Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)BI
Posts
1
Comments
797
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Exactly. The first half of the movie doesn't deserve the ending it gets in the second half.

    I unsubscribed from /r/starwars after a few weeks of trying to have a friendly conversation about it. "The first half didn't develop the characters as well as it could have". You come back a half hour later to a -36 score. People were rabid fans of that movie and that was the final piece that made me want to not interact with that community anymore.

  • Large scale data centers, like the ones that end up in the news for FAANG are ~100 megawatt footprints.

    I have no idea where you're getting 3.4 megawatts as the largest data center in the US, but that is wildly undersized.

  • leave half a million in RSUs

    I'm not sure if it's intentionally being left out here, but if you have half a million in unvested stock, any competing offer from another FAANG company is likely giving you a stock match, or at least somewhere close to match.

    The golden handcuffs aren't as tight as people make them seem.

  • Without knowing anything about the situation, my guess is that if you run a static 1st, 2nd, 3rd shift style rotation, you can pay market rate for 1st and 2nd shift, but you have to pay a premium for 3rd shift due to it being a less desirable shift for the general public.

    With rotating shifts you just hire people and make them work the graveyard shift for no additional money, and get to argue with those that have to work it as "look, no one wants to work 3rd shift. That's why we rotate it between everyone on. We're a team here. We all pull our own weight". Which is a bad faith argument, but they'll happily use it on you and frame you as the over demanding worker, instead of the underpaid worker.

  • I'm kind of a fan of the True Colors system but not because I "believe it". More so that I just like that it makes you stop and consider how other people you're interacting with might consider your behaviors and vice versa.

    • green: independent thinkers (logic driven, efficient, analytical)
    • gold: pragmatic planners (organized, responsible, respect rules and authority)
    • orange: action-oriented (short term changes, adventurous, impulsive)
    • blue: people-oriented (sympathetic, emotion driven, seeks harmony in groups)

    Our exercise at work first required you to classify yourself, then everyone else voted to classify you. So you could get a picture of how you can see yourself compared to how others see you.

    I think what helps the most for facilitating the conversation is that it groups traits that are similar under a single color, so you can quickly say "I'm gold, I think this other person is green", then start diving into how one set of actions might be perceived by the other, etc. We didn't take a personality test. We just went straight in with "here's what I think I am", so there's no questionnaire pigeonholing you into something you might not identify with.

    It helped me interact with my co-worker (and close friend outside of work), because he's very impulse driven and constantly spitting out 200 line proof-of-concept things. But they're messy and buggy and don't have any safety rails and all kinds of other things. Where as I'm much more analytical, filing code changes to him for things like considering null inputs in fields, or to fix spelling mistakes (that one is more anal than analytical, but whatev).

    By doing this classification exercise, we were able to see beyond "dude wtf are you doing you look at all this wrong stuff" and we're able to consider how each of us worked was causing stress for the other. By realizing that and incorporating it to our work we were able to stop getting bogged down in arguments of really specific things and could stay focused on the general problem we were trying to solve.

    My favorite part of the whole exercise when we did it at work was all of our managers said that they are Blue (considerate of others feelings, etc) where as everyone that reported to them said they were Gold (organized, respect authority), like ruthlessly Gold, and sometimes with a hint of Orange because they change focus of the team every time a new "issue" comes up before we'd finished resolving the open ones. It made me realize that management isn't intentionally shitty. They're just delusional to the point that they don't even see how their actions are nothing like their intentions.

  • Yeah, I thought that was so cool when I played it the first time. Gives you some insight into how the neutral parties went about trying to live their lives.

    Although I really liked the story in TIE Fighter too with slowly beating back the rebellion while also trying to prevent internal sabotage and spies from stealing the TIE Defender.