mcavoybn · HackerTrans

I like using codewars.com for learning new languages. Just pick a language and start running through problems. I think the best part about it is that you can review other solutions after you solve the problem. Usually there are some really clever solutions that show off the features of the language, as well as clearer solutions that are a bit more idiomatic to the language and more in line with what you'd want to commit to production. For learning frameworks I usually just refer to the framework documentation and source code.

mcavoybn

há 4 anosdiscuss

Very snarky response. I think the poster you replied to was trying to point out that the reason this happens is because the government prints money and if they don't take the money out of circulation via taxes then inflation becomes an issue.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

None of the things in this article are specific to programming, they are all just the potential downsides of being an employee. In some situations you are an inferior, replaceable tool that is a burden on the company, whether you are a programmer or not. But there is a possibility that you prove yourself superior and become harder to replace.

I think the real downside to becoming "a programmer" is the antisocial tendencies that arise from staring at a screen all day, hyper-analyzing esoteric patterns of symbols. This tendency leaks into other aspects of life that don't benefit from an intellectual breakdown. It's plain to see the author is upset about something, but they defer to their analysis of programming as a profession instead of the stark reality of their emotional state.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Probably not, I think there is utility in relating two similar things, especially when someone is likely to be more familiar with one over the other. Someone who knows networks really well could find it useful to model an engineering team as a network. What really matters is whether modeling the engineering team as a network is useful in your case or not.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

The takeaway is that the deaf man could be you. Cops and judges are flawed, and you should be wary of them. Also, you aren't being forced to read the news, if you don't find the information valuable then don't click on it.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Many of the replies in this thread talk about empathy, and I get where they are coming from. The problem is, if your priority when hiring was empathy you would just offer the job to everyone you interview. It's true, everyone has the ability to grow and learn on the job, and once you hire someone you should be empathetic and help them grow as best you can. But it's asinine to suggest that watching for the signs and markers described in this article during the hiring process wouldn't be helpful.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Maybe it is normal in your country, but where I am from in the US, parents want their kids to be self-sufficient as soon as possible. The author herself said it was embarrassing. I'm not sure what the economic situation is in your country, but housing is very expensive in the US too. But hey, if it gets expensive enough then parents will start buying their kids houses...

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Yeah I was waiting for the point in this article where it became about "outdoorsy types" and not the author but it never happened. I'd be embarrassed too, mismanaging money and relying on my parents support at 34 years old. I guess the author was just so embarrassed that she published this article about it.

Great job with the antagonizing, clickbait title though. I'm guessing "My Tone-deaf Autobiography about How Irresponsible I am" was thrown out.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

>We do like drinking and eating together though, so we got that!

Regardless of the details of your argument, or whether my paraphrase of your original comment was accurate, it is an infeasible solution to suggest that everyone needs to go to church in order to address the loneliness, social anxiety, and tribalism. Your comments all have a condescending, passive aggressive tone and you are trying all kinds of dirty tactics to manipulate the debate to your favor. I doubt you have any real interest in more people going to church. Based on your comments, your goal is to argue and put blame on others. I'm not sure if anyone in this thread has really learned from this discussion (flamewar) and I regret engaging in it.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

>the secular regular get-together groups for people without any unifying interests or socioeconomic status

Unfortunately, I don't think what you are describing ever existed. Every "get-together-group" I can think of has some kind of common interest, even if its something as simple as drinking coffee or reading books. I think your attachment to the church has a lot more to do with your emotions than thinking rationally. The way I see it, the cat is out of the bag with regards to organized religion. It is well known that there have been many corrupt religious organizations and heinous acts committed in the name of religion. To make the argument "The economy was shut down last year and there is a massive issue in our society with depression and loneliness as a result, but it's what those liberals deserve for leaving the church!" is asinine.

>Church is the only place they're going to be exposed to others that may share absolutely no interests with them

Are the bible, history of the church, the nature of reality, and developing a community not shared interests? Also, was the point of the article to only talk to people without shared interests? Isn't one of the first things you do when you get to know someone is try to find a common interest?

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Everyone is attacking the overall theme of this article, and I agree with many of the points made, but nobody seems to be focused on the actual solutions provided in the article which I think are good. The article isn't about software developers believing in you PRODUCT its about software developers believing in your PROJECT. If I was the author, I would probably try to rephrase this as "Software developers are most effective when they feel a sense of ownership and responsibility for the projects they contribute to." The article suggests 4 items:

Don't withhold newly discovered information about the customer's needs

Avoid the temptation of isolating the team in the name of "just getting* it done"

Avoid discouraging technical team members who express interest in the market or business model

Avoid over-statusing your software development initiatives

All four of these items are ways you can signal to your developers that you trust them to do their job and respect their ability to make use of the information given to them (You can't handle the truth!!). I think its worth at least being aware of this methodology in the case that you have a dev team which is showing interest in "the why" of a particular project, or appear to be struggling to build what the business is asking for. Otherwise, you are better off incentivizing devs with bonuses, pay raises, and equity because they might just not care about "the why" or "the why" might just not be useful for them to do their job.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

