One word: maximizing advertising revenue
1,360 karma · joined October 11, 2016
I wish there was a biotech with FB’s culture.
Descriptively, there is a trend, yes.
But it can not be interpreted in statistical (inferential) terms, I think.
There’s too much crap when I search for actual high quality content due to SEO and stuff.
(I’m not saying don’t blog. Definitely, it’s as useful as described in this post, and we’re not running out of storage space.)
“Maybe we don't talk twitter on twitter”
“Satya: Thx for the chat. Will stay in touch. And will for sure follow-up on Teams feedback!”
“jack [presumably Dorsey]: I'm off the twitter board mid May and then completely out of company. I intend to do this work and fix our mistakes. Twitter started as a protocol. It should have never been a company. That was the original sin.”
Larry [Ellison; Oracle] I agree that it has huge potential... and it would be lots of fun Elon: Absolutely:) [2022-04-26] Larry: Since you think I should come in for at least $2B... I'm in for $2B
Although the first third was a slog (a simplistic history of management), the rest was filled with great insights in every page. I read those very slowly, almost meditating, because it was so good.
Warehouse and Lake also feel mostly like distinctions without difference, though if you really want, I think this is the technical difference: - warehouse: structured data for analytics, outputted from ETL jobs - lake: a dump for unstructured data, to be cleaned up later: EL, then possibly T
Moreover, people want to push this even further, with "data river" - streaming(-like) data that is "continuously" transformed (isn't that just an ETL data pipeline?)
The referenced "The Rise of the Data Engineer" article proved quite prescient.
The present overview seems less good on future predictions (it's hard!). Also, some mention of "data science" could've been a propos – though it's difficult to find consensus on what DS actually entails.
Overall, I think a good framework to navigate this space is to think of 2 overarching disciplines:
1) Engineering: scaling data & software.
2) Science: getting actionable insights from data combined with subject matter/domain expertise
Usually, #1 is a platform for #2 – but getting #1 good seems just as, if not more, important, and is perhaps harder.
EDIT: formatting
Did this _not_ work on the same M2 laptop while on Monterey?
(I've had this on Monterey from the beginning on M1 MacBook Pro)
This keeps the workspace nice and clean
For switching apps, either cmd-tab or cmd-` or with Alfred App
Indeed, for moving windows to left/right/etc, you may need an app like Rectangle
You _could_ add custom shortcuts in Settings - Keyboard for menu items like Zoom or "Move Window to Left Side of Screen" but it's a bit limited.
What is missing? I guess some people like live preview in cmd-tab, but I've been ok without it.
Once people get older and have families, I feel like they prioritize that over the social aspect of work. So they like remote.
Whereas younger people kind of want to do more socializing at work. So they may prefer going in (and commuting doesn’t feel so bad when you haven’t been doing it for years or decades)
Even for 1-1, I get too many of those those “Hi Joe” pings without any content.
I have a permanent status “nohello.com” but the UI is such trash, no one even knows it’s there
Can anyone say more how the increased electricity consumption by EVs will pressure the existing grid, and what sources (green or otherwise) will generate the extra capacity?
I think CEOs are there to simply not screw anything up.
In other words, they were picked so that there wasn't someone else there who would screw up more.
They are supposed to be quiet, run of the mill, go with the flow kinds of people. This is the implicit requirement. The explicit one is, "just keep the overall revenue growth stable".
There is no requirement about "solving existing issues" because that's not part of "the bottom line" or even to land any "big wins" because growth is already "good enough" and it's better to maintain it, than risk it and lose everything.
Why this profile for CEOs?
These days, everything is amplified and the smallest mistake can mean big trouble. Top leaders are already magnets for attention due to their role, and if they start to make noise about anything even minor, it will be bad attention.
If the business is already good, "let's not screw anything up".
That's what I'm thinking. I feel that this applies to Pichai, Cook, Nadella and others like them [1]
The danger could be that the companies may become complacent and get disrupted eventually. But perhaps that is something they watch out for (maybe another part of the JD) – and they buy out any competitors that get too haughty, as needed.
[1] Zuckerberg is an outlier because look, he's still a founder CEO unlike the others, and that's because, no matter what you think of him (or even if he's a robot ;) ), he has a terrific track record in decision making. So he's there and allowed to make decisions, even high risk ones, such as the whole Metaverse invention or the stuff about culling headcount "who shouldn't be here". Though he's also doing those decisions due to privacy regulations which seems to affect the stable growth mentioned above.
After literally minutes of use, the thought to return them evaporated just as quickly.
Pretty much all because of the seamless connection.
To be fair to the Sennheisers, they are durable: they survived contact with a wall at least twice.
Facebook for a data science role. Professional, relevant, fun. Edit: this was 2017, Menlo Park.
They evaluated multiple skills, from relevant behavioral type questions, to relevant technical questions.
Interviewers were engaged, smart, never arrogant, and I recall them asking questions about my resume that no one else asked about.
The feedback for not extending an offer was fair, and I think I even agreed with it actually.
And they were the only ones who gave me swag - and it was cool swag.
Looking back, it was one of the most professional experiences in my life. I will add, such experiences are not typical.
Bundle it into iCloud+ or whatever. I prefer to pay in cash over attention!
Apple's different philosophy is admirable: hire people with "taste".
As Fred Brooks said, "great design comes from great designers" (though by "design" he meant "engineering" but still) [1]
[1] See PDF: http://worrydream.com/refs/Brooks-NoSilverBullet.pdf
What I wonder: is this "experts leading experts" philosophy unique to Apple?
And yet, I am with you: shouldn’t the top (smartest?) people be closely involved “in the weeds”? It seems like “design dictators” [from another comment] and such could actually make the org’s products a lot better. Which seems to be the philosophy at Apple: “experts leading experts” – as a reply here says, and the article in [1].
Thoughts anyone?
[1] https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-apple-is-organized-for-innovatio...
For a government entity, an unreasonably large amount of their work is on GitHub. Examples:
Front end design system: https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-frontend
Project board: https://github.com/orgs/alphagov/projects/4
Requests for comment: https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-rfcs
Gov.uk infrastructure as code (WIP): https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-infrastructure
“The GDS way”: How they work, tech stack, processes, etc https://github.com/alphagov/gds-way
“Terraform modules for on-boarding with Cyber Security services eg define the IAM SecurityAudit role”: https://github.com/alphagov/cyber-security-shared-terraform-...
Full GitHub org with >1,500 repos: https://github.com/alphagov