What saved me (in no particular order)
1. Sport. I felt I was “burning” my stress and anxiety by doing 1h of sport a day, in nature.
2. Therapy
3. Family and friends, quality time
4. Find another job
5. Stop social media
6. Fixed sleep schedule
31 karma · joined May 6, 2020
What saved me (in no particular order)
1. Sport. I felt I was “burning” my stress and anxiety by doing 1h of sport a day, in nature.
2. Therapy
3. Family and friends, quality time
4. Find another job
5. Stop social media
6. Fixed sleep schedule
But God, I could not understand the code, and I could not easily make it work with modern technologies (GPU etc).
So I used Claude and Gemini to reverse engineer the codebase, extract the core ideas, and rewrite it from scratch with modern frameworks (with guidance from the original authors)
It took me only 10 days to have a functioning equivalent, in 10K lines of code (using many libraries that did not exist in the 90s and 00s), which I find much easier to understand, even though I wrote none of it myself.
10 days to rewrite 20-30 year of a few persons. That was quite scary.
But IIRC, it happened by night, over the ocean. If the instruments fail you, this is really hard to “perceive” your speed and orientation.
I’m half the person I used to used to be, after a painful burnout. And it’s not even close as painful as what the OP experienced.
So many of my friends went through some very hard time that I stopped counting.
So yes, is this everybody?
At the end of the day, you want to optimise for debug time. There's the probability that it's a compiler/developer bug (respectively very low/very high) and the time it takes to rule it out. It's of course best NOT to start by investigating the compiler bug.
My understanding is that by focusing on fewer things (vision only), they bet to make progress faster because of the simplified organisational aspect.
So you might end up communicating something ("we think it comes from X, we're fixing it that way"), just to find yourself changing you mind a few minutes later.
Changing your message is usually not well perceived, even though that's actually normal during an investigation.
I would not like to be in charge of the communication. Finding the balance between saying too much or too little is tricky.
Getting promoted to an EM position is one thing. Getting good at it is... very hard, and requires new skills. There's very little in your day to day job as an engineer that prepares you to become a good EM.
One can both be a bad EM and become a good one.
The key questions are:
- Does the person have a growth mindset?
- Is the environment helping the new EM grow?