Comments by "Vitaly L" (@vitalyl1327) on "Thriving Technologist" channel.

To be fair, most CRUD flows are so badly written, so broken, that you'd wish the more competent engineers had to work on CRUD (obviously, it's very hard to convince them to do so).
9
Even 9-5 is an exaggeration, nobody works 8 hours a day focused non-stop. The real productive or simply focused hours count is 2-4 a day at most.
7
@FreeStyleKid777 since your learning benefits your current employer too, you just need to do it in your paid 9-'5 time. Use a better time management and pay attention to your current mental state, and select the right activity for a moment. If you feel productive and able to focus - do your work (tickets from backlog, whatever else), if you're a bit tired and foggy - do some light learning to freshen up, if you're out of executive points for today - do admin and such.
5
Oh, crap, that's what I was doing wrong all along...
3
@vulpixelful knowledge of tooling du jour is useless without a fundamental knowledge, and results in those broken systems and utter mess we're all in now. And for those who have fundamental knowledge, all those tiny puny details, like the current tooling and "best practices" are easy to pick up.
3
The previous AI burst bubbles also stayed, just without the hype. We still have all those insanely powerful CAS and rule-based systems from the previous AI winter. LLMs will stay too, once they find their niche.
2
Sounds exactly like the wrong industry case. There's a lot of exciting and challenging industries, and tooling there is still, well, at a stage that you better start building everything from the first principles every time rather than rely on 3rd party libraries.
2
Working hard is the sure way to be less productive than those who work chill. And it is your productivity that determines your career, not your perceived effort or hours wasted.
2
Yet, the opposite is often true - bad programmers are awful people. See the Horizon scandal for a reference.
1
@TheLayeredKing do you agree that those Fujitsu engineers were extremely awful people? Have you seen some of them at the inquiry? They were all very bad engineers, and they turned out utterly evil people too. So, to clarify - incompetent engineers who, despite of their incompetence, decide to carry on working on potentially damaging projects, are evil, by definition. An honest person would have admitted incompetence and quitted.
1
@TheLayeredKing no, you failed to comprehend my point. Incompetence is a crime. Ignorant people who think they have a right to be incompetent are inherently bad people and must be punished.
1
@TheLayeredKing anyone who is bad in a profession they are employed to do a bad people. By definition. No excuses.
1
@TheLayeredKing I communicated it perfectly clear: Bad developers are bad people, if they are employed as developers. Why is it such a complex idea for you to digest?
1
@TheLayeredKing intern is not a developer. Intern is a student. And if a junior developer is bad and not productive on day one, he is an impostor who lied his way into employment. He was supposed to learn in the university and in internships, and once he have a diploma, he is, technically, a certified specialist. If in fact he still need to learn, and not a specialist his diploma states he is, see above - he lied, and only the bad people lie. Do you expect a junior bricklayer to do a poor job, resulting in a wall collapsing? No? Then why the slack for software developers?
1
@TheLayeredKing firstly, I've been in tihis industry for over thirty years. Secondly, being productive on day one does not mean immediately contributing to the end product, productivity definition includes the project-specific knowledge acquisition tasks and process improvements. Pretty much everywhere I worked, the newcomers were always tasked with onboarding process and documentation improvements - they go through onboarding, detect the rough edges where they struggle, and improve them. Immediately. Good ones make meaningful contributions this way on their day one. Bad ones just give a blank stare and fail.
1
@TheLayeredKing the mental gumnastics you're performing to justify the incompetence is hilarious. Forget the onboarding. Two months on it is perfectly clear who is a bad developer and who is not. And anyone who does not conform to professional standards expected from their certification is a liar and a bad person, period. How hard is it to comprehend?
1
@vulpixelful and I am saying that it would have been much better if they actually had a deep and profound CS knowledge and a mathematical mindset. The current CRUD developers skillset is inadequate.
1
Or on the other side of the pond, IR-35
1
Ok, try to strongly type assembly. And when you fail to do so, try to remove it altogether from the stack.
1
@beidero you said all languages must be strongly typed. Assembly is a language. Either your maxima is misguided, or assembly is an ill designed language that must be fixed. It was not obvious at all what kind of languages you're talking about (or even if you understand at all what does a "high level language" mean). Now, think of a wider context - a lot of languages primary (or at least very significant) purpose is to be a compilation target, just like assembly. Do they have to be strongly typed? If you like your languages strongly typed, look at Shen: user-defined typing of the derived languages, while keeping the core flexible.
1