Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

letsnotdothat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 173 posts

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#151

Post by tsunamifury »

llamaLord wrote: post #123
tsunamifury wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been a pm Eng and designer and this sort of patronizing attitude sucks. Look at the end of the day you should be cultivating fellow thought leaders because when you grow up you learn your priorities are more often than not just your own egotistical nonsense and wrong. But you have a lot of phrases to cut others down. Try something different.

Sure there were some buzz words in there... But the actual core of the post wasn't patronising at all. Might need to take a step back and ask why your response to that was so strong.

Hundreds of borderline moron PMs. Armies of them.

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#152

Post by DrScientist »

caminante wrote: post #105
DrScientist wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When comparing countries of different sizes - the fairest way to do so is on a per capita basis [1] and the US is still way ahead of China. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita [1] As somebody has pointed out below - a lot of those Chinese emissions are ultimately produced for use in other countries. Places like the UK have simply shipped their emissions overseas - then complain about these coun…

China has been responsible for 90% of the global growth in emissions since 2015. [0] Their population didn't change more than ~2%. [0] https://dialogue.earth/en/climate/chinas-manufacturing-pushe... > As somebody has pointed out below - a lot of those Chinese emissions are ultimately produced for use in other countries. Not really. See domestic power demand growth for non-green applications. [0]

It's easy to have the highest growth if you start from nowhere - when somebody quotes growth you should instantly be on guard for BS. For example the US could have gone from 1000 to 1020, and China from 200 to 220 - focusing on the larger percentage increase from China is rather missing the point.

You are also forgetting total carbon emissions over the lifetime of a country - developed countries are responsible for a lot of the carbon in the atmosphere - and while developing countries might be catching up in day to day emissions they are nowhere in catching up in total emissions.

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#153

Post by titusjohnson »

peterkelly wrote: post #140
titusjohnson wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on both sides of this table multiple times, as the IC and as the Manager of an eager IC. Here's a list of all the reasons why I as your manager would also flat-out say No to this situation. (These are of course heavily tainted by my own recent experience of trying to coach a mid-level dev through a very similar problem) - "Pretty much working" means all the fun stuff is done and the actual hard thing is lef…

And that's how you lose good developers

In my opinion this is how we shed good coders who are bad developers.

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#154

Post by ryandrake »

sfn42 wrote: post #127
titusjohnson wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on both sides of this table multiple times, as the IC and as the Manager of an eager IC. Here's a list of all the reasons why I as your manager would also flat-out say No to this situation. (These are of course heavily tainted by my own recent experience of trying to coach a mid-level dev through a very similar problem) - "Pretty much working" means all the fun stuff is done and the actual hard thing is lef…

You have a lot of good points and some of it may have been applicable in my case. But this was not complicated. I have underestimated refactors before, this was not one of those times. This was a simple little thing, just getting some data from point A to point B. It would have been easy to verify that the new solution generated the same pages (data in db tables) as the old one. I didnt undermine anyone. I brought it…

I guess it also depends on the size of the company and how big of an existing system you are working within. If you are at a decent sized company, then there is no such thing as "not a big deal.' I posted this[1] a while ago in response to a similar complaint about how difficult it is to just wing it in a big company, and I think it's also relevant to this thread.

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29644628

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#155

Post by caminante »

DrScientist wrote: post #152
caminante wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has been responsible for 90% of the global growth in emissions since 2015. [0] Their population didn't change more than ~2%. [0] https://dialogue.earth/en/climate/chinas-manufacturing-pushe... > As somebody has pointed out below - a lot of those Chinese emissions are ultimately produced for use in other countries. Not really. See domestic power demand growth for non-green applications. [0]

It's easy to have the highest growth if you start from nowhere - when somebody quotes growth you should instantly be on guard for BS. For example the US could have gone from 1000 to 1020, and China from 200 to 220 - focusing on the larger percentage increase from China is rather missing the point. You are also forgetting total carbon emissions over the lifetime of a country - developed countries are responsible for a…

Your first paragraph is so strange, given my link and the source showing China is already responsible for +30% of global ghg emissions.

This is directly to your point. You ironically have US and China flipped, and China is largest AND fastest growing.

