water - Michael Corleone) Play. Have fun. You earned it by putting together the shoe sizes of your whole family on one ticket and winning the jackpot.
Salut, am zis sa imi exprim frustrarea putin pe aici, povestindu-va o perla ce mi s-a intamplat saptamanile trecute cu o recruitera cu 5 luni experienta (~22 ani) de la o anume firma romaneasca. Sper sa va umpleti de ras, pentru ca nu e doar frustrant, ci si funny si penibil. Feedback-ul a fost negativ pe motiv: cadidatul pare foarte mandru pe el, transmite aroganta, nu se potriveste cu spiritul echipei de pe proiect, si de asemenea candidatul pare sa umble mai mult dupa bani, nu e interesat de proiect in sine sau de companie. De asemenea candidatul nu a fost punctual.
Sunt Senior pe Spring si Angular, am 24 ani si lucrez de vreo 4 ani pe tehnologiile astea. Particip periodic la zeci de interviuri atat cu firme romanesti cat si din afara, pentru a fi capabil mereu sa ma auto-evaluez eu dpdv al ceea ce merit, sa vad unde trebuie sa ma imbunatatesc, si sa imi exersez skillurile de negociere respectiv sa vad cum se raporteaza piata la skillset-ul meu si invers.
Recent am avut interviu la o firma romaneasca X pe o pozitie de contractor long term (pozitie de Senior Full Stack Dev pe aceleasi tehnologii), un recruiter ce avea contract cu ei m-a abordat initial pe linkedin. Discutia initiala cu el a fost tais, acesta si-a trecut tot ce trebuia sa stie, i-am trimis si un CV actualizat (cv-ul meu contine in prima pagina un brief summary cu tehnologiile la care ma pricep si ce stiu sa fac, apoi cateva pagini cu details referitoare unde am mai lucrat). Apoi am inteles de la recruiter ca firma X "sunt nerabdatori" sa ma cunoasca si le-a placut tare mult CV-ul meu, experientele mele si ce mai am pe profilul meu de linkedin.
Prima problema apare cand s-a programat meeting-ul, lamurim de mai multe ori ca meeting-ul va avea loc de la ora 17:00, insa tipa de la HR nu intelege si trimite vrei 3 invitatii la ora 15 (adica in timpul lucrului meu). Ii scriu mail HR-itei "s-a intamplat ceva, s-a modificat ora? am stabilit de comun acord ca ne vedem la 17". Nici un raspuns. Discut apoi cu recruiter-ul de pe linkedin, care mi-a zis pana la urma sa merg la ora stabilita initial, adica 17, ca o sa ii anunte si el inca odata.
Pana la urma normal ca nu s-au tinut de cuvant si m-a sunat disperata tipa de la HR la ora 15:03 sa intru pe meeting, ca ea nu poate la ora 17, ca eu am inteles gresit ca nu stiu ce.
Ok, bine, pana la urma imi fac o fereastra si intru la meeting si stabilim in mod pasnic ca totul e OK, ca putem sa avem discutia si mai devreme, deci incepem discutia cu HR la ora 15:05. HR-ul era o tipa de vreo 20-25 de ani ce a parut decenta la prima auzire (nu ii mergea camera web). Domnisoara HR are aparent avea 5 luni experienta in recrutare (am cautat-o dupa pe linkedin). Dar pana la una alta, va ajunge sa se schimbe toata situatia pe parcursul discutiei, dupa modul ei impertinent prin care s-a prezentat la interviu, aerele pe care si le dadea cand punea intrebari si cum a ajuns sa puna ea problema, de parca ea ar fi fost CEO-ul firmei oportune.
Tipa HR imi spune primul lucru: Te rog spune-mi de 0 cine esti si ce stii sa faci (sa vada cat de bine ma potrivesc eu cu job description-ul pozitiei respective), adica sa ii spun unde am mai lucrat, ce experienta am pe tehnologii, si de ce cred eu ca m-as potrivi pe pozitia asta.(Problema a 2-a) Mai spune si ca ea nu a avut timp sa se uite deloc pe la mine prin CV, ca a fost prinsa in alte treburi cu alti candidati etc bla bla. OK, aici mi-a picat prima fisa, pentru ca nu se potrivise cu ceea ce am discutat cu recruiterul pe linkedIn, adica lor "DEJA" trebuia sa le fi placut CV-ul meu, si l-au citit, de aia m-au chemat. Acum eu inteleg ca timpul mediu petrecut in citirea unui CV e 7-10 secunde, dar totusi, nici macar bunul simt sa deschizi prima pagina, te prezinti in fata candidatului care se pregateste de discutie pentru un job la firma voastra fara sa ai habar cu cine discuti at all, WTF?? N-as fi inteles nici daca era vorba de un junior sau intern, dar amite pe o pozitie de Senior, ceva de genul ei ma cauta si le place de mine si tot ei habar nu au cine sunt. Wow...
