470 karma · joined March 24, 2009
* Red Hat was a bastion of open source
* Red Hat sold out to IBM
* Red Hat stopped being Red Hat, and started being IBM by focusing on $$ over open source
* Red Hat reputation degrades as $$ are put first, killing off centos, now this, just downhill from here. >
TLDR: Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: No URLs in mirrorlist
Meeting with people, Hiring, setting up correct processes are your main tools.
Great ICs actually have a huge advantage here, because the key skill for an IC is often technology skills, whereas the key skill for a great leader/manager is trust with the team. Being able to have a deep technical understanding of the problem space will help to develop trust that much faster. However, the key transition is then to get out of the way, and use your knowledge to help challenge ideas while growing the team. The #1 piece of advice is to hold back from giving answers, and instead, challenge people with questions, to let them do the thinking.
- companies that have a history of utilizing/operating with the patents subject (e.g. no patent troll legal firms would be able to meet this requirements)
- only be enforceable against competitor companies that are larger than a certain size, e.g. more than 10 million ARR, so smaller companies can still be formed and get off the ground
- be different based off of the domain - e.g. it should be very hard to get a patent for software or related items
View performance can be a thing at larger scale for OLTP workloads, also, the solution you propose also adds complexity since you have two schemas now instead of one, and as you rightly point out, complexity with views themselves. The question becomes when is this added complexity worth it?
Author seems to be struggling with the connected-kid culture around apps like Instagram and TikTok - which are transforming the school-based culture to something where to be popular, you have to be connected and posting. This is what needs to be controlled IMHO.
As many mention, there are MANY positive uses where the phone is a 100% better medium to teach or learn than old school books or otherwise.
With my kids, I focus on installing and limiting the games and videos to ones that I find productive and educational.
Thats why lawyers are lawyers.
It would be great to get back to more individualism on the web.
The first thing is - this is the industry we live in; especially for small companies, it should be expected to have to handle or at least support tangential roles; it should be expected to have more responsibility and lower bus factor; it should be expected that processes, code standards, etc are not matured since this kind of thing often takes time.
The second thing I'd say, is that there are different personality types. Sure, no one wants to be stressed out; but there are a good amount of people that prefer these smaller-company challenges over sitting in large architecture review meetings for months working in a waterfall format (the other extreme).
Some people like to work in a comfortable role, with a predictable schedule, and just color within their lines with the technologies they know, and go home. Others actually appreciate the challenge and difficulty, and see an "on fire" situation and attempting to level up and see if they can get everyone rowing in the same direction, put processes in place that will last, train discipline and standards, and make it a better place to work.
The third piece, is that what I've described thus far I would not use the word "Toxic" for. I would not consider "overworked" to be the same as "Toxic" personally, since it is each person's responsibility to make sure they are lookin out for their own health, and working to an acceptable and sustainable standard. Sure, employers are always going to want you to work more. That said, the line is crossed when the employer demands or forces workers to work beyond healthy or sustainable limits, especially when the worker has clearly communicated these (often, this second part is what is the failure of many devs) - if that limit is crossed, this is what i would describe as "Toxic", including any sort of employer speak which could be described as "abusive."
I can't imagine using the wearable very much if the game itself isn't compelling - which, from the movie, looks a little wack
Feedback:
It seems overly complicated. You lost me when you said i have to train models? Are you assuming that software developers want to train machine learning models to do something as simple as creating some test data? In reality - I reach for tools that make things easier for me, which includes not having to read a ton of documentation, download new external tools, and things that 'just work'.
It is 100% easier for me to export a little production data to test on (and maybe sanitize), or to write a small script to generate a few users and those things I need to test. Plus - then I know exactly what I'm going to get. A lot of times, after I've done this once, it will work for a good while as well - if I do change the schema, I can add some additional data for that column, and go from there, or otherwise.
For those companies who have 'messy' fixture data - is the tool the issue? My take is that the difficulty with maintaining the data could contribute to this issue, but is also more an issue of simply bad housekeeping - e.g. rushing and not tending the garden. While your system might handle this, your system also seems to require a different skillset (e.g. specific training/knowledge) than the standard QA developer might have.
If I did use it, i'd prefer it to be much easier to use - if I could include a ruby gem, and incorporte it into the testing progress, e.g. an 'after' hook after migrating the db, that would be ideal. Then, I dont really need to know much. However, I would still be concerned about whether this is deterministically creating data or if its random?
Good luck!
Quality+Speed+Efficiency cowboy coding |0-----1------2-------3------4----5| perfect iphone
I would never expect a startup to be operating above 4 or 4.5, it might mean you are spending too much time future proofing.
The best teams operate around 3 or above, but they can do so because they are experienced, disciplined, trust eachother, have a set of tools they know very well, and can move at a quick pace because they automated a lot, have code patterns they follow and are not "re-inventing the wheel" or trying new frameworks for fun.
A LOT of startups are being started by inexperienced developers, where they jump onto some new language or framework, and end up doing a lot of non-core work due to inexperience and due to choosing some nascent framework. This immediately puts them at less than 3, probably between 1-2.
If you are at a 2, i would say you are doing OKAY, any less than that, and I would say you probably are suffering from inexperience, bad choice of frameworks, no tests, etc.
500/1500 students + 1/3 students = ?
0. Performance isn't everything, especially to a lot of companies where having something at all is more important than just being the fastest
1. Dynamic languages are generally require less LOC, which generally equates to faster implementations
2. Rails, Django, <your favorite dynamic language framework> sure are generally bloated, but being able to drop in a library for nearly anything you need cannot be overlooked. Especially for small-midsize companies, spinning up another app server is generally easier than writing a whole bunch of multi-threaded code.
3. The appserver is generally not the bottleneck, rather, of course, its the database.
- guess whether or not this is an isolated case, or whether or not this will become core functionality
- a self-assessment of the true difficulty of the problem
- a self-assessment of their own skills and knowledge in the area
- security reasoning
- API access/readabilty for other developers to use this code
- maintainability of new code
I have personally seen personal implementations that lead to bug, after bug, that have already been reasoned about in equivalent libraries.
Often for the simple fact that other devs who have to work on this code, its likely that the abstraction and readability of a third party library is probably greater than the 'quick-and-dirty' implementation.