Consider that risk aversion is not a bad trait — google “three fund portfolio” and the theory behind it. Stock speculation is time consuming and akin to betting. Know when to appreciate your aversion to risk.
Another way of phrasing self-confidence is “self-validating.” Social confidence is essentially not looking to others for validation. It starts with rewiring how you perceive the world (see: CBT). Isn’t it odd that you construct stories of your failure that link back to your physical attributes? What if you told different stories? This one is hard to grok until you start to realize how much your brain filters out information to fit your core beliefs about yourself. I didn’t believe this until I realized that my negative self stories kept popping up while talking to people with strabismus (eye misalignment). I was literally looking them in the damn wrong eye, and telling myself how disengaged they were and how uninteresting I was because they “weren’t looking at me.” Most of what we perceive is what we already believe. It is unnerving, but valuable to know.
You mention the word “feeling” a few times. Is this in reference to anxiety? We’re all templated to feel social anxiety, but some more than others — especially those running negative self-talk reels in their head. Try to first start seeing that anxiety when it happens, even if you can’t halt it. Foster the skill of emotional self-observation.
Just trying to offer some new starting points. No easy answers here. Try loving-kindness meditation for a start — you’re going to have to come to love and respect your 5’5 balding self in the end.
Try playing a longer game. Pick your favorite tech and join a local group for it, and meet every time they do. Instead of the discomfort of the phone interview, you'll need to tackle the discomfort of connecting with others -- but just realize everyone's human like you, and ultimately wants to connect just as much as you do. Learn about them, look for common ground. Let them get to know you. Don't connect with a certain person? That's expected -- keep trying.
Come up with a notable side-project next time you are inspired -- but make sure it won't take longer than 1-2wks of effort. It can be a gimmick, so long as it is somewhat notable. A trivial CRUD app, but applied to a novel/fun/interesting domain. You could even look for non-profits needing a tech solution. You want to appeal to someone hiring for a jr position, and who wants to see initiative.
Good consultants -- and even FTE career-oriented devs -- tend to have their work lined up via their network. A network is as simple as casually keeping in contact with old coworkers and then pinging them when you're looking for a new opportunity. In your case, it would just be connecting with other tech folk. Open your surface area to opportunity. This is how you end up knowing about job positions not even posted yet, and end up with inside knowledge on tech that can get you into a job much easier.
Look at 1099 contracting. It's low-risk to the employer because you're easier to drop if it doesn't work out. It pays a bit better for you, in return for that risk. If you're out and looking, you can find opportunities to contract that will never be posted to job boards, because a lead engineer just wants to bring someone on quickly. The biggest risk to people pulling 1099 contractors is that contractor ghosting on them, especially when they work remote -- make one of your big selling points be communication.
This strategy -- networking -- is one that is critical to pick up not just for landing a jr/intermediate job, but for keeping career longevity in an ageism-tinted industry.
It'll be a pain in the ass, but surely better than taking minimum-wage. I think networking-motivated individuals who are still early on the dev journey can do very well.
This tool is the lowest-barrier-to-entry to get into circuit design -- used the applet after trying commercial/trial tools (including "cloud-based" ones), and all failed me.
I see testimonies here in comments by freelancers who are using 10xmanagement to source work. This specific product posted here seems to be for something else: you have a gig lined up, but want to be represented.
I appreciate the endorsements, but am now curious about the main product: how do I get on the 10xmanagement list of software engineers to be considered for gigs? I don't see a publicly visible way to apply. Is it really via referral only?
If so, where do I go to find a referral? Luck? Research existing "10x developers" and get them to like me?
What are the requirements to becoming a "10xer," aside from the potential for referral?
EDIT: Ah, I did not read the FAQ: https://www.10xmanagement.com/faq/ -- tl;dr as the response below suggests, probably need to contact them. As far as I can tell, they're basically operating as a standalone agency, so it's not much different than applying for a job interview anywhere else.
My other comment in this thread is not only a testimonial for the "main" 10x service, but also for this specific Agent on Demand one, which I've benefited from last year. See the 2nd paragraph [1].
> I appreciate the endorsements, but am now curious about the main product: how do I get on the 10xmanagement list of software engineers to be considered for gigs?
There's a "Become a 10xer" button on the home page, right at the bottom. It links to this page [2].
Although I do not work for 10x, I am a very happy "client" (I'm a client since they represent me -- it still confuses me after 5 years). Feel free to email me with any questions! gs @ (my hn username).com
Their delivery service is frustrating. It seems to be the norm, and accepted, that drivers will mark packages delivered a full 24 hours ahead of time and do the delivery the next day, presumably to meet delivery requirements.
I've also had these individuals basically solicit me for a tip, recounting how they're underpaid, etc.
