I've been talking about this a lot the last year, and sometimes the reaction is "never heard of that" and sometimes it's "we've been doing that for a while now".
153 karma · joined September 15, 2012
@_mcarroll_
I've been talking about this a lot the last year, and sometimes the reaction is "never heard of that" and sometimes it's "we've been doing that for a while now".
But by the same principle inverse argument is that a lot "tech leads" have the opposite problem: there's no point at which they have been out of the weeds.
That's a key skill that managers have to learn to early: what are the things you DON'T have to look at or know to be most effective. If you are reviewing every bug fix, or have to sit in on every single planning session, you will very quickly hit ceiling of your career as a manager.
I think that a great manager who has done the tech lead job and always worked a few levels above it is best positioned to succeed. But completely agree that good tech leads are very well positioned to make this move too.
Not sure there's a way to remove the link on HN and just make this a discussion, otherwise I would do so.
“A tobacco store lady talking about physics in the wee hours of the morning doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me,” [General Carey] said in an interview with Air Force investigators, according to the report. “You need to watch out for that because that’s just like our training says, you know, people are trolling for information.”
*
Nuclear disarmament never sounded like a better idea.
We are always looking for people to help organize more events though, and would love to have you (or anybody else interested) involved. Events are informal and always free. Shoot me a line: michael @ aqua.io
I'm planning on keeping up on Mike Rogers until I get a response, and keeping the correspondence public until the shame factor kicks in and he gives a response. If somebody has a better idea than that, please let me know.
We should start hold our public servant to task for lying to the American people about these programs.
Doing that would leave bitcoin only attractive to the elite that can move their country in and out of the money easily. But then the obvious question is: for folks that can already move money around easily outside of government control--why would those people want to take on the extra risk inherent in bitcoins?
I've also been to Nazca and my impression was that though the tourist traffic was only a tiny fraction of Machu Picchu, the town couldn't handle much more of it. Even in off season the airport was booked to capacity and people had to wait hours for scheduled flights.
Another example (besides Machu Picchu) that comes to mind is Paracas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracas_National_Reserve). It's hardly a mainstream tourist attraction, but the degradation from the tourist industry was pretty apparent when I visited in 2009, despite being a protected area.
I think the underlying message in this bit of sensationalist journalism is that foreign tourists to should hurry and visit the Nazca lines right away, before they get completely destroyed and are forever lost.
The sad thing is that Peru can barely balance the tourist traffic it gets already while still preserving its natural sites and artifacts. Who know how much damage to the lines would result from a rush of tourists trying to see them before they are gone?
Maybe I'm just missing something, but something critical like keeping strategic conversations focused, intellectually honest, and positive seems to have less to do with the founder skill sets (and the amount of overlap in them) than it has to do with personality, previous startup experience, and having pre-aligned expectations.
Given that the author is the founder of health tech startup (EligibleAPI.com), it's hard not to read this as being implicit in the post :)
Even if something like this were somehow representative of the range of political discourse, I struggle to see what real value it would bring. I agree that we should not allow others to set the rules of a political discussion as a choice between X and not X, but how is limiting ourselves to thinking in terms of just three criteria, instead of just one, much better?
Why put extra work into making your RESTful URL structure more semantic, in other words, if Twitter if just going to shorten them to the point that they are no longer fully readable, or Facebook is just going to hide them behind a preview view?
Then, when you go get invited for an interview, make sure you control the variables of the situation beforehand: remind the person who schedules the interview that you have a stammer and ask if you can bring a tablet computer to use to help communicating with the interviewer (or something similar that would work). If you set the rules for how the interview proceeds beforehand, it should give you control of the situation and show that you are in control of being able to communicate and work successfully despite the stammer.