mtippett

It cuts both ways.

One child (reserved/shy) - has had probably more negative impact than anything else in her life. From the very first access to tech has continually found opportunity to find toxic, negative communities (hentai, r/teenagers, edtwt, sh, bdsm). Any attempt to reduce results in hiding and lying. The speed that a kid can change window or swipe away is ridiculous. Literally can't find a way that tech has benefitted her.

Another child (shy too), enamored with anything that teaches her more (tik tok, youtube, etc).

The big difference is that the second child isn't looking for community. The first child is looking for community but can only find community in echo chambers that reflect back teenage angst, and those echo chambers run deep.

I can only hope that the first child grows into an well adjusted adult, and while not social media, toxic and negative online communities are just simply too easier to slide into.

Similar situation. Occasionally super bad packet loss within the network. https://use-cases.org/2020/12/29/diagnosing-eero-issues-with...

Still haven't resolved it, but it is likely Fing on Big Sur.

"Missed it by that much". Posted almost exactly the same within 30 seconds of you...

Actually thought that I had some how double posted.

Google translate is just as humorous and reasonably similar. eg:

Este lago parece-me bem piscoso. Vamos pescar para nos divertirmos.

Google -> This lake looks very fishy to me. Let's go fishing for fun. English as She is Spoke -> That pond it seems me many multiplied of fishes. Let us amuse rather to the fishing.

English version -> This lake looks full of fish. Let's have some fun fishing.

I'm in a similar situation left ear is better than normal for my age (46M), but my right ear has profound loss (ie: nothing, falls to 80 dB) above 2kHz. Since it's profound amplifying hearing aids won't do a damn thing (apart from possibly damaging the hearing for the good part).

I've thought about looking at if there are frequency shifting hearing aids or even just earpieces to shift some of those higher frequencies into my hearing range of the right ear.

I haven't spent too much digging deeper into it - since I'm completely functional at normal levels, however whispering by anyone and low volume female voices on my right side are completely lost. I typically do that "speak to my good ear" contortion. Or just sit in the corner of the table or sit to the right in other conversations.

Don't get me started on PDF's obsession with nice ligatures.. For the love god, when you have a special ligature like "ti", please convert the text in the copy buffer to a "ti" instead of an unpasteable nothing.

Nothing is more annoying than having to manual search a document that has been exported from PDF and have to make sure you catch all the now incorrect spellings when all the ligatures have just disappeared "action" -> "ac on", "finish" -> " nish".

This was exactly what it was.

Demo, deep dive/narrative on your work. Demonstrating something cool. It was clear the prep was not expected or needed, and it would be scrappy - just like lightning talks at conferences.

The exposure and sharing of ideas was critical.

We even had times where someone would suggest a topic during the meeting and someone would step up and do a deeper dive into it.

Understanding is all relative. You don't need to be an expert to know more than your peers. You just need to accept that your extra knowledge adds value. And be honest where your limits of understanding are.

> because there’s always still the anxiety that someone might spot a flaw in your argument that you didn’t

What's the need to always being 100% right. There are very few situations where there is a 100% right solution. Most are optimized 80-90% for a particular problem set. Indicating that "within our context, we believe this is the best solution" goes a long way in creating that opportunity for discussion and deeper understand of either gaps in the context for the problem, or adjacent problems that may leverage the work.

It's not high pressure, really it isn't. It's the same as when you talk in a team meeting, just more one-sided.

The pressure that people feel is mostly self imposed. Most of the time the audience is there to learn given they have a gap. Most people are projecting their fear onto the presenter. Unless you are an actual leader of an organization, you are just one of the team.

(I'm a reformed strong introvert)

+1 here.

An individual's team/employeer/peers/manager should create the space for your to lead people (which in a lot of cases means stepping out in front of a lot of people), and to be supportive relative to the experience.

Individuals need to take responsibility for their personal growth and find avenues (twitch, toastmasters, meetups, etc) to get stronger that doesn't rely on your employer.

That captures a lot of what I was trying to capture. However, the intent was for people to cover work that they are doing (lowering prep time, immediate understanding), tech they are researching (again lower prep time, immediate understanding).

A lot of technical presentations we did are no different than what you would do explaining tech within your team. A few diagrams, and understanding of the core of the tech. Scaling to more than the safety of the team is really where I think people would rather have 3 meetings with 3 different teams to do a knowledge transfer than take the risk of being in front of collecting 5-10 teams worth of engineers.

