I don't see the browser in the video.
128 karma · joined August 21, 2017
Yes they are people, but a company is NOT responsible for them. Where does this come from? An employee has an employment relationship and not a friendship and while it certainly sucks to be let go, it's not the company who is the bad guy.
From what I see, you can't take off your personal morale views from business decisions.
> Meanwhile the rich fucks are still getting richer even with the "risk" they take. What even has that anything to do with what parent is saying? Or the topic we are discussing?
Is in your opinion no company is allowed to let go people, except if they pamper them with a big severance package? Sorry, but your post reads very childish and naive.
Edit: Both parties can of course negotiate a bigger time frame.
I think it fits here.
For me it's a blessing. Jesus christ, not hearing any background noise is a gamechanger.
I also added a "day done" timer, means, at 18:30 no more work, no matter what. I stop and make my dinner meal.
My morning routine (the 7:00 wakeup call) had the most impact. This call basically initiates a sequence of actions: Wakeup, taking shower, breakfast and PAPERWORK. This goes until 9:00 which is the time where I start my work day.
My next step will be to integrate running into my morning routine as the first action. That being said, knowing that I will do my paperwork the next day at a given time helped the most. I don't have a lot of paperwork or urgent paperwork so this works for me.
When a new routine is integrated and becomes a normal part of my life, I start with integrating the next routine and so on.
One thing I noticed though is, no matter what the routine is and how you plan it, at some point you have to do it and overcome your procrastination. You have to find something that works for you. In the end you have to do the action and just not "plan" it.
I plan my routines in a way where I know I'm not "overwhelmed". You gotta be true to yourself :)
Oh and I should mention that I also have days set where I definately will do certain things. For example, I chose Sunday to be my day where I experiment with some cool programming stuff that I wanted to do. That could be a new library I found, programming language or whatever. But no pressure, it's just my "experiement" day where I look into things I'm curious about.
I also clean my "backlog" on that day in the evening. I have a bookmark folder called "backlog" where I move things I want to read or visit later.
Just knowing I have my fix dates and times to do certain things is really satisfying. I'm not sure how to describe it. But it feels relieving.
In the last startup I worked for, I had a certain behavior of what I call "goal-driven stopping". Instead of stopping my work based on the current time, I stopped when I was satisfied with the work/code I have done and if I didn't fix that bug or feature (the goal) I kept going. This was super bad because I wouldn't stop for lunch and instead kept going. Sometimes it was so bad that I would my 1st or 2nd meal that day in the late evening. For some reason I pressured myself for reason I myself made up.
I learned to not to do this with the help of routines :)
I noticed I lose a lot of mental energy, because of lack of routines. This is especially important for shallow work. Like paperwork, phone calls any sort of action in my daily life that is inevitable and recurring.
Those tasks are annoying and I usually ignore them until the last day. I noticed that during the time I'm not doing it, it's still in the back of my mind and prevent me from diving deep into my real work.
For shallow work I reminded myself of what The Merovingian in The Matrix said:
"If we never take our time, how can we ever have time?"
We have to do the shallow work there is no way around it. If it takes 30 minutes now, it will at least take 30 minutes later. But the longer you wait, the longer it stays in the back of your mind keeping you away from the cool work. I had to make myself conscious about it.
It sounds very childish I must admit, but I have these issues and routines are the only way for me to solve them.
But I have to completely disagree with your view. The reason I recommend "The Prince" is, because Machiavelli confronts the reader with what actually happens in the real world and not what people think is morally acceptable.
This whole book is rational. It asks you what you want to achieve (or conquer) and gives you a guide on how to achieve it. Without any illusions of moral and what else human kind "invents" to prevent them from achieving certain goals (or prevent them from doing the necessary).
Machiavelli ignores, on purpose, what we call "good" and "bad". He focuses solely on what is purposeful in a given context, which is what I love so much about it.
The toxicity every day news is spreading is very energy draining.
It's usually really helpful for both.
Hard work is a requirement and not a guarantee of success. And what Emmet Shear tweeted are things that one should do, to increase the chance of success.
Most luck is created by hard work. Recognizing and taking advantage of it.
A lot of startup founder do startup just very wrong and thus fail and thus make the ratio worse.
The way I see it, it's 75% hard work, 25% luck. Calling things luck is easy, but who are we that we can say so? Just by the ratio of successful startups? I don't think thats fair.
Regarding the "ignorant" comment: It wasn't meant to be an insult, but more of an observation.
I think it's unfair against every person who tries hard and works hard to call his/her success luck.
> Luck and timing does not take away from success, but it can't be ignored either. Why are you focussing so much on luck? Have you ever considered the amount of work they put in?
Sure they started with a rediciulous idea, but what they made out of it, has nothing to do with luck and is a result of thousands of little decision made from that start.
Your posts in this thread look very ignorant.
Fork it if you want, I will delete it then (or on your request)
It's just more of a hint to you that, whenever you want to show something to the public, every extra action the user has to make, could lose you that user.
Keep in mind that "we" want to figure out in seconds if we want to spend more time looking at what you have created or not.
That being said, what struck me most was this piece of Dan's quote:
> [...]if you can prove to React something can’t change [...], then React doesn’t need to visit it
I mean it's the consequence of using memoization, but I never really put it that way and for some reason it helps me writing better code. It's a weird thing I have like "I only really realize/understand it when you give it a name or call it out".
Edit: That being said, 298 or 232 miles sounds very low.