Desafinado

Following the path of least resistance. There is usually a difference between managers who are there for the paycheck, and managers who want to make a difference. Inspired managers and leadership are huge assets, those who want to do as little as possible and not really.. manage, anything, are a bit of a waste of a high salary.

More often than not the second type has a middling technical background, and can't really manage a technical team because they don't know how.

You don't find them. If you put yourself out there (or work with generally smart people) you stumble on them occasionally. When you do, hold on tight.

A couple years ago I set up a new account with my new e-mail address. Someone thought it was a spoof account and reported it.

And just like that I can no longer use my e-mail address on FB, and have to maintain a legacy e-mail address because FB is useless.

Being kind, being a good listener, being pleasant to work with, being an interesting conversationalist.

You're spending your life with your co-workers, don't be the guy who doesn't talk to anyone or competes. After 10 years in the industry I value friendship with my co-workers probably more than anything.

I find actually caring about other people and what they say rather than 'trying to be a good listener' helps me be a good listener.

Yes to communicating with each other and knowing what you're working on, no to doing it every morning. Once a week, every two weeks, or once a month is fine. Any integral communication that can't be handled by the recurring meeting, can be handled ad-hoc as you go.

But people who have only done capital A agile and scrum are so buried in the philosophy that they don't understand that there are far better ways to do things.

Daily status updates are counter-productive, they create unwarranted pressure that leads to devs trying 'get it done' rather than trying to 'get it right'. In the long run, I don't think it helps with quality.

Beyond that, you're asking a bunch of (probably) introverts to have a social meeting every. single. morning. That couldn't possibly cause issues with job satisfaction could it?

I did scrum for the first three or so years of my career. In my latest role we don't, and it's a way, way better daily routine.

It's difficult to predict, but I don't see the classics going away: Java, JavaScript, SQL.

But overall, the goal should be to get a broad range of experience in different platforms so the technology you use is irrelevant. From that point on you just need to decide where you want to invest your time.

For example, when I was doing internships in college I invested in getting Java experience because I knew that it was used by large companies (companies who pay more). This paid off and I was hired by a company who paid me a lot of money to use Java straight out of college. Now I'm paid a lot of money by another company to use Java.

So you want to have the capability to code in anything, but you have to decide which technologies to put on your resume based on what's out there. Knowing Java, JS, and Web Application Development is never a bad idea.

When I started my career I worked in an intense role for two years. So intense that I quickly realized such intensity was not sustainable, and I immediately pivoted into a role that I knew I could do with my eyes closed.

It's felt like I don't have a job for the past decade. In those ten years I've barely felt any stress, have read hundreds of books, mastered several hobbies, and started a family. Would I trade that for more money? I'll let you guess.

One thing I've found helps is to focus on what you can teach the people you're presenting to, rather than yourself. Because really, that's what it's about. And it leads to a mindset that is more amenable to actually helping them.

In fairness to Mark, the company is at a point where he himself likely has limited control over how it operates.

But my view is that the reputation of the company has irreparably declined among thinking people. I'm not sure what the argument would be otherwise.

And I find the 'complex challenges' comment a bit misleading in itself as the company literally sweeps the danger it causes under the rug.

But really I'm interested in hearing from employees in the company, not debating the company's merits.

What do you care more about? Money or purpose?

For some people, money is the only thing in their field of vision. For others, spending their lives making a positive impact carries more, and real, weight.

Speaking as someone who works for the public sector, making moderately good money and helping real people everyday, I can tell you that I'd much prefer that to working for FAANG. Actually, I wouldn't be caught dead working for Meta.

It depends on who you are and what you value.

Motivation to succeed.

I'm a very good programmer, but not that motivated. Given the right effort I'm reasonably sure I could build a number of successful apps. I just don't want to spend my life doing that. Instead I'm a hobbyist creative writer, an excellent cook, a father who's there for his kids, and a helpful husband. After I'm through with those things, there isn't much time left to build anything.

Others want to build software products and make money from them, and those who have the motivation to do this, usually do.

You only get one life, choose wisely.

I hear you. We're doing exactly that and keeping them in the real world. Absolutely no tablets or devices not connected to a keyboard. I even have an SNES on standby to ease them into consoles.

But I do want to build some level of digital literacy, and most importantly just make sure they learn how to type properly when the time comes. Hence the question, I want to introduce them to tech with extreme caution.

