> almost all of the government email IDs are Gmail.

I think you are mistaken.

Majority of the emails are on government server: https://email.gov.in/

They used to be on 3rd party provider till a few years back (but still never on Gmail).

Thanks for creating it and looking forward to try it out.

I have been looking for similar solution and the whitelist used to fail with other tools as they weren't resolving the dependencies.

You can use smart search queries specially for the title/keywords/companies you are interested in.

A sample search will look like this:

- `"python" "engineer" "infrastructure" site:jobs.lever.co`

- `"python" "engineer" "infrastructure" site:boards.greenhouse.io`

(and in the search tools, limit the results to Past week, etc)

Obviously it can only track companies who use tools like lever, greenhouse, etc.

Plus, these plugins to achieve similar functionality: https://meta.discourse.org/t/thoughts-on-a-plugin-which-turn...

In case someone is interested about this domain. There was an interesting challenge around it on AIcrowd last year.

It was called 'Learning to Smell' and hosted by popular swiss fragrance and flavour business Firmenich. It contains publicly available dataset, baselines, winner codebases, etc., to play around with.

[1] https://www.aicrowd.com/challenges/learning-to-smell

[2] https://discourse.aicrowd.com/c/learning-to-smell/357

[3] https://www.aicrowd.com/challenges/learning-to-smell/noteboo...

Disclaimer: I have been affiliated with AIcrowd.

Well, it is already written in the link....

> $3.5 billion worth of cargo

Have you tried talking to your neighbour about the issue or adding a small A4 print saying "No Parking"?

Pagerduty,OpsGenie, etc?

Well, to be honest they acknowledged in the sides that any company's survival chances for 30 years are 0.02%.

They don't need to worry about all investments turning into multibragger.

Similar thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23400285

Good grief this one is complicated.

That Bloomberg article is boring except for the sentence at the end. The submitter made the title be about the last sentence, but we changed it back to the original, which didn't satisfy anybody because the only interesting thing about the article is the last sentence.

The current post seems at first glance to be a garden-variety tweet picking up on that sentence, but someone pointed out to me that it's actually by the author of the Bloomberg article, suggesting that he might be at odds with the Bloomberg editors about what aspects of the story are significant. Suddenly that's interesting.

Given that Alex has been tweeting in response to this in detail (https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/1268061790954385408), it seems like there's enough information here to support a substantive thread.

Given that sneak's post was the first on this and that it links to the statement by the reporter about the only thing that anyone here cares about, it seems clear that this is the post we should leave up. So I merged the comments from the other thread hither.

Thank you for your work!

Thanks for the merge!