What always bothered me about DE&I initiatives is that they are trying to wring diversity out of their existing hiring pool.
If your indeed job posts didn't bring diverse candidates then, why do you think it would now? Because you added a "Please apply if you're DiVeRsE" line to it? Don't be ridiculous.
If you want diversity of candidates you can't keep going back to the same talent pools. You have to diversify where you're drawing talent.
If your college program is primarily getting white/asian males, you can't suddenly expect it to start throwing in women & poc as well. You can't suddenly expect it to start giving you LGBTQ+ candidates.
If you want diverse candidates, you have to look at diverse hiring pools. Look at the bootcamps that focus on diverse groups you're targeting. Look at schools that focus on diverse groups you're targeting.
If you're really interested in diverse candidates, you can't keep expecting them to just show up if you add a "We want diversity!" to your job description - you have to change where you look for them.
If you have the option of having dual-language queues then you can also opt to the secondary language which generally has fewer callers than the primary. So you get to the front of the line faster, and they also tend to speak the primary language.
I haven't dug into Alpine.js, but I've been messing with HTMX on some personal projects for a few months now and am really pleased with it. It's honestly made it a pleasure for me to return to front-end work.
I think at the moment blockchain is synonymous with "crypto".
Imagine you fell for a ponzi scheme. Now imagine you knew where the person who ran that ponzi scheme was.
The remark is a bit flippant (and feels grammatically incorrect) but the sentiment remains.
Lots of people view crypto as a get-rick-quick scheme on both sides. Even after warnings of "don't put any money in that you aren't comfortable losing" people put in money that they aren't comfortable losing. Coupled with the fact that most of these crypto projects maintain very high levels of community involvement (normally through discord/twitter). Sometimes when people lose a lot of money they lash out at the systems they lost money through. So they turn on the devs of whatever chain/token they gambled on.
Are the keyboard mounts purchasable through Dygma as well? I've been looking for decent chair-based split keyboard mounts and am having a hard time. I found some mouse-stands that attach to chairs, but they end up being a bit too small in all the wrong places.
(Canada Specific) There can be additional tax implications depending on if you're contracting under your own name vs. a company. Using materials supplied from the companies you're contracting from can get you labeled as a Personal Services Business and not a corporation essentially treating corporation income as your personal income. This means you'd be subjected to personal income rates vs. corporation.
It's important to note it's not just this one thing that can do it, but there's a collection of things that can get you labeled as a PSB.
This is 100% a side-effect of GitHub. Open Source used to have the additional barrier of mailing lists to detract from "drive-by PRs". The side effect, of course, is that it made it much harder to get involved. GitHub really brought a lot of new eyes on open source software and lowered the barrier to contribute exacerbating (an argument could be made for creating) the drive-by PR problem.
I've been thinking about code reviews a lot.. and I think a big problem with existing code reviews is that for most orgs, code reviews were a way to move planning to the end of the development process instead of keeping it up-front.
I think the foundation of the pyramid (API and Implementation semantics) is often discussed in code reviews when it should have almost no place. By the time you get to the code review not only should these have been ironed out and shared with the whole team. What you should be looking at is simply adherence to the plan, and calling out deviations.
If your indeed job posts didn't bring diverse candidates then, why do you think it would now? Because you added a "Please apply if you're DiVeRsE" line to it? Don't be ridiculous.
If you want diversity of candidates you can't keep going back to the same talent pools. You have to diversify where you're drawing talent.
If your college program is primarily getting white/asian males, you can't suddenly expect it to start throwing in women & poc as well. You can't suddenly expect it to start giving you LGBTQ+ candidates.
If you want diverse candidates, you have to look at diverse hiring pools. Look at the bootcamps that focus on diverse groups you're targeting. Look at schools that focus on diverse groups you're targeting.
If you're really interested in diverse candidates, you can't keep expecting them to just show up if you add a "We want diversity!" to your job description - you have to change where you look for them.