Looking over the comments, the real gap I expect is the lack of peer management support and encouragement. And expectation that mentoring and teaching peers should be part of the leadership expectations. My view are is the the strongest engineers are the ones that accelerate and multiple the work of themselves and their peers, but there are a lot people who subscribe to the "army of one" 10x engineer philosophy.

I tried that - called it Tech Shorts (lightning talks) at small company. Found the largest issue was Passiveness in the engineering crowd. Ended up giving about 50% of the talks myself, not because I wanted to, but because there were so few people who were willing to step up and present. About 70% of the engineering team would attend (~50 people), so it was well received. Will try a new iteration next time.

What made your attempt successful, in your opinion.

We also need to understand that a subset of vi features is part of the POSIX standard, so any POSIX system will need to have "vi". vim is the logical choice there.

So as a result vim has become the reference implementation for the POSIX vi featureset.

Absolutely, it's a power play and innappropriate.

I worked for a manager that would use "I exited his ass" as a badge of pride. That shows no respect for the person, and it also shows no due diligence and hiring, mentoring or coaching that individual.

We all have our own particular biases in how we measure our own personal success, and as leaders we also apply our biases to how we interpret other's success. As a leader who has control of someone's livelihood, you should ensure a tempered layering of (1) expectations, (2) feedback, (3) understanding, and (4) mutual understanding of fit.

No one should be surprised that they are getting fired or getting on a performance plan. The silent behavior is a tell, but it is ultimately unfair to the employee.

Bad hires do happen, but it's usually pretty clear and pretty mutual when that happens.

Lenovo (IBM) has been an active supporter of Linux since around 2006. The Thinkpad T43p had a lot of Linux enabled for the workstation users. I recall when I was at ATI involved in their effort, we worked closely with the engineering team in Japan to make sure that suspend/resume and hibernation worked well with the graphics portion.

It's good to see that this has continued.

Don't underestimate how much use of Linux on high end PC hardware happens within the Workstation market.

It might be arguable that the check-in on the problem isn't so much an automatic process, but one of stimuli triggering a pattern match on a problem, or conscious triggering of the thought process.

When people are working on a problem, simply saying out loud "I'm trying to work out this problem" has an effect lighting up the neurons associated with the previous thinking done on that topic. If there is new information, (like a snake eating its tail), that may be integrated unexpectedly into the consideration.

I would suggest that there are prompts all around us that will trigger a "revisit" of a problem, it is conscious (or at least autonomous based on stimuli) action, but not directed.

I'd add slightly to this. Managers are one path in the leadership ladder. Management is organizational leadership the other is technical leadership. Technical leadership is the principal engineer, architect, or technical fellow at most companies. In most companies the lower parts of the ladder is shared as in technical or IC roles.

Surprisingly there is a large amount of leadership that is shared between both ladders. Group communication, group mentorship and coaching, group leadership is more or less the same. Teams are particularly weak if they don't have both technical and organizational leadership.

The technical leaders typically are focused on mentoring and growing engineers with architecture and technical guidance. Organizational leaders are focused on mentoring and growing engineers on their career path and a lot of the softer skills.

I agree 100% on the if a team needs to be managed, it needs to be changed. Teams will always need leaders to provide focus. And ideally they need both organizational and technical leadership. Rarely does that come in one package.

I'd agree that there it would be very nice to correlate with a traffic load graph. For areas like California, where you have pretty much the I-5 or the Highway 1, knowing the fatality per car travelled would be interesting view.

It's a relationship. Managers shouldn't choose a date, they should come to an understanding with the engineer doing the work. The whole point of the discussion and the range is to discover what could go wrong and pro-actively look to mitigate that.

Managers help manage, the discovery of risks and issues that I talk about in the article are where the manager comes in. The identification of the risks, inter-dependencies, unknowns and so on inherent in the task comes primarily from the person doing the work. I believe this is part of the "solve problems" that you talk of.

Engineers should have no concern working through an estimate with their peers or their manager (be it direct line or part of the project).

Neither engineers nor managers should be asked to deal with unrealistic or overtly broad indications of a date. In the article I talk about a range and a confidence. If there are strong unknowns, that can't be determined, then that is risk that is carried within the task. That is part of the problem that needs to be solved.

I don't believe I talked about commitment, flogging or anything else. I am talking about planning and discovery.