And cumulative emissions? Another ironic critique, given China is by far the largest and fastest growing emitter. Assuming you agree with the 1.5C target increase, we have a limited budget. Allowing a catchup (cumulative/per capita?) isn't sustainable to achieve climate goals.

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#156

Post by LtWorf »

saulpw wrote: post #126
badgersnake wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you market is engineers that’s not such a bad idea.

Engineers notoriously don't buy things (at least not when they're acting as engineers).

Because they are never given budget to do so :D

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#157

Post by hansvm »

kstrauser wrote: post #115
hansvm wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> thou shalt not live-edit prod Even then, there's some nuance. During an outage, cowboy coding can get you back up and running much faster.

Yeah, depending on the particulars of a system. If you're at a startup and report to the CTO, that might be perfectly fine in an emergency . At a company with a few million users, almost certainly not. There's a spectrum of possibilities.

In an emergency, that sort of thing even happens at Google (more for their smaller services, and almost always in the form of auto-LGTM hot-fixes bypassing the normal checks rather than actual live-editing of a script or binary, but even that latter thing happens occasionally). There are checks and controls, but an emergency for a billion users is a big deal.

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#158

Post by DrScientist »

caminante wrote: post #155
DrScientist wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to have the highest growth if you start from nowhere - when somebody quotes growth you should instantly be on guard for BS. For example the US could have gone from 1000 to 1020, and China from 200 to 220 - focusing on the larger percentage increase from China is rather missing the point. You are also forgetting total carbon emissions over the lifetime of a country - developed countries are responsible for a…

Your first paragraph is so strange, given my link and the source showing China is already responsible for +30% of global ghg emissions. This is directly to your point. You ironically have US and China flipped, and China is largest AND fastest growing. And cumulative emissions? Another ironic critique, given China is by far the largest and fastest growing emitter. Assuming you agree with the 1.5C target increase, we h…

It's about per capita basis - it's still roughly half the US emissions per capita and while it may be growing it still has a long way to catch up.

The population of China is about 4x the US.

> Allowing a catchup (cumulative/per capita?) isn't sustainable to achieve climate goals.

Sure. But the current US position is to leave the Paris accords and drill baby drill - while China is leading on renewable generation.

Hardly anybody is doing enough - but blaming others and doubling down on consumption it's a sustainable strategy either.

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#159

Post by caminante »

DrScientist wrote: post #158
caminante wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first paragraph is so strange, given my link and the source showing China is already responsible for +30% of global ghg emissions. This is directly to your point. You ironically have US and China flipped, and China is largest AND fastest growing. And cumulative emissions? Another ironic critique, given China is by far the largest and fastest growing emitter. Assuming you agree with the 1.5C target increase, we h…

It's about per capita basis - it's still roughly half the US emissions per capita and while it may be growing it still has a long way to catch up. The population of China is about 4x the US. > Allowing a catchup (cumulative/per capita?) isn't sustainable to achieve climate goals. Sure. But the current US position is to leave the Paris accords and drill baby drill - while China is leading on renewable generation. Hard…

> while China is leading on renewable generation.

...and they're also #1 by far on GHG emissions, which doesn't offset even proportionally.

It's like saying Bob might be a murderer, but...he's really works hard to teach each Sunday during Bible study. You're just moving the goalpost (and you never acknowledged how your initial critique about number sense was off base).

> Sure. But the current US position is to leave the Paris accords and drill baby drill

Whataboutism fallacy on top of recency bias, i.e., the US has been the largest producer of natgas since 2009 and petro since 2013.

Re: Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'

#160

Post by DrScientist »

caminante wrote: post #159
DrScientist wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about per capita basis - it's still roughly half the US emissions per capita and while it may be growing it still has a long way to catch up. The population of China is about 4x the US. > Allowing a catchup (cumulative/per capita?) isn't sustainable to achieve climate goals. Sure. But the current US position is to leave the Paris accords and drill baby drill - while China is leading on renewable generation. Hard…

> while China is leading on renewable generation. ...and they're also #1 by far on GHG emissions, which doesn't offset even proportionally. It's like saying Bob might be a murderer, but...he's really works hard to teach each Sunday during Bible study. You're just moving the goalpost (and you never acknowledged how your initial critique about number sense was off base). > Sure. But the current US position is to leave…

Eh?

Do people in China emit less carbon per person than the US or not?

Post reply on HN