I really don't like this move to try to uber-ify package delivery. UPS/FedEx have their bad moments, but at least I don't have to worry that the employees are under too much duress to deliver, or are on the edge of unreasonably compensated.
I've been in Seattle for around a month and can completely agree with this. One time half of an order went to a wrong apartment, and the other half came the next day. UPS and related have access codes to get into the building where Amazon doesn't. Having free same day delivery is a life-changer, but Amazon needs to improve a lot.
I had one earlier this week call my phone repeatedly before 6 AM (breaking through the "do not disturb) to complain he couldn't find one of my packages in his car.
just curious: how do they ask for a tip? i honestly can't imagine any scenario where it's reasonable for a delivery personnel to ask for a tip, so i imagine it must be super awkward to even bring it up.
Interesting, though I must ask: Why YML instead of a DSL?
Granted, I come from Ruby, and writing DSLs is pretty typical. Maybe not so popular in Python.
I am asking this because I become suspicious of config languages that read like code. Is not a bonafide programming language the better choice in this scenario? i.e. all overly-configurable formats (e.g. Terraform .tf files, JSON schemas...) converge on just being a new scripting language?
good point! i'm not against a DSL. as I was working on plait.py, one thought going through my head was: "am i re-writing haskell or lisp but worse"? my experience with python and DSL is that I need to use YACC / PLY to create a grammar and so on. maybe a lot of work. i take it that its easier in ruby?
yaml was a format I chose because it is easy to write (close to human), but can not express full programming concepts (but yes to some metaprogramming). i did not want the templates to be full powered as they are meant to be able to express relationships between variables, but not much more (especially not side effects). they also support lazy evaluation - statements do not need to be in order. this is closer to a "mathematical language" for me.
the choice for yaml was also based on the premise that if performance becomes an issue, can hopefully move to another language but retain templates (will have to re-implement python's "random" compat, though)
I'm going on a trip to Canada within the next month, from the US, as a US citizen.
I want to be let into Canada without issue, so am taking a burner smartphone connected to a non-critical gmail account that is plausibly-maybe my "real" personal one. But not really. The maximum threat to me is detention, or more likely, refused entry. If I am asked to unlock the device, I will.
Crossing back into the US, I am less concerned. If I am asked to unlock the device, I will NOT. The maximum threat to me is semi-indefinite detention, and I know at the end of it, I can reach out to the EFF to seek representation in a larger action.
Does anyone else have any tips/tricks/ideas here? I realize trying to subvert any Canadian border search is not a good idea, but it's a good middle-grounds vs. "don't go to Canada" or "give them all your private data", I think. On the other hand, I am willing to be more stringent with the US border because (A) I am a citizen, I cannot be refused entry, and (B) this is a cause I would like to participate in, so invite any negative outcome caused by my refusal to unlock the device or share any logins.
>Does anyone else have any tips/tricks/ideas here?
The trick is to not worry about it so much. In fact, I'd say that worrying and looking nervous would make it more likely that you would be searched.
I live on the US/Canadian border (on the US side) and go over probably 2 or 3 times per month. I regularly drive from New York state to Ottawa (going through Canadian customs), then fly into the US (through US customs) and then back again through Canada (Canadian customs again) driving home to the US (US customs again) with no problems. It's closer than the nearest commercial airport to me in the US and even with the customs delay, much more convenient. I also just go over to have fun in Ottawa and Montreal regularly.
My vehicle has been searched 3 times in probably 6 years. My phone has always stayed with me, in my pocket, un-searched.
I have only ever personally heard of one case of someone having their electronics searched, and the extent of the search was Canadian customs using the Windows search to look for files with "boy" or "girl" in the filename -- presumably looking for child porn.
To be clear, I'm not saying this doesn't ever happen, or that it will 100% never happen to you, but the chances are very, very slim that they'll even ask you more than a few questions, let alone do any sort of search. Your mileage may vary, of course.
That would mean that in all of the ports of entry to the United States only 82 phones per day were searched. That's absolutely ridiculous. There are approximately that many international airports. Just airports. Nevermind the enormous flow of land traffic with Canada and Mexico or all sea traffic.
CBP is claiming that they searched, on average, less than one phone per day in each airport? Give me a break.
Their claim is probably the number of times they've done some kind of deep analysis with forensic tools. Surely the number of times a border guard casually looked through emails and texts is far higher.
EDIT: I'll leave my comment below up for the record, but I'm probably wrong, and Canada above is probably right. CBP is not clear about what kind of "searches" they are counting in these stats, and they could well be only counting forensic searches, not cursory (the quick scroll through).
---------
That number sounds reasonable to me. CBP has no reason to hide their activities because they believe they are faithfully enforcing the law.
Electronic searches are not something agents do casually; federal agents do very few things casually on the clock. They're far too busy.
Typically it has to be either a decision in advance (targeting a specific person) or a big set of warning signals at once that create a suspicious profile.
