141–150 of 191 posts
Good grief people - It's satire. The entire thing is meant to be funny. I didn't even think it was particularly subtle so I'm not sure how others are seeing it any other way.
Took me until point 4...
A lot of this is believable (i.e. can be taken for real, not satire) if you don't read into each point, because a lot of it is quite different from how Google does things: 1. At Google, code has to be designed, written, tested, and reviewed. You can't just start writing and shipping stuff, partly because there's so much infrastructure, and partly because you pay for shoddy code later. Google has long outgrown the kin…
you are assuming it's impossible to design, write, test and review a small change or a small set of changes and get it into production quickly. The assumption is wrong, all you need is good people, the right processes (formal and informal, i.e. discipline) and the right tools. That's what continuous deployment is about
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still don't see how satire is supposed to detect anything other than who gets that it's satire, and who takes it at face value -- which is not even possible until you, uhhh, read or saw the satire. So that point of yours, it's lost on me unless you elaborate.
My premise is that people who fail to detect satire do so because their existing bias makes them see what they want to see. People apparently disable their critical thinking apparatus when presented with an argument that even superficially resembles their own viewpoint.
Reverse linkbait, let's hope that's not the new PR trend.
Just a recruitment propaganda piece. And actually what #1 tells me: "Come to Facebook, and have your share of ever growing giant smoking unmaintainable pile of (php) code."
Must admit I've stopped after the firtst, but: With thousands of programmers, what real features have been released to facebook.com? I often ask myself what those thousands of programmers do, as a user (I know not customer in this case) I can't see it. All of them mobile? Ads? Image recognition? With thousands of programmers should't the output be (5 people dev teams, one feature a month) hundreds of features/stories…
I understand it's tongue-in-cheek, but #2 is actually worrisome: > There’s even a “no meeting Wednesday” meme in the company, which you might as well call a “failure to communicate” death wish. Software needs to be talked about and debated, not simply written. It’s lunacy to be writing and shipping code at a blistering pace, instead of letting things bake a bit in committees representing broad swaths of all semi-affe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your meeting absolutely positively must happen on a known weekly no-meeting day then there's really only three cases I can see: 1. You are bad at planning 2. You are bad at communicating 3. Something really, really bad happened and people will understand breaking policy There's a big difference between "no meetings ever" and this.
Sadly there is a particular type of person who discovers the day that nobody is supposed to go to meetings is the day when everybody is free and the meeting rooms are available. And then starts scheduling meetings for that day.
In this case, I'd say there's no/negligible cost to missing the meetings on a no-meeting day, unless the entire group of people have decided that it is worth breaking the no-meeting rule. Of course, you should let people know that you won't be there in advance...