Kudos on the IDE, kudos on helping your girlfriend, but it could have done without the "I'll solve all the problems with technology and then she'll see me as the hero I am" schtick. It made it kind of an uncomfortable read, even though you did clearly build something with a use case, which is always admirable.
I've had a thing ever since grad school (I lived in a 400 sq. ft. apartment, so it was necessity then) that if I buy a thing, I have to donate something else -- particularly for clothes. It's amazing how much less crap I've accumulated than friends and family of a similar age.
- the author seems to call out specific individuals, by name, to their team leads, based on where they were ssh'd in, instead of bringing up the issue with that person first and asking for the logic of why they were on the box doing the thing (sounds like a lot of assumptions combined with finger pointing)
- it sounds like there's no well-configured monitoring or observability at the DC/rack/machine level involved, at all, which is surprising in a modern enterprise setup
> the author seems to call out specific individuals, by name, to their team leads, based on where they were ssh'd in, instead of bringing up the issue with that person first and asking for the logic of why they were on the box doing the thing (sounds like a lot of assumptions combined with finger pointing)
I'm not sure why you would assume that. She specifically says "The next thing I'd do is to go get in touch with that person."
Perhaps you're keying off "I've been able to track down some well-meaning but ultimately flawed attempts at fixing things that then blew up and became something much bigger. The folks who I pinged about it were amazed that I somehow had managed to "guess" that a specific member of their team had been poking at a specific box"? But keep in mind, that's specifically events that became a large issue. Is it not appropriate to notify management as to the cause of the issue? Either it's a first time mistake or not something the person may necessarily have known to look out for, in which case management should be lenient, or it's the latest in a string of events and management should possible take some other action.
If nothing else, it allows management for that other team to say "hey, we don't need to be messing with this aspect of the server. Either contact the team whose responsibility it is and get them to do the work, or get them to sign off on it first."
On call person was on a plane. They did something using intermittent connectivity and made a mistake. Other person on the ground is helping until the first one lands. I tell #2 about a box touched by #1 and ask them to have a look.
They did and they figured it out. Outage resolved.
Why did you automatically assume I ratted them out to management? At no point does the story go there.
I’m really curious, since misunderstandings like this can really poison a working environment when people think you’re doing things you’re not. I want to know what sent you down the wrong path here.
Commenters tend to proclaim bad intentions when none is present when they either skimmed without reading or that they are lashing out to compensate for some weird insecurity, e.g. "I caused an outage once and I didn't want anyone to ask me and find out! How dare you want to know!?"
> "I've been able to track down some well-meaning but ultimately flawed attempts at fixing things that then blew up and became something much bigger. The folks who I pinged about it were amazed that I somehow had managed to "guess" that a specific member of their team had been poking at a specific box"?
read like "I didn't like what someone did on a machine I had to troubleshoot, and told their manager" to me.
I was also reading this prior to coffee, mea culpa.
After running w, “The next thing I'd do is to go get in touch with that person. It would be foolish to continue when the answer might be a few short chat messages away.”
With you 100%. Sure, meeting people at work happens— in America people spend 8-12 hours a day there. But best to not act on anything until one or both parties don’t work at the same place.
My dad had a slightly gross phrase for this: ‘don’t shit where you eat’.
As in there’s no sense in potentially poisoning workplace relations if a romantic overture or relationship doesn’t go well.
I've worked at places that imported 1000s of college grads per year. In environments like this, there's no way to avoid office romance. The best you can do is put "No dating subordinates" in the company plan, and avoid serving excess amounts of alcohol at company events. (At one of the place I worked, the reason they stopped hard alcohol had to do with a DUI rather than harassment)
If you want to go the low-commitment route, a lot of makerspaces have plenty of equipment for building / making activities and offer classes in subjects as diverse as TIG welding and sewing.
Actually, it's a relatively popular harvesting practice for non-organic crops -- kill them all at the same time so they're all ready to harvest. Differs by region, but afaik in the US foods labelled as organic can't be harvested in this way.
