90 karma · joined May 12, 2017
Migration was a simple matter of exporting a CSV and then just correctly selecting the column order for KeePass import.
For those who don't want to trust a third party, even with their encrypted data, I believe that home NAS sync-when-available is possible - I personally haven't tested the implications of syncing changes from multiple devices at the same time in that scenario.
The corollary to this is that it's often a lot easier for a manager to hire a contractor or use an out-sourcing vendor, even if they don't see the requirements of the role being any different than that of a "permie" and even if it costs the company more money.
Source: I have worked for large corporates both as a contractor and as a full time employee in mixed teams.
My personal experience is that people who wish to specialise in developing their own technical work to a higher level, without taking on management responsibilities, need to be more proactive about seeking the next role that will be right for them and very often that means looking externally.
Of course there are a number of organisations that explicitly provide a specialist seniority track outside management (Sun Microsystems was the first that I encountered), but you probably already know if you work somewhere like that.
For example, I work in London and it would be unreasonable to expect that someone could travel between home and work on public transport and still meet a response SLA less than one hour. That would likely be a different length of time in another location, or if people worked 100% remotely, for example.
My opinion is that if you have a response time less than say 30 minutes, then you actually need to be compensating people for sitting in front of their computers ready to respond immediately, whether that be in the office or remotely.
Unless call-outs are very frequent (in which case there are underlying reliability, capacity management, and/or alerting issues which need to be resolved), then on-call isn't really about the extra time spent working, but the restrictions on what one can do whilst on-call.
To use a fairly simple metric: if an on-call SLA means that I have to be concerned about whether I can pop out to a local shop or how long I can spend in the shower, then I don't think that I would be on-call, I would be working.
Of course start up environments (especially early stage) are always different from more corporate environments and there are generally greater resource constraints in general. For a start up I am usually looking more at what valuable experience I can gain, rather than maximising remuneration (subject to a certain base-level of course).
However ultimately the question remains the same: do I think that what I am getting out of this role is worth what I have to put into it? There are probably roles in which I'd be willing to put up with the inconvenience of very short on-call SLAs, because either they paid very well, or I was gaining very valuable experience.
Whether a role fulfils ones own expectations for the reward/expenditure ratio is a question that everyone has to decide for themselves.
I suspect that if the company is currently getting that amount of extra work (over and above a normal length working day) for free, then you're unlikely to be able to get them to change that. If it was me, I'd be looking for a role in another team or company that has a more realistic approach to on-call.
Any potential extra impact on your current colleagues that you leaving might cause is the responsibility of your management and up to them to mitigate. How your current colleagues decide to react to the on-call situation should be up to them.
Good luck resolving this, I've been in work situations that had unreasonable expectations myself and I appreciate how stressful it can be.
In this case, there are clearly people who are still willing to bet against (lay) a Biden Presidency, at very long odds. This is presumably either because they believe that the price adequately compensates for the low probability of it not happening, or to hedge risk that they have accumulated taking other positions while trading in this market (more likely IMHO).
One other factor is the cost of carry - while money is tied up in a bet it can't be used for anything else, including other betting strategies that might have a higher expected profit. In this case, if one has already made a profit betting for a Biden Presidency at longer odds than 1.07, it might now be worthwhile to pay someone else the slight risk premium to take up ones position until settlement, so that one can lock in the profit and move onto other things.
(Information on the quote's provenance, for those who might be interested: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/05/24/art-limit/)
I recently built a fairly complex system entirely in Bash, not because it was the "best" language for the job (it would have been much easier to do in Ruby or Python), but because the client didn't have any permanent staff that could maintain Ruby or Python scripts.
As a contractor, one of the major factors in the technical decisions I make is: how supportable is this technology for the client, once I have left? Of course the answer to that question will vary on a case by case basis, but Bash is usually a good lowest common denominator in a Linux environment.