I don't think the point of lowercased's comment was that devs don't underestimate tasks to the same degree that "outside-of-technical-people" might. They are saying that "outside-of-technical-people" don't have the experience to understand how difficult it is to give an accurate estimate or how much pressure is put on devs to agree to a deadline and take responsibility for making something happen by that date. This is compounded by the fact that stakeholders are unwilling to define or commit to a detailed set of features or acceptance criteria. The bigger the project, the more painful and difficult this becomes. Stakeholders say "Make it faster!!!" then engineers say "We agree!!! any ideas on how?".

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Just because there isn't a top-down solution that eradicates the source of the issue doesn't mean it shouldn't be observed and discussed. You pointed out that you can't "beef" with the gravitational constant, but if you are aware of it you can avoid its negative affects and potentially use them to your advantage. Gravity will collapse a building, but if you are aware of it you can engineer a building so it doesn't collapse.

"Gravity, at least, will keep grinding until the universe is compressed into a single point. To eliminate gravity completely it would require constant destruction, compression, agitation, and elimination of all physical laws. Instead, just plug your ears and scream "LALALALA" a pretend gravity doesn't exist because you will stick to the surface of the planet regardless."

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Ahh yes, arguing about semantics.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

It's up to the reader to decide what is worthwhile for them.

Also, whether that quote is relevant or not is not what is being argued. The original dispute (on a surface level) was about a "rhetorical technique". Now you say it is manipulative and dishonest, which is a completely different thing and obviously false.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Given the degree of your outrage, I think something other than "rhetorical technique" has triggered you here. Then again, maybe you are just really really opinionated about "rhetorical techniques" and following strict definitions of words? In that case, you must despise the vast majority of stories and literature because of their metaphors, parables, and subtly different meanings...

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

Great point. Another subtle aspect to this kind of rhetoric is that it's about an issue so pervasive that it's disingenuous to present this as new information. Even as a boy you have to be careful what you say to girls, and vice versa. The rules are slightly different, but there are still gender lines and it's going to be really (really really) hard to change that! Men and women are all aware of this, so presenting this as new information is a bit divisive, despite the best intentions of the author.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

I had the exact same thought. I skimmed through the rest of the article. The author's frustrations seem to center around the fact that she is a diversity hire, which is made even more evident by the discussion in the comments. The excuse is that they are "raising awareness" but this is something we are all painfully aware of so it comes across as "my personal anecdote about {buzzword}".

Some of the best and worst co-workers I've had in my relatively short career have been women. In my experience, women are much more sociable than men and bring a certain positive energy to a team, but are less competitive with the other men on the team. Men will always compete AGAINST other men FOR women. They want to be the alpha, which fundamentally means that they get the most women.

This means that women won't bother to compete with men and vice versa. Hiring a woman to work on a team of all men is probably exactly like hiring a man on a team of all women. It will bring undue, subversive, and potentially aggressive behavior between team members of the opposite sex because of the fundamentally sexual, subconscious forces we are subject to as human beings.

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

The part about "doing everything" for someone hit home at first, but it took a turn when you mentioned leaving that position. Sometimes I've had managers come in and just take over a project because a client/investor wanted it yesterday, which I think is a bad approach. Sometimes it's necessary, but it should be mitigated by proper project management practices.

So it seems like a really strange assumption on your part that the new manager or the person "on track to be a senior dev" would behave in the way you expected. What exactly should a manager do different in that scenario? Close their "poop umbrella" and potentially let the person you're mentoring fail?

Furthermore, is shielding an employee with a "poop umbrella" tantamount to "doing everything" for them? I feel like putting your employees on track to a promotion and shielding them from organizational concerns that might distract them is a fundamental aspect of being a manager, if the next manager comes in and doesn't do that, then that's on them...

edit: fixed typo

mcavoybn

há 5 anosdiscuss

The idea of "women have it tougher than men" is naive and toxic. You can try to justify it by saying that your ideas are "based on lots of reading of stuff", but it's obvious you are only interested in how this topic relates to your own ego.

Women go through it in birth, I have never met a person who didn't acknowledge that birth is an absolutely painful and sometimes devastating process that is unique to women. Women die giving birth too. Should men feel ashamed for that? Maybe we should pass a law that makes it illegal to get a woman pregnant... After all she might die and if that happens then the evil man who impregnated her should be punished, right?

Oh wait, nobody understands that only women get pregnant, so I guess that's the first hurdle here. HEY EVERYBODY, ONLY WOMEN CAN GET PREGNANT! Maybe that should be the next study: "Human beings with two X chromosomes are 100% more likely to get pregnant than those with XY chromosomes".