toiletduck

Litestar seems to have a very active social outreach team while fastapi seems to have an active user base to me. It's strange to see how often it gets shilled for by its maintainers/fans in python threads to the point it makes me uncomfortable with the project.

Given they backfill the first two years with grant value bonuses, this is irrelevant: the first two years just pay straight cash to make up those % to 100. First year is an up front payment, second is monthly payments. If anything that vest schedule retains people for those two years rather than being a way to pay less.

I think these kind of articles tend to have a fair amount of truth to them, but a lot of the anxiety etc is caused by the all out denigration of remote workers. People being constantly undermined tend to be anxious about it!

Remote work has some elements that need different attention to make work. I feel isolated at the moment as a remote worker because it feels like suggesting an offsite or meeting in person once a quarter is going to threaten the existence of the remote work status quo.

Intentionally undermining the system to then make arguments against it seems to be the operating model at the moment for people who prefer to spend all their time in an office while making no effort to support remote work, and it is exhausting.

They've delivered Goodheart's law in action - there is so little room to survive in a classroom today in England today as these same metrics are the measure of successful teaching. Teachers are left with no option but to teach to test.

Unsurprisingly, that means we're now higher in rankings in the tests. It also creates fun conversations like "why can this Year 7 give me rote definition of the subjunctive mood but can't grasp writing about their summer holiday" as children transfer from an examined year to the furthest away from a new set of exams.

I have severe doubts success in arbitary, mandatory testing having much correlation with success in a real world context, but a generation of children has had education with a significant constraint on creativity, arts, lateral and logical thinking or fun. Teacher attrition and attracting new staff also reflects this.

Context is key here, but as a thought experiment- the most profitable businesses can hire with effectively no limit if they choose. FAANG isn't a great proxy for that but it'll do - assume their hiring bar is "can produce excellent code". Then what? Do you just allow everyone to heads down code? Principals and staff engineers rarely contribute directly to features because in their org context, with their expected level of staff - code is cheap and easy. Orchestrating decision making is very hard, and aligning technical to product outcomes is hard. How often are these businesses with huge budgets routinely criticised for poor releases? Yet their overall value remains enormous, because their cores are money printers.

Being an expert in the domain of writing code is relatively easy. Being a domain expert of your businesses value and the tradeoffs its making is very difficult. Just because people like the writing code part of the job doesn't make it the end game for the most valuable skillset.

From your multiple comments on threads it seems like your ego is strongly attached to your code - if you truly never, not even one time, derived value from a code review, either you always choose to work in toxic environment/s or you're not willing to accept feedback or defend your "coding style" well enough to align colleagues with your opinion. I desperately miss code review feedback at this point in my career after excellent engineers made me question my strong beliefs and empathise with theirs helped me build my path.

> simplified, vendor agnostic

I just don't see this being true. Being "cloud agnostic" likely means it's an incredibly leaky abstraction where at the first sign of trouble, you're going to have to understand winglang + the specific provider API. Any IaC product requires you intimiately understand what it's actually doing if you care about security and performance. Just because it's a managed service doesn't mean you get to ignore all it's implementation detail, right?

All the cloud providers give you a function as a service, or a nosql database, or a file bucket: ignoring all the nuance as an agnostic is at a minimum leaving optimisation on the table and more likely dangerous and expensive, surely?

I know it's not the point the author is trying to make, but I couldn't help get the feeling this example isn't good enough to carry the point.

from stdlib:

  from urllib.parse import urlparse, parse_qsl

  url = 'https://www.example.com/some_pathsome_key=some_value&foo=bar'
  parsed_url = urlparse(url)
  values = [v for _, v in parse_qsl(parsed_url.query)]
  print(values)

which I guess you could oneliner back to this..

  [v for _, v in parse_qsl(urlparse(url).query]

Well there's not a great deal going on in somewhere like the middle of the Forest of Dean as far as software engineering challenges go - you do tend to have to go where businesses are solving problems.. even in a more remote culture the base for companies will be near big cities because big cities are near transport links.

My Dad died after a long and difficult fight with prostate cancer that advanced to untreatable Stage 4 very quickly because of an underlying BRCA2 mutation. I'm so thankful the NHS tested him for this, and then tested my brother and I (both positive), and then sponsored IVF for my brother to concieve his first child with screening for BRCA2 mutation.

He now has a five month old baby girl who doesn't have the same coinflip requirement that BRCA2 brings girls of almost-guaranteed servere breast cancer and invasive life-changing surgery to reduce risk, and my brother and I both get MRIs at 40 and regular screening for when we (very likely) get prostate cancer.

This article was such a surprise to see at the top of HN, and I urge everyone to share it as both a lovely good news story and awareness of how underlying genes can cause aggressive cancers.

Your suspicions are incorrect - I'd suggest trying the AWS CDK as it solves exactly the problem you want it to solve in the sense of providing strong type safety.

You can use the CLI and your terminal directly, as well as use SSH over SSM for proxying and SCP.

Have a look at https://docs.aws.amazon.com/systems-manager/latest/userguide... - in a lot of cases removes the need for a bastion and SSH keys at all

I empathize after two years in UK education. The working culture is almost cult like and self reinforcing - the Peter principle in action turns the best teachers at reinforcing the status quo into headteachers.

Unions are really powerful in education - it's one of the only benefits of the sector I can think of. Hopefully your wife has a union rep they can teach out to on behalf of all the staff if not just herself? Teaching assistant salaries definitely don't to high enough to compensate for anything outside of school hours!

You absolutely can. Eating less calories than your basal metabolic rate (calories burned just to stay alive) means stored energy will be burnt and body weight will reduce.

>Google has a reputation for killing obscure consumer products

It has a reputation for killing cloud products like classic VPNs in GCP too, a significant part of our cloud infrastructure. Distrust is earned in this case.

The difficulty of the article and of your example is active vs passive learning - watching and reading people with more experience is important, and I guess the spirit of the article is to do that actively without procrastinating - real learning - watch and make notes rather than just relax and passively watch/read.

However, the part not touched on is that things you do passively do build up knowledge too - and it's not an exertion like active learning is. Absentmindedly watching Chess streams when relaxing is good to call out as not an intentional active learning experience, but as long as you're treating it as relaxing it's the kind of thing that is fuel for shower thoughts and can refuel capacity for active learning. As the article says, the "real thing" is hard and tiring, and doing "fake things" can add depth to understanding as well as recuperate for the next struggle. Being mindful and aware of what you're doing and pushing yourself to be doing the real thing when possible is my takeaway from the article.

OVO are still hiring and planning growth this year: I'm not sure on the ettiquette of reffering people, but sounds like it might be of interest. Cloud first, lots of flexibility in teams running their own microservices and a preference for functional programming (although Scala is popular, haven't seen Haskell yet in production). https://grnh.se/a2f788601us

Cloud agnostic in terms of using the best products from each service: sure. It makes sense to leverage the strengths of each cloud provider.

Having all your infra written with shim layers to move it freely between providers sounds like the scale you need to start thinking about hosting your own "cloud provider" or stop using public cloud.

Writing Terraform is easy - having it work after six month of features being delivered, the cloud provider evolving, and working with all your other microservices, isn't particularly. Assuming you can do that and just change a few lines to redeploy in a new cloud environment (imagine that including GKE to EKS) seems naive.