The issue is that it’s relatively low effort to make false and unverified claims. Defending and refuting it is a much higher effort task for the person doing the work to everyone else’s benefit.
RubyLLM dev literally had to take time to provide code samples and doc links.
No issue with listing legit limitations, but be a bro and fact check claims before wasting a volunteer’s time - and potentially leading other developers on a public board astray.
> It probably would’ve been easier if I didn’t use Rust and just used the Arduino libraries, or if I used a different board. But I was really married to this blog post title idea
There’s a lot of meeting hate here and as a developer, I used to feel the same.
But after bootstrapping a SaaS company and at times struggling through cross-team execution, I’ve come around. A short weekly standing meeting, like the one described in the book The 4 Disciplines of Execution, is actually a powerful tool.
Without it, maintenance, admin, and firefighting will expand to fill the entire week. The meeting forces space for focus, clear commitments, and basic accountability.
It’s not obvious early in your career, but once you’ve got some scars, it starts to make a lot more sense.
When you’re deep in a thoughtful read and suddenly get the eerie feeling that you’re being catfished
> But the real threat isn't either of those things. It's quieter, and more boring, and therefore more dangerous. The real threat is a slow, comfortable drift toward not understanding what you're doing. Not a dramatic collapse. Not Skynet. Just a generation of researchers who can produce results but can't produce understanding. Who know what buttons to press but not why those buttons exist. Who can get a paper through peer review but can't sit in a room with a colleague and explain, from the ground up, why the third term in their expansion has the sign that it does.
I think you missed the point of the parent comment.
The money (from advertising) that used to go to news now goes elsewhere (Google and Meta).
It’s left very little in terms of resources for staff.
Think about what the quality of commercial software would be like if there wasn’t enough money for QA and testers and top tier devs capped out at $180k with starting roles at 30k and 40k.
That’s the news industry right now. Poorer quality product.
As a news publisher (RedBankGreen.com) I’ll tell you that pretty much nobody is in it for the money anymore, at least at the local level.
It’s passion and love of the community, despite the many struggles and drawbacks.
AI bots scrape our content and that drastically reduces the number of people who make it to our site.
That impacts our ability to bring on subscribers and especially advertisers - Google and Meta own local advertising and AI kills the relatively tiny audience we have.
I dread the day that it happens in realtime - hear sirens? Ask AI who already scraped us.
1. You can't judge the person, you can judge the behavior
2. To judge the person requires the ability to quantify the unquantifiable (circumstance, sequence of events leading to the outcome, going back to the literal beginning of time).
3. To judge the person implies a superiority to that person
Sure, one can take/justify simplistic shortcuts for practical reasons. But some forget that's what they are - shortcuts that bypass the nuances/reality of the situation.
It’s not really subjective if you don’t believe it’s your place to judge the human to begin with.
If you were in their exact life circumstance and environment you would do the same thing. You aren’t going to magically sidestep cause and effect.
The act itself is bad.
The human performing the act was misguided.
I view people as inherently perfect whose view of life, themselves, and their current situations as potentially misguided.
Eg, like a diamond covered in shit.
Just like it’s possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Everyone is capable of redemption so nobody is inherently bad. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.
So the act and the person are separate.
Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.
But it’s about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad.
You’re correct that belief is a powerful driver of prosperity/poverty - and that believing that you’re headed for either can lead to you to different modes of decision making. I’ve experienced and witnessed both.
An unexpected windfall will amplify the psychology of the recipients. For people who have lived without, the mindset is frequently “live today like it’s your last” or “enjoy it while it lasts” and blow it or self destruct.
Some will be obviously be more mature about it though.
For anyone reading this, please don’t subscribe to this level of cynicism.
For SWEs at Google and almost anywhere else, the wind has blown very favorably for you and that’s something to be celebrated.
The direction of the wind has shifted, but we can never expect it to stay blowing in one direction forever, even if others get lucky and catch one like that.
You will no doubt set your sail and take it to new and wonderful places.
Let’s take a minute and be grateful for how good SWEs have it - we are frequently so insanely disconnected from the realities and struggles of the normal working class and we should remember and express some gratitude for it regularly.
> After several meetings, we came to the conclusion that the best approach was to simply halt the old website development and build a new one from scratch using the best technologies and practices.
Spoken like a true developer. Trash the old system, reinvent the wheel, prioritize the delight of the devs, leave the client with something that is totally obsolete and nobody else knows how to work on in a couple of years.
If that's not contract development in a nutshell I don't know what is.