devnullbrain

Layoffs are a frequent outcome of product launch failures regardless of overall market movements.

>But you can't measure prominence in an objective way.

Nor can you measure friendships or love or anything else that is inherently subjective yet has a marked effect on your life.

Agency?

Or your company can be like Apple, with a $100B warchest, and still do layoffs!

Your view of prominence does not line up with what I've experienced for myself and seen for others.

Yet OP is the one who got a promotion, not a layoff. Good-boy points aren't transferable to other companies - but they do have value.

It's not good enough just to be the fixer, your friend has the skill to advocate for themselves even to the degree of impressing an uninitiated third party. IMO the parent comment sounds like they're not doing this yet.

I would hope any post like this has the insignificant details changed enough for the situation to be unrecognisable.

You seem to have mistakenly put quotation marks around something that the linked article doesn't contain. Please allow me to fill in the correct quotation:

"Fidelity discloses what it believes is the value of its shares of X"

All office discussion today is seen through the post-COVID WFH lens. It's easy to forget that there was a time before, largely filled with complaints about office conditions falling on deaf ears. The cat is out of the bag - we know remote can work and we know how different hotdesking in a room full of zoom calls feels.

The inverse isn't tolerated. If you're a software developer, you get tested for IT knowledge with phishing emails. Yet in IT it's perfectly normal to have an ignorance of the core needs of the developers - and computing itself - that results in reduced productivity or shadow IT systems.

It's not an exaggeration to say I've experienced it at every employer I've had.

It's not that long ago that there was all the hullabaloo about Notepad being updated for the first time in years, to support Unix line endings. Now it has been replaced wholesale with a slow app that crashes.

I've read enough sci-fi to know that galaxy-spanning civilisations will one day send 5000 usenet messages a minute (A Fire Upon the Deep), in the far future humans will develop video calls (The Dark Forest) and Muslims will travel into the future to kill all the Jews (Olympos).

We'll have the same thing for the whole country when the time of housing investment comes to an end. Why start a business when you could just buy another house?

Brilliant. Please consider writing a book about things like this.

See, I can believe that there are enormous EM fields in play. But I can't believe that the employees working there would react to them without code brown-ing.

The article mentions Arm, but even they describe themselves as a software company[1]

[1] because the implied higher margins mean this attracts more investment

Been there, done that. I still frequently get sent Linkedin specs for companies where the hardware team lead is earning junior SWE money. UK junior SWE money.

This spurred me to go back and read the predictions:

>But I can tell you this: Google has changed my life. If I can't find what I'm looking for in Google in 3 tries, looking no further than the first 10 search results on each try, then it probably doesn't exist.

What a sad future we're in.

We talked quite extensively about Stadia

There's a trend of people replying to posts/tweets/etc. with 'I asked ChatGPT and it said...'

It's the modern equivalent of LMGTFY. The OP could just as easily written the same prompt themselves. The difference is that LMGTFY was an expression of irritation, smugness and hazing. The ChatGPT reply is just garrulous laziness. I expect and hope we'll develop social rules that mean this type of reply will be seen as passe.

As a rule, I think physics should be expected to make less sense the further it gets from the human scale. It's not because it's inherently more complex, it's because we benefit from millions of years of brains evolving to understand what we can see and touch.

That's the wrong model for the example. Some nasty surprises are derived from real world complexity. Imagine something like a timezone library.

Also:

>you should fix them!

OK, great! See you in 10 years when you've fixed everything and are ready to start implementing stakeholder requirements.

I swear some of you read 'C++' in the submission title and immediately assume it's tagging on inscrutable, additional ways of doing things. This is making C++ code _less_ intricate.

I don't think the one character solution introduced at the bottom of TFA is convoluted. Could you explain why you think the solution - introduced at the bottom of TFA - is convoluted?

>making your little corner of the codebase nicer than the rest of it is fine, actually

As TFA points out, you might find out that you've made your little corner worse, actually.

I've had this problem as a user, accidentally previewing a link in iOS by tapping for too long.

Small binaries can improve performance, it's not just data that needs caching.

On a wristwatch it's also easy - and probable - to set a minutes hand out-of-sync with the seconds, so they don't both line up at 12 at the hour.

>- You're asking for too much

This is the reaction from Microsoft when I want my Windows clock to display this niche feature called 'seconds'

>making sure I have the skills and experience

A great way to test this is to wait for the email inviting you to an interview.

The emotional rollercoaster of selling yourself on a company only for it not to work out hurts too much. It's also a cost borne only by the applicant. It's easy to want to kick that can down the road until you're sure that you have a shot where some part, at least, is within your own control.

It will never be entirely down to your own performance and actions. Lots of job descriptions out there are for roles without a budget, or at companies with hiring moratoria, or where there's already a successful applicant waiting for a formal job offer.

The effort you put into researching an application, IMO, should be a function of the effort required by the applicant to proceed and the respect given to applicants by employers. The effort for a phone interview is very low. The respect is near zero.

>I think interviewing is just so broken it gives a false impression of quality issues in the labor pool.

I've been in a team where hiring requirements have emerged through the filter of HR almost unrecognisable. Naturally, they're still objective requirements, so qualified candidates are filtered out before ever meeting someone who could judge if they're qualified. It gets noticed, but nothing happens. Of course it doesn't: you're stepping on important toes.

That's how it tends to work. Candidates are filtered out by non-technical staff, including openly using programs that filter out CVs missing keywords. In smaller companies, this even gets farmed out to third-party recruiters that have poorly aligned incentives.

How can we know if candidates are qualified? We never see most of them.

It's hard to imagine many things worse for productivity than bad hiring processes. But it's all just accepted.