236 karma · joined July 6, 2011
My wife has terrible road rage and I'm often suggesting she should be more like a fighter pilot on the road; remain calm, focused and let the stupid shit go. I was hoping I could forward this on to her as an 'I told you so' ;-)
I wonder if it was a deliberate decision to avoid a common debate or if she just didn't consider it.
Even then, there's the option of a PIP, which allows you to quantify their ineffectiveness and give you good cause for letting them go.
I'd therefore assumed that Hitler was just a product of the era and there was a certain inevitability to WWII.
So when we sleep walk into a mass surveillance state I can honestly look at the people who live around me and say 'this is your damn fault'.
Isn't it the 5th largest in the world? http://statisticstimes.com/economy/countries-by-projected-gd...
Does anyone have any real world experience using these kind of techniques?
We're all monsters really.
The two column text is annoying though; I have to scroll down and then up again.
Can I get a source on that? It flies in the face of conventional wisdom.
Plus the voice recognition's accuracy is absolutely stunning for me; even in a crowded bar.
This was the tl;dr for me:
"Some things we’ve learned over the past 30 years – that novelty is more important than quality; that if you’re not disrupting yourself someone else will disrupt you; that entering new markets is more important than expanding existing markets; that technology has to be evangelized, not asked for by your customers – may no longer be true. Almost every company will continue to be managed as if these things were true, probably right up until they manage themselves out of business. There’s an old saying that generals are always fighting the last war, it’s not just generals, it’s everyone’s natural inclination."
I've seen this a few times before, so I'm guessing it must be a cultural thing.
For developers, every meeting is a interruption. Every email a distraction. Yet 'nobody ever tells us nothing'.
I know there is a happy medium, but it seems the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction these days.
Since we've moved over to Kanban, I've found it's much more useful to walk the board. We start on the right and move to the left. The discussion is much richer and I've found people no longer struggle to remember what they did yesterday.
What the author suggests at the end, having everything written down in advance, is just another chore designed correct 'bad' behaviour (people not sure what to say, lots of 'umm, errs'). Perhaps we should be asking ourselves if it's the format rather than the people.
Here is a blog post describing something similar to the one we're using now: http://brodzinski.com/2011/12/effective-standups.html
I've gone from dreading the retrospective to looking forward to it with enthusiasm; mostly because I had never seen them run properly.
The Scrum format (what worked well, what didn't work, etc) just didn't do it for me. The meetings felt forced and awkward. It wasn't until I was involved in a retros with much more interactivity that it all clicked into place.
Teams that don't run regular retrospectives will suffer internal strife much more frequently than those that do. Even if every retro isn't 100% useful, just having it as a regular, un-skippable ceremony will go a long way toward team cohesion.
Of course, we do need a small team of excellent DevOps engineers to keep the whole thing moving forward.
They are also now starting to deploy Openstack in order to benefit from a software-defined infrastructure. It's all very cool.
Also, at what point is project considered a "Death Star"? Does the Apollo program fit into this category? We only went to the Moon a handful of times, but I wouldn't consider that to be a waste of resources. Are we to never attempt engineering on a scale that dwarfs our current capability?