-2 karma · joined February 10, 2021
I really hope this doesn't happen because then you have random utility libraries that "infect" projects for what is essentially basic flow control. I would say stuff like this is best supported in the standard lib and not home rolled.
This looks like a fatal blow, not a place someone would want to work. I’m sure they’re hiring though so you could probably get a job there and ride it out to the end.
* Basic groceries
* Healthcare
* Housing
I don't think these things are easy to achieve but they seem like obvious goals to societal progress. If not, what are we even progressing towards?
> Also, there are not enough executives to take from them to give to the poor. You need 100 or 1000 times more for that, so the executives theme is a straw man.
I said if a company wants to fill a role, that they should pull from executive pay. The average CEO gets 70-1 the pay of the average employee. There is absolutely a surplus of capital to pull from to increase worker pay (thus filling the role).
The top 1% are making more money than ever before. If you're holding assets impacted by inflation, you're doing quite well now.
If we take it as a given that in a modern, humane society no one should starve to death on the street and everyone should have access to the basics of survival, then the answer to the labor "shortage" is simply to shift some of the historically record breaking wealth inequality back down the org chart from the executives to the roles that need filling.
Unfortunately many of my tax dollars go to fund a military I find ethically abhorrent instead of improving the quality of life in the US.
It feels like the office was geared 100% for extroverts and finally introverts have an option that works for them. My productivity has never been higher and my stress has never been lower.
If someone wants to clear their name, go to court and sue for slander. If it's two people's word against each other, I'll believe the victim every time since there's such a high cost of coming forward and slander laws exist.
EDIT Since I'm now throttled...
I'm saying that coming forward either means:
1. Something really happened to you.
2. You're breaking the law and can be punished.
High stakes, no? Which is one of the many reasons false accusations are exceedingly rare if not non-existent.
I will always believe the victim unless the perpetrator wins a libel case. It's the legal mechanism for fighting back.
> a person can disagree and go their own way instead of being hounded by zealots demanding compliance in the guise of friendliness
This is exactly the kind of aggressive and nebulously political tone that would not help a project gain adoption. Why be hostile?
The barrier and punishment for coming forward as a victim of sexual abuse, rape or harassment is great indeed. Questioning every case is ignorance of existing laws setup to handle any false accusations.
Libel and slander laws are also real. If someone is actually making a false accusation, there's already legal ways to deal with it.
"If they won’t then we will." sounds harsh imho.
I feel like this and the general tone of the article are needlessly antagonistic toward Redis. KeyDB is building their entire business off of it after all.
There may very well be a need for multi-threaded Redis, but Redis as it stands today is an amazing project and there's something to keeping it simple along the lines of the project philosophy.
I actually think it's ok to silo projects to a single dev if you design your architecture correctly so that their zone has well defined APIs. I've definitely seen this work better than design/dev by committee.
> IDK, to me it sounds like you have worked in a half dozen B2C startups in a US urban region, all with plenty of money to burn and still seeking "product-market fit".
It's true! (except for the seeking product market fit part, they have had it). I definitely enjoy this type of development better, I also think it leads to the best results and the highest quality software if done right (alongside open source).
> Most development work doesn't go that way. If we don't have A, B, and C ready by the end of the year contracts get breached and people get laid off.
I'm 100% sure you're correct, but I don't think this is developer friendly or a good thing. Part of making great software is having the proper business infrastructure around it. That includes sales, which definitely shouldn't have contract deadlines for unshipped features imho.
> why can't I just write the whole feature from my one-sentence description heads-down for 3 weeks and then put up 5k lines at once for code review?" A lot of otherwise-competent developers will do the latter if you don't force them otherwise. (Way more common even among developers skilled at time management: Getting caught up in a bug for X days and not asking for help.)
I’d argue that both of those are ok, and the former is even desirable. If you have a dev who wants to do that, they are usually quite good and you should embrace their creativity and productivity.
The vast majority of “deadlines” are completely artificial and don’t match the way great software is written (by inspired devs). So much value creation is the search for black swans. Great developers have the ability to make those if you optimize for it.
I could see an ad agency or something having deadlines, but personally I would never work in that environment as I prefer product work and maximizing creativity and individual contribution.
I don't think evidence exists to suggest they don't. From a burnout perspective alone, making people work in an environment they don't like will cause attrition. Especially now that there are plenty of WFH options. That's not even touching on how stress impacts creativity.
> Qualifying this with "good devs" somewhat begs the question. I would rather avoid judging the developers and just say, no, most developers will not typically write the appropriate amounts of tests by without some friendly reminders.
Our personal experiences are diametrically opposed to each other then. I've never seen lack of tests be an issue on any team I've worked with. I have however seen unproductive teams create tests in place of being productive.
> Your idea of a managerial role doesn't seem to leave much room for technical or team leads, only "product management". Sometimes your role is to hire/motivate/unblock - and sometimes the motivational role is make sure someone spends those three hours writing unit tests everyone agreed were important even though no one wants to.
I did include mentorship in my list of things needed to help engineers grow. I'd also add "everyone agreed" in a traditional management setting is pretty much identical to "the person who decides how much people get paid, said so". Good devs will typically write the appropriate amount of testing unprodded.
Managers however seem to have a very hard time adjusting. If I were to give some "best practices" for remote management, they would be:
* Don't worry about how your reports are spending their time. If someone doesn't get back to you, they are busy.
* Don't factor an employee's location into their compensation.
* Minimize meetings (this is for non-wfh too, but it's much easier when people are remote).
* Allow people to leave their cameras off during calls.
* Don't worry so much about flying people to meet IRL. It's expensive and disruptive. It may also introduce politics that won't exist if everyone stays remote.
* Realize that a lot of what people think of as "management" is actually unneeded babysitting that's a vestigial cargo-cult from the industrial revolution. Your job is to hire, motivate and unblock. That's pretty much it.
I wonder if the role of manager will go away and be replaced with more specialized roles. I actually think it might be nice for a company to provide a therapist for people to to privately talk to. That's always been a weird roll that managers often play. It would be nice to vent to someone who doesn't get to decide your next raise. Between some level of HR outlet, product management and mentorship, I don't really see a dedicated role for what we now call "manager".
I don't think there's an argument where advertising is pro-user, since a service that focused on the user would return the best results for a search, not who paid for placement.
There should be no cult of personality. We can absorb someone's intellectual output without lionizing the individual. The entire concept of celebrity is toxic and best left in the past.