I wish he would have shown the heavy tree example in 11:55 without the library, seems cute and all but if you don't provide a comparison it's hard to take seriously.
Stripe looks great but after actually using it the performance is terrible - the api docs and the dashboard especially. Makes me wish they had gone with a css file 95% shorter and spent that effort on making the experience faster.
Well senior engineers won't work at entry level positions, but medium skill ones might. Replace skill with working conditions and it'll be the same thing, people that have a lower tolerancy for working conditions will leave quickly, but some will stay and that's still a win for the company. Especially compared to advertising how corporate and annoying their processes are.
To minimize human suffering you have to donate out all your earnings and be non-profit. I don't have anything against that, but those are irrelevant to this discussion.
How many IT people do you know that have quit after a month because of poor conditions? And how many do you know that suck it up and just stick to complaining about their job?
Engineers don't want their time wasted, but companies have no benefit in trying to prevent it as far as I can see. What kind of brand image would they portray if they started saying how bad their tech stack is?
> I think there's someone who would accept working at each of those places just fine. Even the worst ones.
Yes, people desparate enough to subject themselves to poorer working conditions. What's the single benefit for companies to cut themselves off from potentially good employees?
If you don't present valid arguments to benefit the company don't title it like advice. I clicked the article expecting some more hopeful arguments than "hurr durr I got baited into doing things I don't like", but I see none.
Do you think that companies like G are going to be able to hire literally anyone if they start advertising all the mess that they are working around?
Why would you write this article from an engineer's standpoint with arguments that will only benefit other engineer's but for some reason is directed at companies? Why not just call it "I'm upset with the dev experience" and be honest about your intentions?
Unless you provide any numbers I think most people would rather enjoy life than think how many nanograms of CO2 they’re releasing when sending an email.
I don't understand why this essay was written. It's an interesting train of thought until you actually compare savings it proposes with real world data.
The iMessage case is particularly horrid, the article states that 45 million images sent through the service daily produce an equivalent amount of CO2 as flying 11,000 people from Paris to New York. The images are uncompressed, but had only those anti-environment programmers somehow reduce their size by 50% without significantly degrading quality iMessage would only burn 5,500 worth of passengers in jet fuel daily!
Such a big save, until you compare it with the amount of total number of daily airline passengers, which is 13 million [1]. In comparison that's 0.04%, which wouldn't even make the tiniest scratch and you're proposing to degrade a service that's daily used by 1.3 billion people.
Taking the quote from the text: "The moment we create digital products or services we become part of the problem." it seems a huge stretch the intentions of which I can only speculate on.
The whole point seems incredibly stupid, but I'd really like to be proven wrong.
FYI you can configure mouse wheel (or in my case just trackpad) scrolling in tmux [1], I've had this configured for years and it's worked really well for me.