I think it's time to revise HN guidelines, when the original title is clearly intentionally misleading/clickbait/omitting key facts ("temporarily disappeared in this case). Editorializing to fix that should be encouraged, not just allowed.
That's just a tech version of the age-old hostile (panel) interview.
I don't think it's a useful interview practice, at least in tech, below director level, but you just have to keep your composure and gently assert control.
If that CTO favored it maybe their company culture was unusually aggressive.
Curious, which app/ forum/ subreddit/ group were you a tween debatelord on, and in what years? (got a link, so we can see?) To what extent did your formation depend on that crowd and its cultural values?
Don't become so cynical. Congress has an obligation to be consulted on wars and withhold consent/budget. (Even if they were merrily trading on events).
Perhaps one of the silver linings we eventually get from current happenings is meaningful anti-insider trading legislation, with criminal penalties, timely reporting, nonpartisan enforcement. In principle that legislation could happen as soon as 2/2027. Or perhaps not.
Reminds me of an old 1990s/2000s post from News of the Weird [0] about endowed chairs with funny names, such as an XYZ Corn Chair at some midwestern US university, or an NEC/ Nippon Electric Chair at some Japanese university.
[0]: www.uexpress.com/oddities/news-of-the-weird/archives , can't find the exact citation.
So how stable were Windows 95, or Windows 3.x, IYE?
reply