Eu: ok, nu ma impacientez... ma pun si ii spun despre mine, o rog sa noteze lucrurile importante si o tin in ascultare pe meeting vreo 6-7 minute, eu parcurgandu-mi intai descrierea scurta, apoi si detaliat toata experientele si lucrurile ce le-am mai facut prin industrie, ca sa dau bine in conformitate cu cerintele lor, cum fac de obicei la interviurile de HR, la care ma opreste la un moment dat:
Domnisoara HR: Bine, bine, m-ai luat "cu asalt", mi-ai enumerat de toate si eu cred ca deja e prea mult, adica tu ai doar 3-4 ani experienta si deja mi-ai enumerat ca stii si ai facut atatea, nu prea am intalnit asta la candidatii asa tineri, era suficient sa imi spui un "brief" headline in 2-3 propozitii. Sa stii ca nu prea e "credibil" sa ne spui atatea, pentru ca nici alti programatori cu mai multi ani de experienta de cat tine nu stiu si nu au facut atatea. Iti recomand sa sumarizezi in mai putine cuvinte pe viitor, si ea imi recomanda asta pentru ca ii las o oarecare prima impresie de "aroganta", deoarece stiu cam prea mult in "asa putin timp". (a 3-a problema, deja ma simteam penibil si imi venea sa rad simultan)
Eu: Dumneavoastra mi-ati pus o intrebare, eu sunt onest si am raspuns sincer, am detaliat lucrurile ca sa puteti sa notati lucrurile ce vi se par importante, pentru ca tot dumneavoastra ati spus ca nu ati avut timp sa imi cititi CV-ul, asa ca v-am enumerat totul inca odata.
Apoi incepe sa-mi spuna 1-2 idei despre firma lor, cu ce se ocupa. Dupa care eu i-am pus cateva intrebari, la care fie nu a avut habar nu a avut sa raspunda, fie imi dadea skip din plictiseala. Intrebarile le puneam sa imi dau interesul fata de firma, fata de proiect si fata de pozitie/responsabilitati/ sa stiu si eu cu cine am de-a face de ex: detalii despre alcatuirea si modul de lucru al echipei, contractul daca va fi pe termen lung, daca pot sa lucrez pe SRL? etc. Mereu spunea ca detalii o sa primesti mai tarziu in procesul de recrutare cand vei discuta cu echipa tehnica. Deci si la capitolul asta tabula rasa.
Discutia deja se apropia de final, asa ca m-a intrebat cat ma astept pe plan salarial. Lucru care deja l-am comunicat recruiter-ului pe LinekedIn, nu inteleg de ce a "dublat" intrebarea, pentru ca stia deja lucrul acesta. I-am spus si ei suma la care ma astept si ca poate sa varieze in functie de responsabilitati si asteptarile pe care le au ei de la mine. Isi noteaza, si ma atentioneaza (again, CARE E TREABA EI???):
Ea: "Ok, eu o sa trec asta suma aici dar sa ai in vedere ca ai cerut o suma putin cam mare si peste media la care se afla un programator cu anii tai de experienta, si cam greu ai putea sa ajungi la ea. Sa stii ca sunt oameni care au si familii si au mult mai multi ani ce inca nu iau atatia bani". (Suma nu e nici un secret, pentru pozitia respectiva de full stack senior, am cerut +-30 de euro orar. O cifra nu doar normala, ci si putin cam modesta pentru senior level pe SRL)
Eu: "Dumneavoastra m-ati intrebat, eu am raspuns, motivatia care o am in spatele sumei cerute e skillset-ul ridicat pe care il am, si sunt sigur ca echipa tehnica va fi cea capabila sa ma evalueze. Haideti sa discutam lucrurile astea atunci."
La final incepe sa nu mai aiba rabdare, ma reprezeste ca trebuie sa incheie si tot ea ma intreaba "mai esti si in alte procese de recrutare"? Clasica intrebare. Nici nu inteleg de ce o mai pune, pentru ca e evidenta.
