First 60 second impression - this looks like powershell with not-insane syntax. Looks quite revolutionary, it breaks the traditional paradigm for UNIX shells and appears to artfully refine the good concepts in Powershell (which seem to be let down severely - in my opinion - by UX issues.)
What's wrong with the powershell syntax? The long names? Those are optional. I find the idea of short names (for interactive) AND the option of long names very good. Many of these aliases are similar to unix commands (e.g. "cat" instead of Get-Content or "ls" instead of Get-Childitem).
Exactly. Once the number of stakeholders crosses a certain threshold, your lead developer will be so busy with them that they will essentially just become the manager because they wouldn't have any time to code.
Well, maybe you can call it manager. But it would be a "project manager" and no one would report to them - at least that is what I meant with the alternative that I suggested.
The EU project has always been a project rather paternalistically cultivated by US foreign operations, including intelligence operations, so I believe.
It allowed them to remove a heap of troops from forward bases in the region.
The CIA has certainly done some regrettable/shady stuff historically, as have almost all intelligence organisations that I’m aware of (reading about the history of espionage and covert activities, I often wonder how the people involved manage to preserve any sort of sanity in that mistrustful, cloak and dagger world?).
Although politically (and somewhat culturally?) natural allies, being that both entities are largely a collection of democracies/republics, if you view global economics as a zero-sum game you could say that the EU is a direct competitor to the US.
Indeed, although politically less-strongly federated/bound together, as far as I’m aware, the EU has greater wealth as a whole than the US does. Various governments, companies and individuals that oppose democratic forms of government and ‘liberal’ values see the economic strength, cooperation and mutual defence/offence promoted by an alignment of these two political organisations as counter to their interests, or potentially a threat to more authoritarian hegemonies. Contrary to what you say, the previous US administration actively supported Brexit. Many authoritarian governments around the world were also cheering it on, as presumably geo-strategically it was/is in their interests to divide and undermine democratic forms of government.
I've worked all through many London investment banks, mainly front office tech, I have rarely seen traders working weekends, and I was not compelled to work many hours greatly exceeding 40-ish.
I don't know what these jobs are that they are talking about that are greater than 60 hours. I've seen a little of it maybe in the mergers and acquisitions side of things.
As the old joke goes, a bank trusts young bankers with PowerPoint, young traders with its balance sheet. A sleepy trader could lose the bank millions. A sleepy analyst might, at worst, typo a spreadsheet that gets reviewed by an associate. Banks are incentivized to avoid sleepless traders in a way they aren't with analysts. Also, exchanges shut down at night--nobody is gaining an edge by staying up until 3AM. (Counterfactual: FX.)
(Disclaimer: I chose trading over banking. Mostly because the people were more fun. But being able to go home at 6PM on Friday, having put in your 60 hours, and turn off until 6AM on Monday was no small matter, either.)
> But being able to go home at 6PM on Friday, having put in your 60 hours
I know you are phrasing this as a better sign, but even here, I would see 60 hours/week as extreme overwork. I started tracking my hours to get a sense for how much I work in a typical week, and found that both my quality of output and my emotional state are impacted greatly by the number of hours. At 40-50 hours/week, everything is pretty reasonable. I can do 50-65 hours/week in short bursts, but not over a prolonged period. 80 hour weeks are barely possible, and will leave me absolutely shot at the end of the week, and the following week will be spent recovering from the overwork.
(Side note, my personal tracking has only gone down to a minimum of 40 hours/week, but it would be interesting to track productivity with a shorter work day/week as well.)
To each their own. I’m now in a role where my workload oscillates between 30 and 60-something hours a week. I love it, and I like the bursts, though there is recovery.
After a year or two, in trading, that sixty goes down to 50. After some more time it goes down to 40 or so. That said, those hours are work. They are intense and stressful and horrible for one’s nerves and health.
I left trading after my boss, a trim middle-aged man (I assumed) with extensive balding and some cardiac history, celebrated his thirty-second birthday.
I'd love to know where and how, because I have never seen a position offering £100k and above anywhere in this country. I have friends working as seniors for Facebook in London and they don't make £100k.
I have two guesses - either you were a contractor, or worked for a bank where I've heard it's possible to cross £100k salary. Or third option, you mean <£100k of salary + bonuses?
The one I worked for wanted me to move to London, and I said fine, as long as you give me a comparable standard of living.
Nope, they took my Irish salary and converted it to GBP, and that was it (this was post Brexit, btw).
Obviously, I didn't move. And working with any engineers in the London office was a massive pain as anyone without family commitments worked in London for a year, and then transferred to the US for a massive salary bump.
The core issue is that FAANG don't benchmark against finance in London, which means that pay is pretty out of wack.
For instance, I got a 150K offer from an investment bank in London around that time, and I'm definitely not as useful in finance as I would be in tech.
It just blows my mind that they haven't fixed this to be honest (I suspect that they'll have to, now that Brexit has actually happened).
Almost certainly the conversation is about total comp rather than base salary; at FAANG the difference is marginal (especially since at Facebook, there's no 1-year cliff; your equity starts vesting immediately every month).
But even putting that aside, most senior (E5) Facebook engineers in the UK make 125-160k base salary in the UK. Even if that's denominated in USD, that still leaves a significant % breaking 100k GBP base.
If you hire a room full of developers at high salary and nobody is capable of acquiring "the correct understanding/skills" then maybe it's not such a straightforward technology.
It is reasonably straightforward to deal with relational databases in comparison, this is a well-known space.
