I'd go even further than that. They're not independent variables, but instead are highly correlated. High achievement in one area means you're more than likely to be above average in another.
If you're serious about security, every computer outside your control should be considered compromised, regardless of what you think about the owning company.
With Signal, I have an E2E connection where if I trust both clients, I can trust the connection. WhatsApp, however, has client code that will essentially reveal any unsent messages to the server on request. And then you just have to trust this compromised computer with any message you send.
And if you're shooting your resume off to such different positions that you can't cover them with the same (or one of a few) intro paragraphs, you're probably not that great a candidate for this specific role anyway.
That was the way I read it initially to. I think the intended meaning was that we don't know anything about it, up to and including this ridiculous claim. It's more to highlight the lack of transparency than actually put forth a viable theory.
There are lots of things you can do to make a car not street legal. And people have access to them. And it's their responsibility to make sure they only drive a street legal car on the street.
At first glance I was thinking of the hell that it would be to run a current IDE on a 640x480 14" monitor. But at 1280x960 on a 28" monitor, it may work pretty well.
It's got its up-and-downs. It's a highly profitable company that still wants to hire smart people, so it bills itself as a "startup culture." Then you join and you're in a multi-level org chart with different silos literally competing for resources and attention. Very corporate. So their turnover is pretty fast, particularly in engineering.
It is a very profitable company with legit tech and legit scale, so there are some great experiences to be had there if you're lucky enough to land on the right team or impress the right boss. And because they have a pretty high bar for hiring and a reasonably high burnout rate, having worked a few years at TA means something to many Boston tech companies.
Leaving the green-colored names at the door (none of this is something I haven't or wouldn't say to anyone in management there, so it's not like I'm talking out of school), I'd agree with pretty much everything said here. Especially the bit about other tech companies--I still get asked what I did at Trip even though it was my first job out of college. It's not at all a startup culture and if you go in expecting the kind of autonomy and trust you see at a smaller company you may be very disappointed, but the consolation prize of an above-average (not top-of-market) salary, easy work, and a few impressive-sounding bullet points for the resume may be worth it.
As a first gig out of college, it was great and I don't regret spending time there. It was a gentle-enough introduction to large corporate structure and while I'm not temperamentally suited to "Cog #541" type of gigs, it's easy to see why as a company it's very successful.
I don't know if they'd lose, but I don't know if they'd make a dent in TripAdvisor as opposed to the smaller competitors. People go where the data is, and Trip has the reviews and has the reputation for trustworthiness. Yelp doesn't have a good rep as far as trustworthiness goes--the allegations of paying to hide bad reviews, etc.--and would be starting from zero or near-zero.
(And, having seen a few organizations handle fraud in user-generated content, I think Trip does a pretty good--not great, not perfect, but better than anybody else I've seen--job of it.)
