What is this article?
Why is it citing three seemingly non noteworthy people’s opinions and crediting them with their former roles as a headline takeaway? Are we to take away that they are currently unemployed?
Why is it citing three seemingly non noteworthy people’s opinions and crediting them with their former roles as a headline takeaway? Are we to take away that they are currently unemployed?
Farley didn't mock them - he had open contempt. Beck and Orosz wrote a great critique, but had no mocking involved.
But calling them ex-fintech is kind of like saying Marjorie Taylor Greene is an ex-CrossFit gym owner. While technically true, it's not the relevant accomplishment in most conversations.
Why the hell is this not mentioned in the article in favor of their former jobs?!
It's a low quality article.
Writing about a person and providing background information about their former job but not about the facts that make them pertinent to the subject matter is dumb.
It’s a very pointless article and it’s strange to focus on a few random people’s opinions on something that does not have obvious importance. Especially when hundreds of thousands of workers who are active.
One of these people seem to be a former entry level worker. Why? This is less valid than “some people on Twitter said”
https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/author/gergely/
https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/measuring-develop...
https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/measuring-develop...