Wow, this seems great for doing interviews with an analyst, or just demoing data generally. Cool product!
1,119 karma · joined March 19, 2020
I might be too used to using coding agents in various parts of my workflow, and others are still getting acquainted, or others find it still much different than just another standard debugging tool.
And fwiw it's probably not Claude's fault that emoji fonts load this slow, though. Wtf Safari?
No it's not
I've built with Flutter and React Native a few times over the years, but I will give Skip a go in my next project, I've heard a lot actually.
They do. Large 'first party' vendors have a completely different system, basically. Even large third party vendors have a more direct line to support.
I agree that the paper is just much more useful context than any descriptions they make in the OP blogpost.
Not only is this a contrived non-comparison, but the statement itself is readily disproven by the limitations basically _everyone_ using single instance ClickHouse often run into if they actually have a large dataset.
Spark and Hadoop have their place, maybe not in rinky dink startup land, but definitely in the world of petabyte and exabyte data processing.
Yes, it seems cruel and also counter to ensuring the org succeeds. Your perceived ability as an engineer might go up if your colleagues fail, but your colleagues failing when you knew a possible way for things to go better is harmful to your org's goals and culture. It only takes a small few failures for the bar to be lowered to the point that you yourself may not want to work there.
Even sometimes when other people's projects are NOT your problem and they aren't seeking feedback, sometimes you SHOULD make their flaws your problem if it is of crucial importance to your org. Knowing when you should expend your energy on an initiative like that is in itself a mark of seniority.
The blog itself mentions this a bit.
You're setting yourself up for making a huge part of your future revenue stream being set aside for ongoing chipfab capex and research engineering. And that's a huge gamble, since getting this all setup is not guaranteed to succeed.
This dancing around what was actually said or sent all reminds me of that meme, Dipshit289: dude you don't wanna know... Oh the horror...
Fwiw, there's this thread that seemingly explains what employee was doing the harassment - and shows Phil overreacting and exaggerating the 'harassment' itself, as well as misattributing blame: https://chaos.social/@North/115605819126197877
That makes me think much less of both Adafruit and SparkFun. I really, really wish all sides would simply put everything out for us to evaluate. Having to trust various unreliable narrators is not respectful to the time of all of us potential customers.
I would be wary of this being the superior winning state, but definitely an alternative. I've done exactly this in my career as a tech lead only for it to burn me, and probably 2/3rds of the time the best thing for everyone is to simply "Save the Sprint" and not become mired in discussions that often are for personal empire building that strategic leadership would hate.
Maybe people have different experiences than me on this, feel free to speak up!
This is good intuition but generally people won't tell you whether they have a good or silly/self-serving reason in my experience, and you can only really get them to surface that by comparing it to the priority of other commitments and forcing them to depriotize something.
I think the ratings might be a bit borked. There's a dialogue path choice that results in the A+ where you end up asking directly whether the back-channel was worth another delay, and you. The VP says no. No junior gets interrupted.