Also a convenient way to remember right of way while on the water is to use the port/starboard lights of the approaching boat. If you see green (their starboard side) that means you have the right of way, and red means they have the right of way. Just like traffic lights :)
The rule of thumb I go for with boats is that the vessel with worse steering has right of way. For instance a freighter has right of way over a sailing boat regardless of direction or wind because the freighter isn't going to be able to change course in any appreciable amount of time.
Plastic boats give way to wooden ship, wooden ships give way to metal ships, and nothing gives way anything much smaller than itself - Not the colreg rules, but a good approximation for unskilled crew members. Especially on a wooden ship.
I am not sure Marx has much to say on why a person earning $100/hr for a company and being paid $10/hr wouldn't have his earnings potential stolen by another company willing to pay him $20/hr. $90/hr of profit is great but $80/hr in my pocket is better.
> After that, I make sure I won't be carrying a pager that can ever "go off" in the middle of the night. That's a non-negotiable for me at this point in my career.
I'm currently in undergrad so starting my actual "career" still seems far enough off for me, but serious question how do people actually accept that? Will I have to accept that when I apply for junior/entry level positions? I don't think I'm asking too much if I want to have a full night sleep and a strong work/life divide. I might be a bit young and naive, but I hope I won't get comfortable with living at the beck and call of my employer. People are more than just their individual contribution to lining the pockets of their bosses, no?
It's entirely dependent. This is also partially why "do you have a good manager" is included. I've had a few that absolutely will be in the line of fire first, and not make their team do anything they wouldn't do themselves.
From experience: a good team/manager, when forced to do this, will often freely be first on call, give you a day off after if you had an incident at night or let you sleep in til noon or later without complaint, etc.
If you are European or similar country with better working conditions/employee laws, it will be less painful. IIRC, in US salaried tech employees can effectively have unlimited unpaid overtime as a specific exemption.
Good advice about managers, it sounds like it may take a while to settle down and find a team that fits. It's good that you have been able to find a manager and team that actually works as a, well, team.
> IIRC, in US salaried tech employees can effectively have unlimited unpaid overtime as a specific exemption.
Yeah I see that daily with my dad working from home. He works at a local newspaper (wait those still exist?) doing stuff with maps, datavis and page layout/design. He works probably twice the amount of hours he gets paid for early morning until late at night, and can never take time off even with his measly "paid vacation time" allotment. He somehow manages to trudge along, which is unimaginable to me. Generational difference? Or maybe I just don't have the full picture yet
It depends a lot on the company and specific role. As a junior person there is a higher chance that the position you apply for will require this kind of commitment but not all. Just make sure you ask during the interview process.
Unfortunately, you don't always know if on-call will be involved until you start at the job. Often many companies don't even hire you with a particular role in mind, instead you are matched to a team after you're signed on. (Especially for new grads). And sometimes on-call is introduced in an existing role, it can be difficult to refuse, especially for people in more junior roles.
But definitely ask about on-call when interviewing, in case they say they have it you can bail out before you sign.
I ask about it repeatedly to all interviewers to the point that some companies disqualify me. Call it a survivorship bias in reverse. It doesn't always work, amazingly, but it always sends a strong signal.
I used Pts around a year ago to make a music visualizer for an art class, it was really great for that use-case and I was really happy about my final result.
I'm excited for the future of your work and the future of the greater creative coding community.
Also while I can still edit: iirc the documentation is high quality. I was able to get a basic prototype working really fast, and the docs were extremely helpful.
From my limited knowledge (basically 0) of supply chains, I disagree. (Though I am neutral on the statement "you can't really trust any part of it.")
The anecdote I heard was that say you have a blockchain to keep track of your goods shipping on trucks. When the trucks leave and enter a facility their payload is entered into the blockchain. The idea is that it will make sure that every party along the supply chain can say "well I got the next person what they needed" so you can easily put blame on and correct for missing/failing items.
Sounds good, right? Well, not so fast. It turns out that some of the items were stolen from a truck (whether by an employee or otherwise). The truck arrives at the next facility, scans in and certifies that they have the proper items and none are the wiser!
Hold on, can't they just physically check at each stop to actually make sure that they have the right cargo?
Bingo! At that point, what problem does the blockchain actually solve? Blockchain works okay-ish for digital goods (cryptocurrency), but completely falls apart for physical goods.
I heard a joke somewhere that the internet is just people libeling each other all day.
I personally think that we should be intolerant of intolerance, until of course that message is co-opted by "elites" (billionaires, politicians or whoever you believe is the group(s) pulling the strings) to suppress any criticism of their power.
I thought GitHub said they were going to assume good faith by the repository and allow it to stay up until a ruling has been decided (as well as funding legal costs), rather than immediately taking it down under the hand of the "rightsholder".
Did I misread their previous statement after the youtube-dl fiasco?
The relevant part of their "youtube-dl is back" post:
> Given the cost to developers of an unwarranted takedown of code, we ensure we have a complete notice before we take action. We distinguish between code that merely can be used in an infringing way and code that is preconfigured to be used a certain way. We also recognize that code can provide access to copyrighted content without violating the law (for example, fair use). In some cases we can keep a project up because the content identified in the takedown notice is not in fact infringing or circumventing a TPM that controls access or copying of copyrighted works.
So basically: no. But they surrounded it with so much fluff that's its easy to misinterpret.
Nothing will change much, as soon as GitHub is still a user-generated content host. They have to follow DMCA safe harbor practice, which is to obey the claim until proven false, in trade with not get sued themselves as a host.
