I don't have the link to the US census bureau in front of me, but I think as of 2018 more than 50% of employees worked for firms with >500 employees.

And, of course, there's nothing preventing a small/medium business from incorporating, either. "Corporation means big, small business is a different thing" is common shorthand but not actually how it goes.

Couldn't disagree more. I know plenty of folks who hate Smith, but none who'd say they hate "Alberta" or Albertans.

I would be more concerned with the legislation passed last year by the UCP which weakened Elections Alberta's ability to respond to this sort of thing vs. "being friendly", yes.

The data sharing between the CRA and Elections Canada is optional, but if you want to vote, you've got to be registered - whether via the CRA or otherwise.

> but if you want to vote, you've got to be registered - whether via the CRA or otherwise

Technically true, but you can register at the polling booth on the day of the election, and there's a checkbox that lets you opt out of saving your data in the database. [0]

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48015977

Being on the electors list is optional, is something you can opt-in to (and opt-out of), and is not required in order to vote in Alberta.

There are many reasons an individual may choose to not be on the list (eg. domestic abuse situations).

The people who've opted out of the phone book for reasons like "stalkers", etc., would probably be pretty upset with this, even if they're "few people"

In practice, I think these things correlate more than you think they correlate.

I don't think it's "poor character", though, so much as "willing to develop the deep mental model required for effective contribution".

As someone who worked for a contractor which had Meta as a client, I disagree.

All advertiser support agents were given super-read on all profiles & pages, and I never once observed a CSR being questioned on their use of this access in any way.

It’s often the case that employees are much more locked down than contractors, simply because the company is more liable for employee actions.

No amount of rewriting will help you if you, fundamentally, wrote the wrong thing, as is the case here.

They didn't take into account the long-run impacts of the changes on future development, etc.

I recommend reading the explanation given by one of the Zig devs, as it's a very clear and solid one.

This is the most common issue I see with LLM authored PRs. Yes it does fix the issue _right now_ but as a maintainer I need to consider how it affects the project in the future. But “contributors” get mad if you reject for those reasons. So I can understand having a blanket policy.

>Are you suggesting that LLM's can't test for people who use screen readers? Keyboard only users? Slow network requests?

I don't think it's feasible to fully simulate the full depth of actual usage, given that (especially in the case of screen readers and the like) there's a great deal of combinatorial depth and context to the problem. Which screen readers, on which operating systems, and which users thereof?