I could be wrong about this; I don't have personal experience. But I've discussed these sorts of cases with friends who are federal agents and prosecutors.
There is something I don't understand about this whole debate: why is it considered a "search" of a phone when data is decrypted or exfiltrated?
If one "searches" a safe, and finds inside a paper with some random characters on it, the safe has been searched. The paper was there, it was discovered, the interior of the safe was viewed. The meaning of the characters may not be understood, but the safe was searched.
If one "searches" a phone, and finds inside some random pattern of bits, why is the search "not completed" until the bits are deciphered into something the agent understands?
It seems to me that the act of searching doesn't imply understanding what was found, yet for some reason all the public discourse - including legal analysis! - is predicated on the idea that "searching" a phone means deciphering its digital contents.
> CBP has no reason to hide their activities because they believe they are faithfully enforcing the law.
It is far from settled that searching the electronic records of citizens just because they're crossing a border is a faithful enforcement of the law. That's precisely what this lawsuit aims to disprove.
That being said, I agree that the number is likely accurate. CBP is not regularly searching electronic devices.
Out of the number of people who crossed, how many were flagged for additional questioning? Out of those flagged, how many were carrying a cell-phone / laptop across the border?
I'm lead to believe there is a large chance of racial profiling being involved.
On whose part? The border patrol, so that the pool of potential plaintiffs is large? Or by the EFF and ACLU, choosing a diversity of plaintiffs to represent?
It's always been easy for me, too. I recently got a Nexus card which makes it so I don't even have to talk to a real person when arriving in Canada (at least via air). Literally just two questions in a kiosk and hand someone a receipt. Of course that means the governments of Canada and the US did a background check and recorded my fingerprints and retinas, but I'm fine with that, personally.
I have global entry and feel the same. On the application they didn't ask for anything they didn't already have so it wasn't a big deal. Well worth it considering the included pre check.
>I have only ever personally heard of one case of someone having their electronics searched, and the extent of the search was Canadian customs using the Windows search to look for files with "boy" or "girl" in the filename -- presumably looking for child porn.
This is horrible - not beacuse of the child porn aspect, but because Canada has draconian laws (though so do Britain, Aus and NZ) which mean that drawings are prohibited. Drawings of fictional characters, that is. I read a story, though mere anectode, I hope it is relevant - about a man who was arrested beacuse they found they found drawings in his cache. He didn't even like the material. A US citizen that was crossing the border and searched beacuse he looked "suspicious".
We should not excuse this violation of freedom of expression just because it happens/happened at the border. Canada has laws that it deserves to be called out on.
USA and Canada are democracies. The people (majority of people (actually the people claiming to represent the majority)) have spoken - fictional drawings of children are to be treated as crimeful as real ones. Court adjourned.
>The people (majority of people (actually the people claiming to represent the majority)) have spoken
Really, have they? Is there a poll showing that? And does agreement on laws mean that the laws are therefore not draconian? I'm sure many in, for example, Saudi Arabia would think that homosexuality should be prohbited. Does this mean that it should be that way?
>fictional drawings of children are to be treated as crimeful as real ones
> I realize trying to subvert any Canadian border search is not a good idea
Erm, I don't see how you'd be "subverting" the search. The purpose of a border search is to examine what you're bringing into the country. If you smoke marijuana at home but (prudently) don't try to bring some into Canada, that isn't subverting their search.
The latest time I returned to into the USSA (a while ago), I had an old laptop that I zeroed out the hard drive and physically moved it out of the computer. I figured this would leave the thugs with less justification to steal my things. However, I lucked out and was not actually subjected to an invasive inspection.
Also, I don't know what you've previously used this burner phone for, but any flash filesystem won't actually erase things when you delete them.
$100 says nothing is going to happen. This is selection bias at its best, as you only hear about the people getting their devices searched not the ones crossing easily. The chances of this happening to you are slim to none.
I am not saying no one should be worried, I am just saying OP should not.
>> The maximum threat to me is semi-indefinite detention
Thanks for willing to take one for the team but be prepared to be put on a "troublemaker" list and be harassed, time and time again at border crossings.
I am curious, is it possible that countries / regions share such lists? i.e. would refusing to comply with a digital search at the US border possibly affect me in EU?
Just apply for Nexus. You're harmless. They'll do supreme vetting once and you'll avoid any stupid power tripping boarder guards after that. Since I got that I've spent under 5 mins at the boarder each time.
My solution has been to not go to the US, but that is not always doable.
An interesting solution is to give something else to the border to worry about. Something perfectly legal but that would focus their attention. Like a perfectly registered and legally transported gun. Or some flour in plastic bags. Or a bottle of whiskey.
As a guy that's had my phone searched by customs a dozen times now, been put in windowless rooms while my car was tossed, held for four hours in the same room as my car while they pulled panels off, etc...
