Fair enough, I've never been involved in a CEO recruitment, I can't imagine the candidate pool tends to include people like the previous CEO of Bluesky
Just to say the obvious: the new CEO is a VC partner and former CEO of Automattic. That seems very bad, no matter how "committed" they are to the vision of Bluesky.
Yes, but its gonna be weird. I've done very tangentially related work with game controllers, and my suspicion is you're gonna have to try a few (dozen?) before you find one that even sends reasonable commands. I can imagine a FireTV stick sending game controller inputs. I have no idea, but that's the type of thing that might go wrong.
A MX3 air mouse might be the exact thing you want though.
Obviously not the main point, but I've been reading watch media online for over a decade now, I've read or heard this "Quartz Crisis" story hundreds of times and never ONCE read about the coincidence with the Bretton Woods agreement. Makes sense though, its basically oral history.
Agreed, we've all been there, but 4 hours! For a network config change. No one raised their hand and said "hey I just toggled this thing maybe we should look, I did it exactly when our entire region went had down"
No that has certainly been my experience, but what is going to be the forcing function after a company decides it needs less engineers to go back to hiring?
What bothers me about posts like this is: mid-level engineers are not tasked with atomic, greenfield projects. If all an engineer did all day was build apps from scratch, with no expectation that others may come along and extend, build on top of, or depend on, then sure, Opus 4.5 could replace them. The hard thing about engineering is not "building a thing that works", its building it the right way, in an easily understood way, in a way that's easily extensible.
No doubt I could give Opus 4.5 "build be a XYZ app" and it will do well. But day to day, when I ask it "build me this feature" it uses strange abstractions, and often requires several attempts on my part to do it in the way I consider "right". Any non-technical person might read that and go "if it works it works" but any reasonable engineer will know that thats not enough.
I like it! Would be nice to have some visual indication on "what" was similar, or why, or even how much? Or an example of "this is similar to that because ...". Maybe a visualizer of the algorithms?
I'm a little surprised United is so bad in this. IME I've only seen fresh, sealed water bottles, so it must be the environment? But I can't think of a single actual factor that seemed different on United vs. Delta
> Nuclear fusion company: We do fusion stuff, we’ve raised $1.3 billion of capital from investors like Google and Chevron, but we need more money to build fusion power plants.
> TMTG: Oh people love giving us money, we should get together.