I asked a girl out, once, and she said yes, then I never heard from her or saw her again. I can't read people worth a damn, so that basically taught me to stop trying.
This is pretty non-standard. However, if it wasn't a deliberate joke on her part (maybe she wasn't interested in a coffee, but saw this as a chance to do something someone would never forget), her behavior suggests that she may have been more nervous than you. A more painful outcome could be, for example, if she laughed at you and then walked away indignantly.
Well the same thing could happen again. I'm imagining that it wasn't particularly pleasant the first time, and just because it (probably) can't get worse, doesn't mean the same outcome won't hurt less. So it seems that one thing he has to lose is some amount of happiness (at least in the short term).
That being said, go get 'em, it probably won't happen again :)
> linked most highly to success in therapy is the strength of the relationship between therapist and client
Have there been many studies looking at how the client-therapist relationship itself effects the client? Wouldn't having a non-judgmental person with whom you can comfortably confide it, whom you know is making a concerted effort to help you improve your well being, have some noticeable improvement on your condition, regardless of whether they were a trained professional?
Or put another way, is there anyone who finds themselves in therapy largely because they have no close friends?
Polemical headlines doesn't make an argument more persuasive; Silicon Valley companies don't have a say in police use-of-force, but the author knows and is only trying to tie the two topics together for popularity points.
> A senior administration official told CNN, "... The administration remains committed to enhancing our national cybersecurity by raising our cyber defenses"
I hope you can see my eyes because I'm rolling them as hard as I can.
This does raise the question of whether the US government is foolish enough to use insecure US made electronics. And I suppose answers it.
Either that or it hires private individuals and pays them to do it. What is your point? In either case, the govt is making the resource-allocation choice.
Your point is well taken, but if memory serves, the specific technologies listed were developed by private corporations and industry consortiums. Would be interested to see a fact checked history on this, however.
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: Yes
Technologies: Javascript, HTML/CSS, Angular, Node, Swift, Python, JSON, SQL, git
Resume/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bwk-VyT0MrjgOUZRQlRaX2ZhVDA/view?usp=sharing
Email: Joshua.N.Cox at gmail.com
Self-taught (~2 yrs) applications and front-end developer, 70%-30% front-backend; experience with developing applications in JS, Python, and Swift (2 App Store apps); aggressively consuming knowledge and eagerly learning new technologies.
Will they be selling it at the subsidized rate California farmers are accustomed to? Farmers in Central California paid $17.00/acre-foot last year. I'll do the maths:
