mtc010170
Idk why. We should be able to have a civilized, intellectually curious discussion about this. The future of Reddit (and its implications for the future of the Internet) is pretty on-topic to me for HN.
@dang can we get a stance on this?
I'm not saying that's bad - that's probably the right thing to do with their company blog, and it's cool nonetheless. But I do get a little tired of people putting stuff out there like this that warps (some peoples) perception around how long things actually take. We wonder why, as an industry, we misjudge timelines on things left and right.
Even if we take it at face value, this is a person who's intimately familiar with this product. So sure, it's easy to set things up when we've done it a bunch of times. If you were doing this, solving the novel problem that you're faced with, is that how long it would take? Plus that's not really what most of us get paid to do. We have to learn on the fly and figure stuff out as it comes.
So rather than have the provocative headline and conclusion, like a lot of other people have commented... this is really something that could amplify that $50/hour employee, not take their job away. And maybe we shouldn't read into the alleged speed so much. YMMV.
I'm someone who tends to get along and work well with others. That part definitely has its advantages for employability (and life in general), and is recommended. However, taking it to this extreme is just dangerous advice. Constantly being a people pleaser can carry enormous risks, especially (but not limited to) to yourself. It's important to learn to be ok with people disliking you sometimes.
Napkin pseudo math for sure.. but when has that even stopped us from categorizing engineers with these labels.
I think people have already touched on it potentially pushing certain companies out of PA.. which in theory reduces competition which is bad for consumers. So that’s one example of how this legislation that’s designed to protect consumers could end up hurting them from another angle.
Another thing I’d wonder about is: if laws like this were to catch on.. does it start to disincentivize subscription-based business models? We’ve seen such a shift towards subscriptions.. but would that potentially change dramatically?
I do feel like not letting the homepage itself shuffle its layout is a missed opportunity for showcasing the product.
First of all - thank you for all the hard work! My team and I are really impressed with what you've built so far.
The company I work for has recently started to adopt RTK and RTKQ. We're working in a legacy React/Redux codebase, and have been evaluating them as core libraries moving forward as we build one of our new features.
One of our other engineers has been leading the charge with learning/applying RTK/RTKQ.. so he has a better feel for it at this point, but I've been following along fairly closely in PRs.. and as the technical lead on our team, I'm responsible for deciding whether or not it's a good fit for us.
As of just a week or so ago, we've pretty much decided to go all in on it.. despite my initial reservations mostly due to worrying that it's just the latest "new kid on the block"
The RTK part I bought into pretty quickly. Having seen a bunch of flavors of Redux code, I especially love the way RTK allows you to write reducers that mutate state directly.. and just really abstracts away a lot of the complexity, providing a means to writing idiomatic Redux code! On the flip side, I am a little worried about how much it hides what Redux really does, as someone who took a while to really understand it myself. It's started to get into Rails territory from a magic standpoint ;)
RTKQ was a bigger leap for me.. my initial impression was that the API seemed a little clunky.. especially the query "builders" part. While I like the way it allows you to inject different API endpoints where they're used, I do fear it will result in some very tight coupling between it and the requests to services. Having said that, the API has grown on me since I first saw it. So maybe it's just a matter of familiarity.
Anyways, there's certainly more feedback I have! And I'd also be the first to admit I'm not totally fluent in all these libraries and concepts.. so not even sure I'm qualified to speak to these things or if this is what you're looking for. But feel free to reach out to me at [email protected]. Would love some feedback in ensuring our team is really using these libraries effectively.
Thanks again for all your hard work!
> Passionate people are generally good when their skills and wants align with the company, but if they're not well-aligned then the passion just amplifies every conflict.
I'm starting to see where my original comment was definitely oversimplifying the depths of this topic.
Based on the responses, I think I should clarify:
People that show that they want to be there often make for excellent teammates, because they actually care (the old missionaries vs mercenaries idea), and will often be willing to put in the effort to fill whatever gaps they lack, while creating a positive work environment.
Plus, they might have a really good feel for the product and market, because they're genuinely interested in it. You want people like that on your team.
Now, of course - businesses are not a charity that only employ people because they want to be there. There is a minimum bar of skills required and plenty of other traits that matter. And on the employer side, there's a ton of factors there too (budget, existing skills of the team, etc etc).
So yes, I was generalizing. But in general: I'd take someone who wants to be there with high aptitude who has things to learn over someone who has skills but doesn't actually give a crap about the product or company any day of the week, for the types of companies I'm trying to build. That doesn't mean my or your companies needs/goals are the same.
There aren’t billions of people who love your products, Mark. Use maybe.. but I wouldn’t count on it staying that way at this rate.
There's no particular mantra I had in mind. Some examples would be to "do things that don't scale" or "fail fast" or to not focus on what your competitors are doing.
I understand there's no one-size-fits-all of course.. and I suppose that's the reason I'm asking. I'm curious what in your experience has turned out maybe counterintuitive or where you went against the grain. And what standard wisdom you may look back on and say: "Wow if we had done what everyone had advised us to do.. I don't think we would've ever gotten here."
Thank you and congrats again! Best wishes to you and Amplitude moving forward.
1) What was the hardest part of your journey to IPO?
2) If you could give just one piece of advice to early-stage founders, what would it be?
3) Of all the common startup mantras you hear repeated, what one would you would advise people to ignore?
Data from article here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Cz7NqDblls_TBJVI4xwD...
That said, there's a trope displayed in this post that's getting especially old to me on HN, and that's the: "POs/PMs ruin everything (or are useless), and all they care about is getting a raise or promotion.. not the technology (or the users, or the product)."
I find the tribalism baked into this oft-repeated viewpoint super annoying. And I believe the author, and others parroting these ideas.. are projecting a viewpoint all over the place without much substance.
And I think it's actually harmful to organizations and teams working effectively together. So maybe we should look a little deeper and leave the engineers-are-better-than-everyone-else bigotry out of it.
In my experience, the value from retros is a function of the skill of the facilitator.
Perhaps you could be a force for change on your team, by speaking bluntly about not spending enough time on that third column. Others might be receptive to it!
Of course, context is everything.. so perhaps the blanket statement is a useful reminder for the author.. but also maybe dangerous advice for those reading who this just gives license to continue not putting enough thought into things they should.
A bias towards action might be a good default, but how many of us are dealing with untenable situations stemming from rushed decisions?
So be careful with this advice.. and do your best to know yourself and the situation.
Do you remember when Facebook wasn't considered terrible? Twitter? Reddit? Instagram? Snapchat?
This is just the latest one to rise to the top.. following very predictable patterns. It's got something novel (in this case I guess a better algorithm and UX).. an attracts an early community (which largely always seems like the youth rebelling against the current top dog). Then the masses come. Pretty soon.. that original spirit and thing that makes it "better" is taken away by greedy advertisers or "influencers" and the party's basically ruined. And then the next one comes along.
So consider me skeptical of TikTok being any fundamentally different. In another 2-3 years, the next social network will emerge and take over the zeitgeist. Rinse. repeat.
It makes me wonder if this is really a person who works for FB at all, or just someone masquerading for the sake of making an already loathed company look even worse.
Clearly it was hyperbolic, but I think satya71 was drawing attention to some legitimate mixed messaging on the part of YC over the years.
I certainly had a similar (perhaps cynical/incorrect/unfair) reaction to this announcement.
Maybe that's not the reality, but the perception is something to consider, too.