I had a lot fewer issues crossing the border once I stopped being so organized.
When I checked in for my flight I didn't have my passport itself on me, just the number. The airline I was using asked for an expiration date. I remembered the month and year but not the day... So I just picked a day. When I cleared customs, the guy was so busy correcting the expiration date on the computer that he wasn't even listening to my answer to his questions.
On the way back, I was switching airlines, and the originating airline was unable to print me a boarding pass for the flight they'd put me on. When I got to customs and they asked for paperwork, they also asked for my boarding pass for my final flight. When I didn't have one, they sent me to get one from the airline and then literally waved me through when I came back.
Once I noticed this, I started to think back... The least hassle I've had clearing security was when I did dumb things like leave a lighter in my pocket when I went to the airport. As soon as they found the lighter, they just took it away and admonished me and sent me on my way.
For the most part, if you haven't given them a reason to be suspicious, once they find something it seems they stop looking.
Contraband can be digitally transmitted without physically traversing a border. Given this, what purpose is there to performing extended searches (potentially of cloud / remote data) at the time of border crossing?
This opens a door to unlimited search power at US borders against US citizens. There is already a 100-mile inland range where your can be searched without a warrant around our borders -- we are only going to make this worse by extending that range into all of our private digital data.
I posted a house/key analogy just now that may help clear up the distinction between physical and digital data search. Just to be clear, I'm actually ok with border guards physically inspecting my electronics. I am not ok with them compelling me to login to them, decrypt them, or otherwise hand them over my social media / banking logins / etc.
Keep in mind, we're talking about US citizens re-entering their own country here. I think this is a key point.
It's one thing if a border guard inspects your house key you brought along, analyzes for dangerous substances, drugs, etc.
It's another if they clone that key and have someone drive out to inspect your house with it.
To me, your house in this scenario is your entire collection of private data accessible online / remotely (finances, taxes, possibly the private data of others -- possibly even portals to HIPAA/other PII data of a more commercial nature).
Assuming you agree that it is unfair to let the border search data outside of the phone, then it gets still more problematic.
One of the tricky aspects here is that it seems you can be detained / intimidated if you refuse to decrypt / unlock your device (as a US citizen re-entering your own country). I think you're getting at the idea that the phone/laptop is a physical device and should be searchable like any other object -- and, I think that's fairly reasonable. The problem is that the border guard can also "compel" you to decrypt that device / log in to it if you've put these measures in place. People have been forcibly detained for refusing to cooperate [1], even being put into a chokehold [2].
I respect that some amount of extra search power is required at borders -- but that power must be reasonably scoped (and in this case, I'd say it is not).
"possibly even portals to HIPAA/other PII data of a more commercial nature)."
You bring up a good point about HIPAA. I work in health care and we are allowed to keep a work email client on our phone provided that we keep control of our phone at all time (to keep PHI/HIPAA info safe). A border agent searching through my phone could be considered a HIPAA violation and would have to be reported. Not sure if anything would come out of it fine wise for the company but it would still be a nightmare for compliance.
One interpretation is that you're responsible for someone else breaking the law. If it's a violation, then the border guard committed the violation.
Another interpretation is that you cannot possible obey the law. If the border guard has the legal right to demand access to the HIPAA protected data, and you can't legally give him access... then the law enforcement officials are forcing you to break the law.
With no punishment for them, of course.
There's one set of rules for normal people, and another for law enforcement. How does this keep me safe?
"One interpretation is that you're responsible for someone else breaking the law. If it's a violation, then the border guard committed the violation."
The problem with that is that they aren't a covered entity and thus shouldn't have access to the data. Because they aren't a covered entity HIPAA rules do not apply to them.
Another way of phrasing self-confidence is “self-validating.” Social confidence is essentially not looking to others for validation. It starts with rewiring how you perceive the world (see: CBT). Isn’t it odd that you construct stories of your failure that link back to your physical attributes? What if you told different stories? This one is hard to grok until you start to realize how much your brain filters out information to fit your core beliefs about yourself. I didn’t believe this until I realized that my negative self stories kept popping up while talking to people with strabismus (eye misalignment). I was literally looking them in the damn wrong eye, and telling myself how disengaged they were and how uninteresting I was because they “weren’t looking at me.” Most of what we perceive is what we already believe. It is unnerving, but valuable to know.
You mention the word “feeling” a few times. Is this in reference to anxiety? We’re all templated to feel social anxiety, but some more than others — especially those running negative self-talk reels in their head. Try to first start seeing that anxiety when it happens, even if you can’t halt it. Foster the skill of emotional self-observation.
Just trying to offer some new starting points. No easy answers here. Try loving-kindness meditation for a start — you’re going to have to come to love and respect your 5’5 balding self in the end.