Location: London, UK
Remote: Yes, also open to hybrid and office
Willing to relocate: No, longer term maybe (EU passport)
Technologies: Ruby, Elixir, TypeScript, JavaScript, Node.js, Python, Go,
Shell, Bash, SQL, PostgreSQL, React, Svelte, HTML, CSS, Git,
Docker, Git, Kubernetes, Linux, CI/CD, Rails, Phoenix,
AWS, data pipelines, RMQS and other messaging/queuing systems
Résumé/CV: https://github.com/dideler/resume
Email: ideler.dennis AT gmail.com
GitHub: https://github.com/dideler
Gists: https://gist.github.com/dideler
LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/dennisideler
About: On a technical sabbatical and not actively seeking employment but open to opportunities.
Over 10 years professional experience, primarily in backend roles but am well-rounded.
Enjoy wearing different hats. Practice agile/XP but guiding principle is being pragmatic.
Have worked in various industries and teams, including highly effective product focused and data-driven teams.
Good at seeing things from different perspectives and knowing when to challenge and when to disagree and commit.
Have held director positions in small companies, and consulting positions in medium companies.
Can zoom in and out for small/big picture views, know how to lead and work with stakeholders.
Mission-driven and proactive in my work, with an emphasis on clear communication and accountability.
Preference for part-time or reduced work week (with relevant pay cut) as I'm a new dad.
I’m surprised to see that Ashley has a Wikipedia page. I would not have thought the allegations to be notable enough. But Wikipedia editors seem to disagree in an Article for Deletion [1], citing that there are high-quality sources. News outlets will easily pick up a story about taking on Apple - or anything anti-tech for that matter - and Ashley herself has been very active about it for years. She runs a consulting firm in her name that seems to focus on megacorporation reform but also advertises herself for leadership consulting. The LLC also runs several websites related to the Apple saga: gjovik.co, ashleygjovik.com, whatsintheair.org, justiceatapple.org, iwhistleblower.org
Love the list just a shame to see the 10x myth. 10xers really do exist but it's hard to think about when framing it simply as 10x programmers.
These are people who see two levels of hierarchy requesting something for months and then builds a prototype over the weekend that solves 80% of the problem. Who sees two teams arguing for days back and forth and gets them together to make a decision with them and moves on. Who sees the hours wasted every day on bad tooling and bloat and makes the bold decision to cull and simplify. Who sees a product team losing a quarter building the wrong thing and is not afraid to shut it down with the boss. They know how to hire A players and raise the bar. They know when to hire. They know when to let people go.
They are not 10xers relative to 0.1xers, these are everyday 1xer situations.
They consistently have multiple magnitudes of impact. That's not easy. For most of us that happens a lot less.
Yeah same ! I don't like hearing the word just, but sometimes it helps to stop over-engineering things, or to find arguments against the one saying "just"
Just adding an @ to the string match would make it a bit more robust. (Would still be vulnerable to jim@their.domain.my.domain, so add a $ on the end if it’s a regexp.)
But even with the most rudimentary web-dev languages you can replace the inner string match with a lowercase transform, split on @ and perform an exact string compare. Insanely simple stuff. Probably still a one-liner in any sane/productive framework.
Definitely use a real email address parser if it’s available, easy and/or you’re dealing with unknown email addresses. But absent any strange circumstances there’s also nothing wrong with basic string manipulation if it’s done properly (e.g. split on @ and test for an exact string match, case insensitive). As personal preference, I’d choose that over regexp.
Hackers deliberately create strange circumstances, it's the primary way to find exploits. Any code that relies on a lack of strange circumstances is a time-bomb.
There aren't too many strange circumstances for a properly written split/test routine. Described more precisely:—
1. Split on @
2. Get last string from array
3. Convert to lowercase
4. Perform exact string compare against target domain
It's possible that there's some window for obscure unicode hijinks, but I'd posit that a regexp parser or a "proper" email parsing library is just as at-risk. Possibly more so as those would be significantly more complicated and involve significantly more code.
It makes the preceding * less "greedy". I don't think it has any effect on the set of strings matched by this regexp, though, which is a simple string suffix check.
I don't think that's clearer because for [.] I need to remember that . does not need to be escaped in character classes whereas \. is quite clearly an escaped literal character without any advanced regexp knowledge.
Harvesting and storage of a naturally occurring element is lower maintenance in theory. It is easily stored a thousand years ago and a thousand years from now, even if some global catastrophic event occurred that renders modern technology useless.
Is there a term for these denial of service tactics that many organisations employ?
E.g. not having the authority, being the wrong person and sending you in another direction, putting the onus on you to move things forward, not responding to emails and calls, ignoring questions and selectively answering, not making contact details or policies available, and so on.
They would continue to cheat but more discretely. It's a cat and mouse game. For example, they can easily start a new gc and invite everyone but the instructor via DMs. Or invite everyone but add a verification phase. They love a challenge when it comes to outsmarting the system.
