48 karma · joined February 28, 2012
The author is free to switch to linux whenever he wants, but using Windows 8 as scapegoat is a quite poor excuse.
A two-paragraph rant is not quite what we would expect from a HN link
In our weelky meetings we write down each task that needs to be done and the name of the person in charge, then send it by email. Even if there is no follow-up the next week, we observed that stopping to send the emails leads to less work done (or, at least, not the work that is expected to be done by the managers)
Of course, if your employer doesn't compensate with something, you're getting screwed. But that's true for developers, waiters, clerks, everybody, it's not something specific of our kind.
If 6.0 is unvelied next week, then Apple is doing that on purpose, as they know Ars checks their logs for that kind of content. However, if they stick to 5.1, then we'll know it's some kind of prank, and Ars will probably think twice before publishing the same article next year
You know, explaining an idea to somebody, from scratch, it's the better way to develop it. If it's stupid they will realize. If it's good they'll get enthusiastic.
In a previous comment I mentioned that this is the tactic that my manager uses, and it works wonderfully: let people talk from the beginning and ask questions later.
Of course, if you end up disagreeing, even though if their idea is good, they'll like that you let them explain and took time to consider
Even if my final answer is negative, the fact that I took some time to consider it is perceived as very positive by coworkers and managers.
My guess is that the key here is empaty. Engineers discuss ideas, where managers usually evaluate people. Of course, ideas belong to people (at least when they're conceived), but that quickly dilutes.
In order to evaluate people, you need a lot of empaty and some time. My manager is an excellent evaluator, and his tactic is quite simple: he lets people talk. They talk, talk and talk, until they have to shut up because they said something stupid and realize that themselves. He has the ability to make people self-conscious about their own mistakes with the least effort, as he does nothing but listen.
However, when it's time for him to talk, he talks little and observes the reactions. This gives him an aura of being very, very wise, which is absolutely correct (I work in research and he's a big fish)
Sorry, I'm moving away from the article's point, let's get back to the track. Splurting and dismissing ideas is good for brainstorms, but not for regular meetings. As an engineer, this is hard to percieve, but it's true. About a year ago I started copying my manager's tactics and it has worked very well; people percieve me less of an asshole and more of a smart guy who thinks before talking.
It all comes down to the Family Guy conversation between Brian and Peter: "Peter, do you think before you talk?"
This realization occured to me about a year ago, and when it came to me, everything was so clear. I had been an asshole in too many meetings because of wanting to speak first. My manager, on the other hand, was a very quiet, enigmatic guy, and he seemed wise.
While the engineers discussed some ideas, he listened. By listening, he was able to detect who was full of B.S. and who was has the best ideas. In the end, when he finally broke his silence, he was usually right.
Silence is very, very powerful, and it's never too late to learn to shut up
Maybe they didn't go for the best option, but I always like to remind the US customers (who usually just don't honestly know about Amazon's restrictions) that buying electronics from them is a bad idea for the international market
Empty comments can be ok if they're positive. There's
nothing wrong with submitting a comment saying just
"Thanks." What we especially discourage are comments that
are empty and negative—comments that are mere name-calling.