rokob

I agree with this. However memorizing the borrow checker rules has led me to architect code “more correctly” upfront and consider things like ownership that I was otherwise pretty lax about ahead of time before. I think this has made me more thoughtful even in other languages which I think has been a win for me.

That said, the tedious refactors are a real pain. I think we all hoped that rustc would be smarter by now. It has gotten better but it isn’t there yet.

This is ludicrous. The point of Z2 is a specific physiologic adaptation. There isn’t really any mental pain. Anything you can do to make your training more consistent is positive for your long term performance. Save the mental gymnastics for the actual hard days.

Staying in a hard VO2 interval or pushing through on those long threshold efforts is an actual mental exercise. Don’t push the belief onto people that staring at a wall in Z2 is giving you some gains. If it works for you then go for it, but it’s a wild mentally that thinks a physically easy ride needs to be hardened up.

These are all variants of Kent Beck’s saying: “Make it work, make it right, make it fast.”

https://wiki.c2.com/?MakeItWorkMakeItRightMakeItFast

In mice

This is fucking insane

Tell me about it. Trying to get better every day.

This seems to resonate with my experience, although I feel myself bristling due to the baggage of the word memorization.

Although sometimes “memorization” doesn’t happen because you sit down to do it but rather that you keep using the same things over and over when solving problems that they become internalized. I find that to be a more fruitful path towards understanding that I don’t want to call memorization but it is.

I got 59. Too bad about frame and frameset. I was happy to recall map and area.

Google has a title called TLM which is tech lead + manager which is meant to straddle the divide. In practice you have twice the expectations which are themselves conflicting with only the one salary. It is often used for ICs to try out management before making the decision which ladder to stay on. Most TLMs are at the staff level so kind of fits that staff engineer who is a junior manager that you describe.

I would read these two pieces as they lay things out pretty well:

https://staffeng.com/guides/what-do-staff-engineers-actually...

https://staffeng.com/guides/staff-archetypes/

I think it all depends on who you are and what your team needs.

> The distinction between the three types of errors can lead to the phenomenon ... of a mathematical argument by a post-rigorous mathematician which locally contains a number of typos and other formal errors, but is globally quite sound, with the local errors propagating for a while before being cancelled out by other local errors

I was initially amazed at this when I was in graduate school, but with enough experience I started to do it myself. Handwaving can be a signal that someone doesn't know what they are doing or that they really know what they are doing and until you are far enough along it is hard to tell the difference.

I think it is primarily your last bullet point, it is less exciting to write about unless you really are looking for specifically that content. They are widely used but they are normal parts of a lot of architectures now.

Can’t tell if April Fools joke or not because I know places like this and it’s a nightmare way to build software.

SOF usually doesn’t let a boot run a team of operators the way tech companies do though.

Code is not mainly to be read by a person. It is a step to an executable artifact. It is read by a person mainly to modify that artifact. This trope that code is meant to be read is misunderstanding why you are reading it. One doesn’t read code as prose for its own sake. You read code as a means to an end. It is why we sometimes only read the documentation of libraries without reading the underlying code.

Congrats to the team on the launch.

I believe this is just referring to the glucose:fructose ratio now being closer to 1:1 than what it used to be. In the old days people only looked at glucose and the 60g/hr limit is more or less for that metabolic pathway. Fructose takes a different path so you can easily go to 120g if you are using a 1:1 mix. Also the old 60g/hr limit isn’t universal so that is how you get some people that can handle 150g+

The actual quote without the ellipsis is:

> If you're a leader seeking to increase employees' motivation, what can you do? Leadership experts Allan Cohen and David Bradford offer some suggestions. [4] In Influence Without Authority they articulate a set of principles and frameworks to support the development of stronger working relationships and more effective collaboration.

Your comment is irrelevant to the actual article. You are responding to a straw man of your own invention.

My understanding of all DH based encrypted communication protocols is that they rely on some external authentication mechanism to ensure the public key of your counterparty is actually the right person. Is that correct?

In other words, if my friend is on the other side of the world and we can only communicate digitally, I need to bootstrap trust in a public key somehow and that is always outside these protocols. This is specifically called out here in section 4.1 and I'm pretty sure this is just a fundamental reality but I wanted to see if anyone had pointers to either a general proof of this or some kind of alternative.

Nice

Typically the direct reporting relationship is about managing someone’s career and not necessarily their work. The leadership described here is more about the work to be done rather than the person’s fulfillment and suitability with that work. This separation is more pronounced with large (1000+) engineering organizations. Often people don’t experience this difference because it doesn’t exist at the smaller scales.

Engineering management is more on the management of people and engineer leadership is more on the management of products/projects/systems.

Because version 1 is the first version with any actual guarantees: https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0.html#spec-item-4

Got me for a minute. Nice.

Where are you getting that? Sundar has more than $1B.

You are basically describing Brave and their BAT token.

Your phrasing makes me think you are not in the US so I can’t speak directly to how your university might do things. But CS is more about pen and paper and ideas than it is about writing code. Don’t presume that you are learning how to build software the way it is done in industry. That being said, the material is a solid foundation for learning how to think about logic and tradeoffs.

You don’t get 2x your salary quickly via promotion for doing the same job unless you are starting at the very bottom.

I really agree with what you are saying, but counterintuitively buying “into the company vision as much as possible” seems to result in the most burnout for me when reality eventually hits.

I’ve been trying to figure out how to temper my natural tendency to go all-in with the reality that everything has some shit that sucks. I can understand the hope that there might be some psychological ease associated with dissociating yourself from the vision.

I’m curious how you found out he had multiple jobs? I agree 100% that someone should get fired if they aren’t doing the work. But it is typically illegal to fire someone just for moonlighting unless it is in their contract.

You have to consider total comp and then factor in that Netflix only pays cash but competes against the others. So you can get 600k at Meta via cash+equity+bonus you get the same all in salary and bonus from Netflix.