So the thing about free speech is https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment the first amendment means the government shouldn't be able to suppress what you say. That's all. Corporations aren't the government and shouldn't be held to the same standards.
This is such an intellectually lazy stance to take (I know, you thought you were being clever, but believe me this is the least clever thing to say about free speech).
1A doesn't have anything to do with it -- either free speech is a concept worth protecting, or it isn't. John Stuart Mill wrote at some length about it, and in particular about what happens when the population at large decides they don't like your speech.
Let's take this to its logical end -- let's say Joe wants to host a legal but repugnant site. Cloudflare doesn't want to protect it, ok; EasyDNS won't host it, sure; now let's say Comcast gets involved. They don't think Joe should have internet because he's espousing ideas they don't like, so they cut him off. Same with his mobile provider. Hell, what's to stop the local grocery store from banning him?
Point being, Joe could _legally_ be forcibly removed from society for having opinions some people don't like.
This is an excellent point, it is something I worry about and something we've blogged about in our two previous posts about this topic.
It's one of the reasons I'm so wary when flashmobs try to force other businesses to dump specific clients.
It's one thing if your views or actions or so repugnant that all suppliers voluntarily refrain from doing business with you. Maybe one would reconsider their actions faced with that prospect?
But the phenomenon today, where flashmobs form and demand vendors sever their clients because the mob is demanding it and for the reason that the target is politically or ideologically at odds with the mob, that can play out exactly as you fear. Where does that stop?
This is one of those cases where there wasn't an easy answer, unfortunately. Dreamhost unknowingly wound up with a Dailystormer domain on their system last week and they got DDoS-ed into a crater. Also not good.
While technically correct, I don't understand how this has any bearing to my earlier response.
I explicitly state that I do not condemn EasyDNS for choosing to exercise their freedom of (dis)association in whatever manner they see fit. I would simply prefer to do business with someone whom I didn't have to guess at the moral convictions of, and obviate having to guess at whether or not the speech of users on a forum I host are crossing a line that I can't foresee, and would prefer to do business with a vendor where that wasn't something I had to worry about, even if it means having shitty neighbors.
I don't see anyone claiming that the government is preventing speech here. Just because it's legal for the company to deny their services, doesn't mean that said company can't be criticized for it.
You're correct, nobody is claiming that. I simply pointed out that "free speech" and saying whatever the hell you want are two different things. One is protected by law. One is not, and if I held an opinion you found morally wrong or vice versa, the other is not beholden to hear it, nor to serve the opinion holder if either party is a business. And I don't think that's bad.
Sure society may have prevailing moral standards, but the thing about having an opinion (which I think I'm proving with this comment) is we all, myself included, have forgotten that means we don't have to share it.
I do! Not because I feel like I know anything, but because logically I know there's quite some distance between an engineer and someone wanting to be an engineer. I see it every time my team gets a summer intern.
I got started by re-connecting with a group I led at university and being introduced to folks teaching business and practical engineering skills at a local accelerator (which seems to be primarily populated by college students and people without much experience trying to start their own companies). It's been a learning process -- both in terms of learning what people really ought to know before they apply for their first job versus what's normally taught and trying to fill in some of the missing bits, and learning where I myself have skills gaps.
I found this (mental health issues of colonization) to be one of the most interesting parts of Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy. It drags on a bit but plenty of folks go batshit, so that lends a tinge of realism.
Research papers cite scientific sources, sorry. Out of curiosity I've read the document being discussed here and clicked a random sample of the links and none of them I clicked led to peer-reviewed science (though a couple are Go links and a lot are Wikipedia).
The tone of the language is nice, but the Wikipedia citations remind me of my time teaching high school five years ago. Anyone who wrote a paper without citing in a significant way five scientific sources (google scholar provides free pdfs, how awesome is that?) got an automatic zero.
Wikipedia has good information but it's hardly what one would want backing themselves up for something like this.