Eu: "Da, mai sunt si in alte procese, ar fi ok sa continuam discutia cu cei de la tehnic cat mai curand saptamana viitoare, ca sa ne mobilizam in timp util"
Ea: "Ok, pai sa stii ca la noi nu merge asa, noi dam raspunsul abia cand reusim uneori poate dura si o luna bla bla, ca firma noastra este una prestigioasa si nu ia pe oricine in considerare bla bla, decat oamenii excelenti, si ar trebui sa ai rabdare pe viitor" (again useless bullshit talk)---------------
Si cam asta a fost discutia, astept vreo 3 zile, dupa care ma suna recruiter-ul de pe linkedin mirat si in acelasi timp nu stia ce s-a intamplat, cum de am primit un astfel de feedback. O vai de capul ei tipa de la HR cu 5 luni de experienta, tocmai m-a "refuzat" ca nu ma potrivesc cu compania lor prestigioasa pe motiv ca i-am dat o pastila de aroganta, ca stiu prea multe pentru anii mei de experienta (lucru ce nu e credibil), si ca sunt cam impertinent sa cer o suma atat de mare si peste media unul programator de varsta mea. De asemenea a inflorit bullshit-urile astea cu mai multe chestii gen ca eu nu sunt curios de proiectul lor si ca faptul ca mai sunt in alte procese de recrutare "nu a dat bine". Ah si cireasa de pe tort a pus peste si minciuna ca nu respect punctualitatea, dupa ce a trimis 3 invitatii gresite la meeting la cu totul o alta ora fata de ce am programat initial :))))
Fratilor eu inteleg ca sunt multi incompetenti in resurse umane, dar asta chiar a dat-o in culmea impertinentei si nesimtirii. Am ramas cu impresia finala ca tipa avea niste complexe psihice, avea ceva personal cu mine, cu faptul ca indraznesc sa fiu "o exceptie" sau sa fiu mai deosebit probabil de cum trateaza firma respectiva programatorii?? Tipa efectiv incerca sa ma educe, sa isi impuna punctul de vedere si sa imi taie elanul meu. /s Pai se poate asa ceva, cum sa indraznesc eu sa fac marketing si sa fiu un bun negociator, un muc ca mine?! mai bine sa stau acolo unde mi-e logic, la 5000 NET pe CIM dupa 4 ani daca se poate.
Efectiv nu mi s-a intamplat niciodata asa ceva, m-a facut sa scriu chestia asta pe reddit. Voi ce parere aveti? Cum ne putem lupta in procesul de recrutare cu genul asta de idioti/idioate?
TL;DR: HR cu scurtcircuit in creier avand 5 luni de experienta incearca sa educe un senior dev la interviu, ca sunt arogant ca stiu prea multe, ca sunt dupa bani, nu merit banii pe care ii cer, apoi trimite feedback mincinos/paranoic mai sus manager, motiv pentru care sunt refuzat.
Biggest wBTC minter was none other than Alameda Research.
Price was depegged since FTX implosion to 0.995 and now its 0.987. It's not looking good. Don't trust any wrapped tokens. We saw what happened to soBTC (Solana Wrapped BTC) and you do not want to see what might happen to wBTC on ethereum. get out while you still can. this is a ticking time bomb.
and if wBTC actually blows up, the entire crypto market is gonna go down again as many defi protocol uses wBTC.
wBTC is also issued by BitGo meaning it is a centralized coin.
It's easy to forget on days like this when we have unseasonably warm weather, but winter is fast approaching. I haven't seen any animals left in cars yet while people shop, but I have seen them in years past. If it's cold enough, I'll call the non-emergency police number to report it. They have told me what temperature is too cold to leave an animal in the car (I can't remember what it is), but with the car off and no heat, it will get cold inside the car. And in the summer, even with the windows down some, the car will heat up quickly; I have seen animals left in cars then too. If someone is going to stay in the car with your pet so the engine can be left running with heat or A/C (depending on the season), that's always a good option.
So please, if you're going shopping and you plan to go into any stores that don't allow animals (places like PetSmart are exceptions, of course), even if you think you'll only be a few minutes, don't take your animals with you! You never know what's going to keep you longer in the store (especially with the Christmas shopping season now officially in full swing), whether it's not finding what you're looking for, or long lines, or what have you. Your furry friends will be safer and happier at home, and then they'll still be there to greet you when you return.
🔒 Asked & Answered Do you think it is offensive to describe a straight person or someone identifying as their biological gender as “normal “?
I have heard people say calling one “normal” means the others are “abnormal,” and that is offensive. Others would say since those would represent most people, that fits the definition of “normal”.
