61–70 of 178 posts
His description of presentations to Bezos reminds the infamous BillG reviews http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/06/16.html
Exactly.
A few years back, I found myself in a one-on-one saying: "you would think someone taking a job managing a hog farm would at least know what a hog is."
Though, that was about web-development.
A suitable allegory.
I would leave out the 'delete every third paragraph' bit, though. Or change it to 'delete anything that can be inferred.'
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a good illustration of no matter how brilliant the leader is, a bad team under them and/or poor execution can lead to failure. Even with this infighting and whatnot going on Amazon is still doing amazing things. I'd be interesting to see what it'd look like if they were able to execute everything well. It seems that's also a crucial role of the exec - if they see something that needs to be happening and it's n…
How does a good leader end up with a bad team? That's worth understanding.
I still can't believe the first post was not a fake. Gosh, it didn't contain any figures. How in a data-driven company can you propose some analysis without them?
My apologies for straying near politics but i think Yegge's just defined the best characterization of the 1% :P > In some sense you wouldn’t even be human anymore. People like Jeff are better regarded as hyper-intelligent aliens with a tangential interest in human affairs. The difference between this description and Yegge's later description of Bezos as being like the Dread Pirate Roberts of Princess Bride fame, is t…
> I think Yegge's just defined the best characterization of the 1%
"she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human" - William Gibson, "Count Zero", 1986
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're being harsh. I think it was probably more considered but I'm guessing that everything he's written since THAT post has been more considered - it would be a completely natural reaction to having accidentally laid yourself bare. After all whom amongst us having accidentally forwarded an e-mail to the wrong person hasn't got a little more careful about what we say for a while afterwards? But I still think…
Ok, maybe considered is less harsh than bland. But do you think it is a good thing? The first time I noticed this was when I listed to the original and then studio version of 2 Pac's "Hit 'em up". In the first he was really and truly angry and you could feel it. The second version was 'just there'. When actors and actresses get "into character" it is really clear. They mean what they act and it seems natural. let us…
Yegge's original piece was making a specific point and he came out with examples that supported that but that doesn't mean that those examples represent Yegge's overall view of Bezos and it's reasonable that he might want to throw out the other side of it.
In terms of whether it's honest - from both pieces I think it's fairly clear that Yegge doesn't believe that Bezos gives a shit what Yegge thinks so I see no reason why Yegge wouldn't be being truthful.
But even if Yegge was toning himself down, I don't have an issue with that.
I think that among some in the tech community there is a feeling that "honesty" and "truth" tend to trump everything. While that's great in theory the baggage (usually personal offence) that comes with it has to be considered.
Ultimately life is about getting stuff done and for most of us who aren't Jobs or Bezos level genius where brutal honesty will be forgiven, a "polished" truth will often get us better responses from others than it's more brutal counterpart.
If that's the case we all have to ask ourselves do you want to be right, or do you want to get things done?
Note: I'm not talking about lying here, I'm just talking about how you present the truth.
Steve, if you are reading this, any chance you can throw some light on the core skills a generalist engineer ought to know ?
https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/five-essential-pho...
This is a Steve's post on how he conducts and what he expects from phone interviews.
It's over seven years old so proceed with care -- it's possible that his views changed since then.
Also, this is probably more of a bare minimum rather than the whole picture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that was just polite talk. This isn't new -- this has been a glaring issue for a while. And if they were serious about it, Brin wouldn't have replied so flippantly. Google is just a one product company (with Gmail being the exception that proves the rule) lacking the humility and gravitas to be more.
Android, Youtube, and Maps aren't products?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, maybe considered is less harsh than bland. But do you think it is a good thing? The first time I noticed this was when I listed to the original and then studio version of 2 Pac's "Hit 'em up". In the first he was really and truly angry and you could feel it. The second version was 'just there'. When actors and actresses get "into character" it is really clear. They mean what they act and it seems natural. let us…
The problem is that anger often sounds more authentic but anyone who has ever been angry will testify that what you say when you're angry (or even just irritated) doesn't necessarily reflect your actual view, just one facet of it. Yegge's original piece was making a specific point and he came out with examples that supported that but that doesn't mean that those examples represent Yegge's overall view of Bezos and it…
I do not think only anger can be conveyed.
I am not being specific about this very situation. And I agree that being diplomatic can be more effective most times.
Edited: To provide contest for question.