What always bothered me about DE&I initiatives is that they are trying to wring diversity out of their existing hiring pool.
If your indeed job posts didn't bring diverse candidates then, why do you think it would now? Because you added a "Please apply if you're DiVeRsE" line to it? Don't be ridiculous.
If you want diversity of candidates you can't keep going back to the same talent pools. You have to diversify where you're drawing talent.
If your college program is primarily getting white/asian males, you can't suddenly expect it to start throwing in women & poc as well. You can't suddenly expect it to start giving you LGBTQ+ candidates.
If you want diverse candidates, you have to look at diverse hiring pools. Look at the bootcamps that focus on diverse groups you're targeting. Look at schools that focus on diverse groups you're targeting.
If you're really interested in diverse candidates, you can't keep expecting them to just show up if you add a "We want diversity!" to your job description - you have to change where you look for them.
This is making a common but wrong rhetorical move, which is ignoring the fact that qualified candidates of the preferred race, with the preferred genitalia or gender presentation, and with the preferred sexual proclivities just aren't out there.
It's not like there is a large pool of black developer talent that firms just keep missing. It doesn't exist. It could be created, but a separate and totally valid question is: why do that? Why should we want every group of people to be representative of the population down to the smallest scale in race x gender x sexual preference?
> If you want diverse candidates, you have to look at diverse hiring pools.
I would assume the diverse hiring pools come with candidates that are not as qualified as the other pools. That's the flip side to this.
Do business hire from specific pools for biased or performance reasons? I think the assumption is that all hiring inequality is the result of bias. What if it isn't?
A big part of the issue here is that, even though the predomaninance of white and Asian men in CS is very obviously a pipeline problem, for whatever reason Twitter has decided that nobody is allowed to say it's a pipeline problem, and they'll excoriate you if you try. So since most of these initiatives have the primary aim of "keep Twitter happy", they have to undergo these absurd contortions to try and have a DEI program that can't say where the lack of DEI is coming from.
Naturally it ends up being a mess of contradictions and confused thinking, because everyone has to pretend to ignore the obvious root cause.
> for whatever reason Twitter has decided that nobody is allowed to say it's a pipeline problem, and they'll excoriate you if you try. So since most of these initiatives have the primary aim of "keep Twitter happy"
Given that Twitter takes an active role in censoring particular ideas, I think it's worth being careful to distinguish "Twitter has decided this isn't allowed" from "a lot of Twitter users have decided this isn't allowed".
If you have the option of having dual-language queues then you can also opt to the secondary language which generally has fewer callers than the primary. So you get to the front of the line faster, and they also tend to speak the primary language.
1. Censorship which caused a market reaction for more competition, and the first mass exit of the platform
2. Changes in the Fee Structure and billing policies, this caused the 2nd mass exit from the platform
3. Platforms getting better at internal monetization (i.e YT SuperChat and memberships)
There has been little advancement of of the patreon platform, and with more and more competition from other direct compeitors (subscribestar, etc) and different monetization avenues (TeeSpring,etc) there is little reason for creators to use patreon outside of the network effect, and since they are not growing that effect is smaller every day
It's not actually that unusual to absorb security into engineering; if engineering is already doing most of software security, and engineering/ops is already handling IT security, then the rest of security might in fact be duplicative of stuff third parties can do just as well.
I have no inside knowledge as to whether this was the case at Patreon; no opinions about Patreon whatsoever. But re-orging security into and out of engineering is not unprecedented.
I haven't dug into Alpine.js, but I've been messing with HTMX on some personal projects for a few months now and am really pleased with it. It's honestly made it a pleasure for me to return to front-end work.
I think at the moment blockchain is synonymous with "crypto".
Imagine you fell for a ponzi scheme. Now imagine you knew where the person who ran that ponzi scheme was.
The remark is a bit flippant (and feels grammatically incorrect) but the sentiment remains.
Lots of people view crypto as a get-rick-quick scheme on both sides. Even after warnings of "don't put any money in that you aren't comfortable losing" people put in money that they aren't comfortable losing. Coupled with the fact that most of these crypto projects maintain very high levels of community involvement (normally through discord/twitter). Sometimes when people lose a lot of money they lash out at the systems they lost money through. So they turn on the devs of whatever chain/token they gambled on.
Are the keyboard mounts purchasable through Dygma as well? I've been looking for decent chair-based split keyboard mounts and am having a hard time. I found some mouse-stands that attach to chairs, but they end up being a bit too small in all the wrong places.
Nah, they don't have very many mounting solutions available. I tried first using some camera gear / clamps and couldn't get it stuck in the right position, so I ended up using two of these gooseneck mounts: https://www.amazon.com/Tryone-Gooseneck-Tablet-Stand-Compati...
It could be more solid, but the part of the bendy neck closest to the keyboard is resting on the chair's armrest, and that's what gives it most of its stability. These guys[0] put 1/4-20 screw holes on the bottom of their split keyboards, I wish everyone did that.
They look like goose neck iPad holders. They’re probably too flexible for me and would wiggle under typing. Other than that they seem to be an elegant solution.
(Canada Specific) There can be additional tax implications depending on if you're contracting under your own name vs. a company. Using materials supplied from the companies you're contracting from can get you labeled as a Personal Services Business and not a corporation essentially treating corporation income as your personal income. This means you'd be subjected to personal income rates vs. corporation.
It's important to note it's not just this one thing that can do it, but there's a collection of things that can get you labeled as a PSB.
I've been thinking about code reviews a lot.. and I think a big problem with existing code reviews is that for most orgs, code reviews were a way to move planning to the end of the development process instead of keeping it up-front.
I think the foundation of the pyramid (API and Implementation semantics) is often discussed in code reviews when it should have almost no place. By the time you get to the code review not only should these have been ironed out and shared with the whole team. What you should be looking at is simply adherence to the plan, and calling out deviations.
> is often discussed in code reviews when it should have almost no place. By the time you get to the code review not only should these have been ironed out and shared with the whole team.
That's a fair point. It's my background in open-source and I suppose the specific ways we work in the projects I'm involved with which made me add these things at the bottom. Oftentimes, contributors come up with PRs for new features, and there was no prior discussion about API design etc. (although we highly recommend to have such discussion before starting with the work on a large PR).
I.e. oftentimes a PR review will be the first time I see how something is implemented, how the API looks like etc. It may be different with more controlled settings in in-house development teams adhering to more formally defined processes.
This is 100% a side-effect of GitHub. Open Source used to have the additional barrier of mailing lists to detract from "drive-by PRs". The side effect, of course, is that it made it much harder to get involved. GitHub really brought a lot of new eyes on open source software and lowered the barrier to contribute exacerbating (an argument could be made for creating) the drive-by PR problem.
If your indeed job posts didn't bring diverse candidates then, why do you think it would now? Because you added a "Please apply if you're DiVeRsE" line to it? Don't be ridiculous.
If you want diversity of candidates you can't keep going back to the same talent pools. You have to diversify where you're drawing talent.
If your college program is primarily getting white/asian males, you can't suddenly expect it to start throwing in women & poc as well. You can't suddenly expect it to start giving you LGBTQ+ candidates.
If you want diverse candidates, you have to look at diverse hiring pools. Look at the bootcamps that focus on diverse groups you're targeting. Look at schools that focus on diverse groups you're targeting.
If you're really interested in diverse candidates, you can't keep expecting them to just show up if you add a "We want diversity!" to your job description - you have to change where you look for them.