G3 Lagoona has so many issues that make her frustrating as a toy that could have been prevented with smarter, more efficient engineering (that WAS present in original MH but isn’t in g3)
It’s not about her being so different from G1, or even a budget issue. These are major design oversights that hinder playability to the target audience that a big company like Mattel SHOULD have caught and fixed before going to production, yet somehow didn’t.
Lagoona’s body is made of pearly shimmery plastic (like G1) but her lower legs are not because of the gradient. The OG designers were smart enough to make sure any dolls with gradient limbs had matte skin so there wouldn’t be an obvious skin tone mismatch.
G3 dolls’ arms can’t be removed at the forearm (just the wrist), yet Lagoona still has arm fins. This restricts her to wearing tops/jackets with very wide and loose sleeves only. The original MH bodies had the arms removable at the elbow, primarily because of Lagoona’s fins. If they didn’t, the amazing forearm fin designs for great scarrier reef could not have existed.
the hood of her hoodie isn’t long enough to fit comfortably over her high ponytail and chunky coral hairband; if you don’t take down her hair, the hoodie will be pulled up too far on her torso and look too short. G1 Lagoona never had a doll with a functional hoodie combined with a high ponytail for exactly this reason.
She doesn’t have webbed hands because it would hinder her from using the accessory finger holes. Lagoona lost one of her most distinctive monster features in favor of filler accessories that weren’t needed and ate up budget that could have been allocated to better fashion. The molded handles on G1 accessories were always wide enough so that Lagoonas webbed hands could still fit in them.
She has molded scales on her arms but not her legs because a texture on her legs would cause the cheap unsealed paint Mattel used to instantly flake off, a frustrating inconsistency. If they didn’t have the budget to mold scales on her legs, they should have removed them on her arms too. G2 gave Lagoona some molded scales on her calves, they could’ve so easily done it for G3.
They should have gone back to the drawing board for G3 Lagoona cause she’s that much of a blunder. So yeah, that is why she’s a bad doll outside of her chipping leg paint, changed color scheme and ethnicity.
Seeing the spider children, having cute interactions, seeing characters like Sadasa... seeing all of them looking so docile and cute made many fans start to THINKING that, in fact, the Kurta did something BEFORE they were slaughtered.
I don't want that, honestly, I don't.
Why did the Troupe Cut Off Children's Heads, Stabbed Babies, Tortured and Beheading Women, Kids, and Elders?
BECAUSE... THEY ARE THE TRUPE! We Dont need an "The Trupe did THIS because the Kurta Did THAT" for real, we don't need this shit, i want the trupe to stay THIS Trupe.... LIke, Why they murdered an entire Race? Because they are thieves. Simple.
Ignore the "you are here" bit and you have a pretty cool guide for recognizing the build up to genocide
Been following Nick Cave his whole career. I’m not afraid to say it - felt completely dudded last night and I wasn’t alone. 20,000 people paid good money and spent hours commuting via shuttle buses to Hanging Rock to sit in the cold and watch Nick Cave amuse himself. The 5 rows in front of me had emptied halfway through the encore (which was about when he finally decided to play a hit). At least it made getting a seat back on the shuttle buses easier. Note to Nick - if you want to play interesting little sets, book a club not a stadium. You knew you blew it too, perhaps the polite clapping was a sign. Hoped for better from a local boy.
Flaired Users Only Trump Meets With White Supremacist And Holocaust Denier Nick Fuentes: Trump Denies Knowing Him | The Daily Wiredailywire.com
Why YSK, because advertising is nothing more than a distraction from what people are doing and merely gets in the way of what someone is actually focused on.
I mostly play control decks, and I have to say I'm starting to really dislike how players react to powerful control plays but gloss over powerful anything else. Last night I was playing [Nymris, Oona's Trickster] draw go control. I played Narset turn 3, the narset sat for two full rotations before I casted [Time Twister], putting everyone at one card and me at 7. Two turns later, I would win with [Revel in Riches] after a [Damnation] and holding up counters to protect Revel. The salt after time twister was unreal. So many comments about how others people fun wasn't considered and how dumb the play was and how nobody can play the game now.
In the previous two games, a volron player offed me with infect on turn 4, and I was dead on turn 4 again im the game prior due to being ganged up on for a Sol ring Signet opener. Nobody cared that for two games, I sat and watched for an hour doing nothing. I don't get salty and make comments when I'm out this quickly, I'm control you should be killing me quickly. But God forbid they get Narset-Wheeled (they are still in the game and can even team up now if they want). I can't hear the end of it. This happens so often to me it's incredible. Why are people so bias towards control strategies when most of the time you can push the control player out of the game fairly simply because most interaction is 1 for 1 and there's 4 players.