This is a reasonable idea if the users maintaining the system aren't technical AT ALL. Think small business who wants a homebrew inventory system for some reason. There is almost always a better tool, but Access is still very approachable for non technical users
Big companies are significantly better to work in when you're either (a) in sales with a clear path to hitting/exceeding quota, (b) a strategic revenue generator, or (c) a super hot and extremely well funded corporate initiative (basically all AI projects right now).
The money tap is always on, you get all the cool toys, travel perks are great, and you get to work on amazing stuff without as much red tape.
Yeah, I was working on more of an infra thing (involving caching and indexing). Certainly important given the size of the company, but not something that gets lots of hype or sexiness.
There were occasional bits of ambition to occasionally work on interesting stuff, but it was mostly a “keep the lights on and then figure out how to make yourself seem important”.
One of my biggest pet peeves is when engineers say that we can’t do something because we would have to learn something new. I got into several arguments because I wanted to rewrite some buggy mutex-heavy code (that kept getting me paged in the middle of the night) with ZeroMQ, and people acted like learning it was some insurmountable challenge. My response would usually be something to the effect of “I’m sorry, I was under the impression that we were engineers, and that we had the ability to learn new things”.
As I said, complaints about my attitude weren’t completely unfounded, but it’s just immensely frustrating for people using their unwillingness to learn new things as an excuse to keep some code in a broken state.
I think i found something even better. I'm just adjacent to the big money maker. We keep folks on the page a little longer but don't need to concern ourselves with revenue and ads. Just make it good so folks stick around but important enough that we won't get axed.
> Big companies are significantly better to work in when you're either (...)
You're basically stating that people who are hired to staff projects that are superfluous secondary moonshots are more likely to be fired than those who maintain core business areas. That's stating the obvious. When a company goes through spending cuts, the first things to go are the money sinks and fluff projects that are not in any key roadmap. This is also why some companies structure their whole orgs around specific projects and even project features, because management limits the impact of getting rid of entire teams by framing that as killing projects or delays in roadmap.
My wife and I saw Guster play with the National Symphony there. It was an incredible show. Such a shame that this administration wants is politicizing this incredible institution.
I never moved to omz (or even zsh; I still rock bash) because I have 10+ years of dotfiles that cover all of my needs. I can see all of the cloud accounts I'm logged into, the status of my Git repositories when I'm cd'ed into them, the number of directories deep my stack is when I use pushd, and have lots and lots of custom functions that save me time. I had moving to zsh in my personal backlog for many years but have yet to come across a pressing reason why I should!
Anyway, yeah, all of this adds startup and command invocation time, but the value far outweighs the latency.
I'm changing to GhosTTY as we speak (from Mac Terminal, because I'm tired of gemini-cli not getting my shift-return for newlines). Wasn't until that process that I learned that new Mac accounts are on a different shell (zsh) than I have (bash). Last time I switched shells was when Apple flipped from tcsh.
Now, I'm deep down the rabbit hole of standardizing all my shells/terminals/configs with Nix. Either a really good or really bad project to start on a Friday night.
It's basically the same, except smarter about command history and auto-completion by default. I'm sure you could get Bash to act the same way with a bit of prodding.
As a person who was super into the rooting scene before getting iPhone-pilled in 2018 or so, I can see both sides to this issue.
On one hand, people that jump through the crazy hoops phone manufacthrers put up to get root are either technically-proficient or willing to become so and are, usually, responsible enough to keep their devices locked down and secure.
On the other hand, banks are subjected to literally all of the regulations, and breaking any of them usually incurs unbelieveable fines. Given that phones are the default computing device for most people these days and how (relatively) easily secrets can be extracted from rooted devices, blanket-banning them makes a lot of sense.
Nonetheless, modern Android is just as locked down as modern iOS, with a few exceptions (like adb access) and without the awesome hardware and software optimizations for that hardware that make video recording fast and web browsing even faster. Between this and nobody having a real answer to Apple Watch, I'll be an iOS stan for the foreseeable future.
reply