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

Redis Core Team Update

redislabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–76 of 76 posts

Re: Redis Core Team Update

#71

Post by pfranz »

mellosouls wrote: post #62
pfranz wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always think of the famous Hindenburg crash tape. "it's a terrific crash" 1937 for those, like me, that weren't sure of the decade. https://genius.com/Herbert-morrison-hindenburg-disaster-broa...

Sure - but that is "terrific" in the still-current sense of "massive, of great size" - not the archaic use in the parent.

The only reason I remember that use is because it sounded out of place to me.

This posting [1] puts the usage change from around 1880-1930. I've always taken the modern usage to mean unusually fine/magnificent.

[1] https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38606/what-gave-...

Re: Redis Core Team Update

#72

Post by wwright »

dijit wrote: post #55
wwright wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you claiming that you couldn’t find any woman who was qualified for your project?

It was true, at the time. I live in a third city in Sweden, in a slice of time that the company needed to find someone and we do not pay competitive wages. I’m sure we could find someone qualified eventually and if we paid enough, and we have had good female candidates at other times albeit for different roles than this one, however they didn’t want to relocate. Context being what it is, it takes us roughly 2 years t…

In that case, I would say HR is at fault not for asking that affirmative action be taken, but for not backing it up by making the job attractive in the first place.

If you can actually attract people to your company, then asking that you hire at least half women shouldn't be an issue; there are plenty of qualified women for any position. If you can't attract people to the job generally, I think any other factors would largely be noise versus the real problem.

Re: Redis Core Team Update

#73

Post by sdesol »

atombender wrote: post #69
sdesol wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm on reddit but I haven't posted in a while, so I'm not sure if what you saw was mine. Actionable software metrics is extremely hard to create, which is why we are often left with VERY LOW hanging fruit metrics or novelty metrics, as I like to call them. I honestly believe we are at a point now, where hardware is cheap and good enough, that we can generate very meaningful software metrics…

Feel free to email me when you release! My email is in my profile.

Will do and thanks for the support!

Re: Redis Core Team Update

#74

Post by dijit »

wwright wrote: post #72
dijit wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was true, at the time. I live in a third city in Sweden, in a slice of time that the company needed to find someone and we do not pay competitive wages. I’m sure we could find someone qualified eventually and if we paid enough, and we have had good female candidates at other times albeit for different roles than this one, however they didn’t want to relocate. Context being what it is, it takes us roughly 2 years t…

In that case, I would say HR is at fault not for asking that affirmative action be taken, but for not backing it up by making the job attractive in the first place. If you can actually attract people to your company, then asking that you hire at least half women shouldn't be an issue; there are plenty of qualified women for any position. If you can't attract people to the job generally, I think any other factors woul…

> then asking that you hire at least half women shouldn't be an issue;

Application rates of women for our studio borders 8%, and our previous hiring rate of women was 8%; with aggressive affirmative action policies (mostly around marketing and bringing in female code academies such as pinkprogramming[0]) we have increased this to 12%.

You don't specify /why/ the job is less attractive, I stipulated primarily two reasons:

1) Location.

2) Salary.

You might agree that moving 700+ people is a little untenable.

My argument about salary is, and very much playing devils advocate for HQ: "We don't really care who does the job as long as the job gets done, if we can pay a man less, we should hire a man".

[0]: https://www.pinkprogramming.se/en/

Re: Redis Core Team Update

#75

Post by imron »

derefr wrote: post #66
imron wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m sure people running Redis in production are happy about that. I sympathize with the main points you were making, but surely ‘people running Redis in production’ are the core use case for Redis, so ultimately this move seems good for the project’s overall direction.

Zooming out, there are two kinds of production infra software: 1. the kind that devops people directly see a need (usually a scaling need) to integrate it into a stack of existing production software ; where this integration may or may not require additional development-time work (i.e. connector glue code in the business layer), but is either way an ops use-case . Examples: any caching layer, any message queue. 2. th…

This follow up comment was insightful. Thanks.

Re: Redis Core Team Update

#76

Post by dijit »

wwright wrote: post #70
SPBS wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you jumping to that conclusion? The parent comment probably couldn't even find a person qualified to lead and you had to make it a gender thing.

The parent comment explicitly made it about gender. They explicitly said they had a man they liked but couldn't hire him because of HR.

For whatever it's worth we didn't have a man in line, we had nobody in line. But we had pressure to hire this person because it would increase the representation and the expectation was that we'd be able to train her on the job.
Post reply on HN