They're very young now, so in the beginning my hope is to have any type of device locked down to essentially just educational games and content. As they get older I'd expect to be less restrictive, for now I just want to make sure that their access is limited when they're young, but they do still have access to a keyboard.

My thinking was whitelisting in the beginning, but I'm not sure what I actually want to allow access to.

I thought Reddit was turning into the old Facebook in the sense that:

- people actually use it

- it's use is widespread

I haven't been on Reddit long but would say I'm still enjoying it. Where Facebook is a zombie that people use to sell trinkets on Marketplace.

I think it can be location and company specific too. In some cities hiring is hard to do, so they take what they can get. And some company cultures value experience and stability, others like younger devs.

My experience has been that most devs in their 40s and 50s can run circles around those in their 20s and early 30s. If someone is already good in their 20s they're likely a savant. TL;DR the biggest thing is managing your career intelligently. I think there's more risk when you approach 50, but the same is true in every industry.

If you wanted to go from good to great - electrician, plumber, bricklayer - what would you do?

It's not magic. Take yourself seriously as a tradesperson, continually read about the field, and work for companies that provide you with high quality experiences.

I don't know that I'd call myself a 'great' programmer, but I am quite a bit better than I was ten years ago. And the reason for that largely comes from using that ten years of experience to improve my understanding of the field.

There isn't a silver bullet beyond putting the work in.

This resonates with me quite a bit. I took an unstable role in my twenties, had the motivation to upgrade to something much better, then settled down and started a family.

Eight years later and I've developed a deep skepticism about private industry and how companies are run, and know I'm working for an employer that's conducive to my mental health. Eventually you gain the recognition of how important that is, and how easily it can be lost once you have it.

They do, but in most things the inauthenticity usually gets rooted out eventually when results aren't delivered.

True confidence produces results.

Yep, in other words it's called true confidence, having genuine experience in the task at hand. It's something that can't be faked.

The math can work out for both renting and owning, you just have to do the math and see which of the two options works for you.

In todays environment homes are so expensive that it can be a questionable investment. At other times in the market that wasn't always the case.

Let's wait until someone develops real AI and figure it out then.

It's hard to say how it'll sell, but I do self-directed learning and research, and document it on Github. As a senior dev I feel like self-directed learning of what I need, and no more, is a better look.

A number of years ago I did do a certification on project management from Coursera, which is a good look. Your software related experience should speak for itself, but tangential certifications like project management look like an 'above and beyond' type of thing, IMO.

When I see an actual software certification, my thinking is that this is a person who likes checking skill boxes, but who will miss the big picture when it comes time to actually solve problems.

The only real way to find the hidden gems is to have genuine curiosity and be a voracious reader.

Oftentimes you won't know that you're going to get a golden egg from a book until you actually read it, so you find good books by following your curiosity and consistently reading.

The only issue with this approach is that some of the best books out there can be prohibitively expensive, so it helps if you can find them in a library before you buy. But many of the best books will never be in a public library, either.

More generally, the best writing out there either exists in the academic world, or the ancient world. Writing that was written by PhDs for other PhDs, and historical (usually religious) text that was preserved throughout history.

If you're searching for books in a shiny, new bookstore, it's very likely that about 95% of what's in there is going to be disingenuous crap. If you're searching online or in a quality used bookstore you'll have better luck.

Also, one other comment that hasn't been mentioned.

Having one kid is actually pretty easy. There are two of you, one of them. One of you is always resting at any given time.

When you have two kids it's a big change. If you're sharing responsibilities equally, now you're putting one of them to bed every night. And you're with at least one of them all the time, and if you're not, the other is handling both (harder on them).

And with two kids you're starting to see inter-child conflict, so it's not just managing two separate kids, but also their interactions.

In the long run having two kids can be beneficial because eventually they start entertaining each other. Currently, my boys are around 2 and 4, and things are starting to settle / they play with each other. If you just have the one, one of you is always going to need to be with them.

If you have three kids it's pretty intense. If you have four.. don't have four unless you fully understand what you're getting into.

Read Positive Discipline by Jane Nelsen. It's a classic and it's lessons are key.

Extraversion is a big factor, what level of day to day intensity is comfortable for him. To me that's a bigger aspect to look at.

You could argue that the demand for software developers dilutes quality. When we're desperate for bodies that's going to mean we settle for inexperience.

Depends on whether you're asking 28 year old or 38 year old me.

Now? I'd go grab a hot beverage.