jspiral

how dare you, he spent a whole month in switzerland. what an exalted being

I'm sure you've already thought about this but bear in mind that as a buyer, I don't want to hear "unlimited" for things that have material scaling costs for my service providers, it just sounds unsustainable and likely to change later or be the cause of an issue.

On the other hand being free from arbitrary limits is great.

i have been involved in quite a few code escrow agreements but none that were actually used. i'd be curious to hear any stories about cases where that did happen.

in my experience it has just been a way to help business decision makers credibly claim they are managing risk when buying from a startup

WGU was a customer when I was at Learning Objects, they always impressed me visionary and outcome oriented. glad to hear a positive anecdote more than 10 years later.

yes, i was part of doing something like this at a small elearning startup for one of the largest publishers in the world circa 2010. Exactly as you say, brought in to provide the tech platform for a strategic initiative involving a transformative shift to digital-first courseware and content.

in the future our personal editors will create our own editions of these books. mine will have an even longer captain crunch section and yours will be abbreviated

absolutely, how do i support this

ah i didn't actually explain it, the other responder did though. 6/7th (~85.7%) of parents with b g are knocked out by the day of week filter, while only ~%73.5 of the b b parents are knocked out by it. (if i did that math right) so proportionally the sample has more bb parents than the one without day of week.

true but note that the day of week selector is knocking out 6/7ths, it's quite a dominant excluder of parents. thus countering the effect of "has one boy already" on the composition of the group

what works for me is to think of it like the mob of people is already there in front of you, and you're first grabbing out just a subset of the mob based on some conditions, then checking only those qualified at random which is the same as checking the distributions inside the qualified group. so for problem 1, the mob is all parents with 2 children, each child is either b or g. the underlying distribution is 25%bb, 25%gg, 50%bg.

you first cull the set by saying "only parents with at least 1 b, line up to be examined". i think it's clear that the selected population will be 1/3 bb parents, 2/3 bg parents, right?

on the other hand the second problem is you saying: "all parents with a b born on tuesday, report to be examined!". note that most of the parents that were in the question 1 selected population are now excluded. try to imagine which parents get selected by this one.

you can't make the inference back to the original question because it's a different question about a broader group of people. question 1 population distrubution actually is 1/3 vs 2/3. the key is to think of it as selecting different subsets of the parent mob.

yes, a weekly recap of the big stories from 10 years ago this week and what ultimately came of those topics would be fascinating context

or starting a campaign to convince others to adopt your ways!

that sounds like a description of scuba diving to me, maybe worth a try if you haven’t

its tragic that this sort of thing can't be resolved more optimally. Sets up a lose/lose. Too bad you can't just send your agent in to negotiate on your behalf, a 3rd party can take positions that are very hard to express yourself without ruining the relationship.

i am very interested in the next generation of things like horizon workrooms on oculus. I find the current gen unpleasant to use for long periods of time but I'm sure it can be improved

At my company we have recently rolled out a new framework where the IC track has rungs that run parallel to middle management roles.

we're calling it "advanced professional", and has 3 levels, the highest being equivalent to the leader of a function, if you're familiar with the domain / function / specialty paradigm. This is essentially a director level individual contributor which I think is a pretty cool.

We're just a medium sized services company (localization, AI training data production, digital marketing). so if we're doing this I expect a lot of people will be soon enough.

in meatspace though, my real mailbox is mostly filled with spam that the sender paid to have delivered. granted, it would at least act as a limiting factor.

i have a bit of a reputation for doing this, and a few personal relationships with business leaders who have tapped me for these kind of projects. in the end its kind of dysfunctional every time because various people in the org own the relevant responsibilties already and you are basically micromanaging them against their will as a prelude to termination or reorganization.

its not like the solutions are usually that hard to figure out, it's always a problem with people and their incentives ultimately.

the fixer role is basically to give confidence to the CEO that disempowering certain people is safe and there's a path out.

i have more sympathy today for the gatekeepers than i did earlier in my career. The main points that lead to this are:

1. many of these grassroots apps are a mess, filled with bugs and security flaws.

2. often they don't align with standard platforms and technologies that are in use. this includes source control, CI, unit testing standards, SSO, etc, not just the code itself)

3. no one put together a business case, so no budget or justification exists for support and maintenance costs, and no planning has been done to execute on that.

4. the application was not built in compliance with internal processes. this can mean it will never pass an audit (because the org is operating under ISO 9001 or something). at a minimum, some valuable and time-constrained people may have to analyze it carefully to figure out what the risks are

for an IT org, there are usually a lot more good ideas than there is capacity for supporting, maintaining, testing, and managing applications. further, maintenance costs dwarf initial build costs. "here, I built you this" doesn't really solve the whole picture. it feels more like an annoying effort to skip the line and hand off a white elephant that has to be babysat for ever.

Note that this is not a justification for the stonewalling or cold shoulder. in this type of org, i'd expect IT to help write the business case and make it easy to do things according to policy

yes

Joan Didion is great, I would recommend Slouching Toward Bethlahem to anyone who isn't familiar with her yet. Her writing is precise and observant.

hiring manager here, this is advice that everyone should take. looking back at hires that didn't work out through my career, unsurfaced expectations mismatches are the main root cause. even if both parties are reasonable and "good".

this matches my experience as a developer. now as a manager, i treasure those who can build most of their refactoring in as a "tax" onto every task, and then explain anything bigger that won't fit clearly enough - we can usually find a future initiative that could expand to contain and benefit from the desired refactor if it's actually a good idea.

my memory is that the most common term to use there would have been "special effects", and "illusions" would have seemed strange even then

didn't see this until just now - no, not all.

you're right. also, there's a type of responsibility i'm hinting at here that's less formal, more like: "this person can handle tasks of complexity X and is willing to do what it takes to create a quality solution", that is the nuts and bolts to my mind of a successful and high functioning team.

When i was directly managing developers (now I manage dev managers), I always loved it when someone would talk about their expectations and targets. As a manager, there are usually many areas or topics that could be going in a better direction. and someone who is more engaged because they want to earn a higher salary in exchange for taking responsibility in some area of the team is a huge asset. If someone wants to earn a higher salary in exchange for taking more direct accountability for our outcomes (which can be in an IC or lead capacity), there's usually plenty of opportunity in the typical team, if the manager can structure it right with the various stakeholders and budget authorities. Just wanted to say, don't hesitate to start the conversation with your manager. I know some probably don't handle it well but some do. What I'd recommend is, a conversation based on the question "what would I need to be bringing to this team to hit salary level X". if the manager doesn't come up with an answer to that, well you probably should be looking elsewhere. but it might be the shortest path to what you want especially if you like your current environment.

cool, i seem to have been a generation behind on my ad blocking. thanks!

thank you, looks great

the rolling stone website is completely intolerable, wow. Anyone have a good reference for current best practices for browser config or tools to make these sites act a little leaner?