evidencetamper

Oh, I see. You're not actually Japanese.

If you never heard about the weight maintenance company wide competitions (let's fitness!), the labor doctor telling you that it might be difficult for you to handle stressful management work with high blood pressure, the kids saying that they were laughed at because their dad is fat...

You're blessed.

This, plus yearly mandated healthchecks with huge pressure and shame on excessive weight.

Do you have any references?

This argument keeps popping up as if every engineer was exactly the same, which is simply not true.

High quality talent is expensive, hard to recruit, hard to keep. High salary is one of many perks a company offers to capture high quality talent. A work visa to live in a first world country is another one.

> and leadership asks why you weren't logging everything in full fidelity?

I haven't been asked this question ever. In a way, I wish I was. I wish leadership was engaged in the details of the capabilities of the systems they lead.

But I don't anyone asking me this question any time soon either.

That's an unfortunate and charged statement that misrepresents what I said.

A fundamental aspect of science is rigor. And a fundamental aspect of democracy is opposition.

It is impossible to establish causality in complex economic systems to be able to have evidence based decisions.

The current economic direction is not a consensus. The Western democracies are increasingly politically polarized and economically volatile.

Between the many different crises (unaffordable real estate, populational collapse, unsustainable environmental practices and global warming, increasing inequality, hollowing out of small and medium sized cities, and the list goes on), it is very difficult to justify the status quo.

It's also not clear that allowing factories that underpay exploited workers to ship stuff over is a net win

Thankfully nothing along the lines of this suggested wild speculation to try to get a rage bait headline.

Dishonest trolling is not a challenge or pushback. Nothing constructive comes out of this.

If the failure was not a failure, but instead an amazing success, then it would have been more successful than this exceptional success.

Evil is a moral concept, which is less tied to religion these days.

Drugs are an anti-social drain on society, that sickens its buyers, turning them into zombies or criminals, and turns the sellers into greedy, violent people who corrupt law enforcement.

Your edge case of an angel doesn't translate to the actual realities of drug trafficking and addiction.

Dunning Kruger is a cognitive bias in overconfident individuals, not a general characteristic found in every person.

> If you move you still need to notify them, although perhaps in Japan big brother already knows you've moved.

When we move, we need to register our address change at the city hall. In terms of Big Brother, that's a given.

The problem is that we also need to change all bank, bills, etc. too. So this replaces the need for mail forwarding, for example.

Different from your comment, that comes from your insight from your lived experiences in this community, the quote is a whole bunch of nothing.

Maybe the nothingness is because LLM can't reason. Maybe it's because it was trained a bit too much in marketing speak and corporate speak.

The thing is, while LLMs can replicate this or that style, they can't actually express opinions. LLM can never not be fluff. Maybe different types of AI can make use of LLM as part of their components, but while we keep putting all of our tokens in LLMs, we will forever get slop.

And how hard would you expect the Americans to drive the negotiation when they know they are the only possible customer for Alberta?

Trade deals are not made with generosity towards oil producers in mind.

> Basic econ 101: inelastic demand means supply can be as expensive as the limited number who are lucky enough to get it are able to afford.

In the same basic econ 101, you learn that real estate demand is localized. UBI allows folks to move to middle of nowhere Montana.

Which is an excellent point for conversations, but in the context of the release notes in the website of the project, I understand that this xkcd principle does not apply.

If one goes to the release notes for Lazarus, they either sought those release notes out, and hence already know what it is. Or they were linked to it in a specific context, such as Hacker News, which the expectation of curiously clicking around to understand the project is natural.

Not every form of discrimination is the holocaust.

It is very important to not be extreme when dealing with human ignorance. For mild cases of discrimination, especially those coming from fear and ignorance, engaging in full confrontation is not necessarily the most effective strategy to reduce said discrimination. It might actually increase it.

Now if faced with hate speech, that's a much higher degree. That needs a different strategy to reduce it.

But unless you are looking at actual segregation and genocide, dropping a Nazi accusation is hardly constructive.

The adverse effect is higher latency, as the execution gets delayed due to throttling.

Parent probably didn't care about latency.

Singapore has been independent since 1959, while the USA got its own in 1776, and Britain has been around for more than a thousand years.

I don't think we can, yet, call Singapore a lastingly successful system, considering most of the time since its independence has been under a father or his son.

What do you mean by that? I don't understand the comparison, but would like to. Is it about monopoly?

As long as the library is available.

Neither static nor dynamic linking is looking to solve the 20 year old binaries issue, so both will have different issues.

But I think it's easier for me to find a 20 year old ISO of a Red Hat/Slackware where I can simply run the statically linked binary. Dependency hell for older distros become really difficult when the older packages are not archived anywhere anymore.

> Redis is arguably the most well regarded tech of all.

REDIS tradeoffs have been so widely discussed because many, many engineers disagree with them. REDIS is so lowly regarded that some companies ban it completely, making their engineers choose between memcached or something more enterprisey (hazelcast these days, Coherence some time ago).

> unfair competition for work

That's a very good indicator of a bloated institution. People have to compete for work instead of pushing it away or avoiding it because they already have their hands full.

But I don't believe there is a general rule that applies here.

Most great managers I had were deeply technical and involved in the nitty gritty of the projects, including coding the very spiky aspects of a project.

Most mediocre managers I had were very focused on relationship building. The kind of manager that would need a hobby project to keep current, instead of being the most knowledgeable person in the room.

I find it surprising that someone who worked inside a banking corporation, and has seen first hand that nothing ever goes according to plan, is able to believe that somehow the machinery is perfectly orchestrating a privilege loop.

He has found something of an audience in the social media oriented audiences, who are educated enough to grasp the general idea, but not specialized enough to verify his claims.

I've only heard of him because of this sort of Hacker News comments, and my general impression is that he is usually so off the mark that it is hard to have relevant conversations.

He makes money selling books and having an Youtube channel.

> Finding the right balance is key to creating something truly impactful

This doesn't mean anything at all. These platitudes are pure vapor, and seem just solid enough that they make sense at first glance, but once you try to grasp it, there is nothing there. What is impactful? What is untruly impactful as opposed to truly impactful? Why is that important? Why is the right balance key for it? Balance of what? How do you measure if the balance is right?

My expectation for engineering (including its management) is that we deal in requirements, execution, delivery, not vibes. We need measurable outcomes, not vapor clouds.

Excellent comment. What you raised are two important aspects of the analysis that the article didn't bother thinking about:

- how to best leverage the team you currently have

- what is the most likely shape your team will have in the future

Jane Street has enough resources and experts to be able to train developers on OCaml, Nubank and Clojure also comes to mind. If one leaves, the impact is not devastating. Hiring is not straightforward, but they are able to hire engineers willing to learn and train them.

This is not true for a lot of places, that have tighter teams and budgets, whose product is less specialized, and so on.

But this is where the article fails and your comment succeeds: actually setting out parameters to establish a strategy.

That's also an aphorism that may or may not correspond to reality.

Not only there are companies with highly capable teams that are able to move fast using a complex mix of technologies, but also there are customers who have very little interest in new features.

This is the point of my comment: these maxims are not universal truths, and taking them as such is a mistake. They are general models of good ideas, but they are just starter models.

A company needs to attend to its own needs and solve its own problems. The way this goes might be surprisingly different from common sense.