ytygg775

Apparently not many. What's beyond me is why people don't leave the shitty ones. HN comments are full of examples where I'd scream that question. But maybe it's not as bad and people like to exaggerate? Or they prefer to complain instead of taking consequences. I suppose seeing oneself as the victim is just the easy way out.

Of course there are. And in a good company, those above you will listen to your suggestions for improvement and work with you to make them happen, or something addressing the same issues. Just like you should be listening to your reports and work with them, not against them.

This whole "opposing forces" attitude is what makes hierarchies toxic instead of supportive and I'd run the other way if somebody described a workplace like that to me.

No. If you need to make it mandatory then they are the wrong people anyway.

What you should ensure is that they can do that. That their schedule permits this. If they are the right people, they will gladly take the opportunity.

No, it's a fact of life. If you don't, then somebody else will and you'll go under.

If you first spend 5 years crafting the perfect invitation to a date for your crush, then meanwhile another guy will have not just asked her out, but by that time they will have rings on their fingers, a house and two kids.

> I don't fully share your negativism towards this: the ability to innovate quickly is important

I fully agree! But that's a different thing. Of course the ability to quickly innovate is important, but you are implying that the current state of affairs is a necessary consequence. It's not.

I also like to "quickly innovate" by hacking some proof of concept code. Exploration is important and fun. I don't write a test first, or no test at all, if I don't even know yet fully what it is that I'm building or how the API needs to look like. But in the long run I can't keep going like that.

I don't get why everybody is in love with cloud solutions for keeping their secrets. Encrypted as they may be.

Self hosted, at home, or I don't trust it. It's really that simple.

This. Why would we be critical of LastPass being secretive and/or wrong and then take a tweet at face value?

From one of the tweets:

> I did not download anything. My machines are clean, and I have physical 2fa on everything. None of the links or contracts I interacted with were malicious. Nobody else had physical access to my PC.

Yeah sure. Sounds like my aunt when she messed up her PC and loudly claims "but I didn't do anything!" Surefire sign that she did. Turns out it's true, every time.

> While the codebase is critically important, the most important aspect is how that codebase translates into user experience.

I'd agree to this, if you include the individual contributors in the set of "users".

Then you are doing this wrong. It's in your hands how you fill the role.

Don't try to learn from people who are also doing it wrong.

For everybody working as a programmer, this should be blatently obvious. Who hasn't experienced a non-programmer manager without a clue telling them what to do? I'll never ever work again for a manager who couldn't do my job, at least in principle.

Ideally they stay in touch with the programmers by continuing to program, occasionally but regularly. To not have their knowledge frozen in time the day they became managers. And to keep feeding their flame.

It's a necessary qualification, but not a sufficient one. The manager also needs to be a people person. Lots of programmers are not, and that's ok, they can be excellent programmers. Just not managers.

In summary, a better title would have been "Turn the people persons among your best programmers into part-time managers".

Clickbaity title. It makes it sound like remote work for everybody everywhere almost broke because of this-or-that thing involving Microsoft and Asus. Not the case. The article is about some obscure issue for a particular company who trusted their IT to be handled by Active Directory in a Microsoft Azure cloud environment, involving Asus home routers. Hardly a general insight.

The root cause for this is the inability of our industry to properly define standards and then enforcing/sticking to them. Everybody just hacks something that kinda-sorta works and whoever has the larger market share is right and everybody else has to suffer, even if they themselves want to do the right thing and do it properly.

Let's face it, we all suck at this and have to pay for it with this kind of meaningless waste of time "troubleshooting".

> While, on the other hand the business could sell their products on their website and therefore get 100% of the money on their website

And then they also need to deal with all the crap that this entails.

> they do a ton of things to siphon listeners that came for my music away from listening to my music, including NOT playing more of my music after the intended song plays.

I understand the criticism that it's hard for you to get an audience to notice you. But once somebody has listened to a tune of yours and then doesn't actively seek out more of it ... could it be that they just prefer to listen to something else instead? Competition is toughand it may feel easy to blame it on big tech, but sometimes peoples taste is just not something you can legislate..

> Just a reminder: Proofs are usually stuff for a master course.

And that's my criticism. If more people in society cared why something is true, we wouldn't have falsehoods abound all around us that are obviously wrong and logically screamingly incorrect.

Matrix multiplication is an uninportant detail. Modus ponens is what holds everything together. But rarely anybody can handle the latter, nor even has heard of it.

> Yes, proofs are a powerful part of mathematics, but they aren't at all the only goal.

Ultimately, they are.

I'm surprised that nobody brought up yet that pressing i is rarely the only way to enter insert mode. As a vim power user, I use a, o and c (after different types of selecting some part of existing text) at least as often. That would make the clutch useless in the presented form, so I'm skeptical that this is actually being used.

Using the clutch either as a full esc replacement would make more sense (send esc on tap down, send nothing on release). Or inverted, send nothing on tap down but send esc on release, and have the user train that they subconciously tap the foot down upon entering insert mode by any means.

I applaud your effords. But unfortunately, this perpetuates the notion that this is what math is. It's mundane calculations, best done by a machine. Nobody even underatands why it's meaningful to multiply matrices like that.

How come that high school math is full of this stuff, like doing manual matrix multiplications over and over, but not a single mathematical proof?

Society would really benefit from people training logical reasoning, which is what a mathematical proof is. Rather that than a manual matrix multiplication.

Heck, even most of my SWE colleagues can't even write down a real proof.

Sometimes I wonder whether these Atlas Obscura articles are entirely made up, some kind of funny-if-it-was-true fiction.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned ANTLR yet. That's the modern way of doing this.

> If it pays more to work for a crypto exchange or the next data-stalking start-up than to cure cancer then most of the knowledge people will work on them.

Building stronger morals could also help.