wikiman

I'm not going to lie, the comment about "if they can use git" is the core of my problem with the arctic storage. I'm still wondering what the point is other than to make some meta point about how committed github is to preservation

The market is reactive to relatively short-term inputs. I'm looking at a few things that are causing the jump:

- Some of it is inflationary as others have pointed out. There's a lot of money entering the system right now, and markets tend to go up on that

- Some of it is short sellers realizing gains from the last month and exiting their trades (the effect of closing a short causes markets to rise)

- Some of it is psychological reactions to dropping death estimates, and concurrent optimism that things will go back to "normal" soon (or at least sooner than previously thought)

What the market did 12/21/18 is sort of irrelevant

I'm just not counting on should at this rate...

I'm not an expert, but most government agencies are allowed to charge reasonable fees for access to their data. I don't know if this qualifies, but it at least seems like a possibility, especially if it's transparently just passing along their costs in the form of AWS' own cost structure

New York is very quickly rolling out OMNY, which does support apple pay. It makes me happy, and I can't wait until I can buy my monthly that way

The fundamental truth of software. Your system is only as good as its worst component. every. single. time.

Deployment is a component. Monitoring is a component. They are also OpEx and therefore "inferior"

At one job we actually had to give up on take-home challenges basically because a good, humble junior was indistinguishable from a good, clearly-thinking senior

he's running for senate in Maine. The blog post is probably a part of his campaign

This 100% this. I run my teams via "Kanban" (I don't know how kanban it actually is, but that's what I call it).

The only question I ask around prioritization is "Is it worth doing?" If the answer is yes, I ask the stakeholder if they care how long it takes. If they do, I ask for a range and give a best estimate if it's achievable. If the answer is no, I ask why they care how long it takes if it's the most important thing to do.

My engineers know that they're expected to do that one project to completion, and we loop in other stakeholders (marketing, sales, QA, etc) progressively as we approach completion. Admittedly I work at a company of 20, but it works remarkably well, despite the absence of a "schedule"

My personal favorite are the bosses that poll the group and pick the lowest estimate

I read the book years ago in college, and that's exactly what 10k hours is about. The whole point of the book, as I recall, is that you can master anything, but being successful is a horse of an entirely different stripe

Depends on your definition of highly-skilled. Compared to an au pair? Very highly skilled.

An H-1B requires application of specialized knowledge and a bachelor's degree or the equivalent of work experience. So it's all a matter of perspective, but the highly skilled formulation talks about the skills required to do the job, not the competency within that specialization. Beyond that, I agree though, that visa status is a despicable reason to pay people less than what they're worth

In my experience with most Enterprise software, the problem isn't the number of features it's the total lack of discipline in deciding what features are actually needed. Jira is the worst at this because people throw spaghetti at the wall until they get something that "works" for PMs but nobody else understands. I've worked at exactly one place that really was careful about JIRA and what made sense from the tool and it was a joy. I imagine the same is true of Salesforce though I've never seen anyone actually pull it off

Actually my read on Wasserman's quote (reproduced in another comment) is that superdelegates exist to promote the seating of grassroots delegates, the implied logic being that if the superdelegates weren't delegates, they would simply be elected in place of grassroots delegates with the result being a decrease in their representation (If I were the type to try and be a delegate, I really wouldn't want to run against Obama, Clinton, or Carter in their home districts)

DELETED because this joke has been made