After a decade's experience including being a project lead- you're almost always going to save more total time by asking than not if it's non-trivial to examine it yourself.
For example, right now I'm training up new people to Android who previously worked on our product on Meego. They can spend literally a day or two trying to figure out the Android code for something, how it interacts with our core, and how Android itself acts. Or I can give them an answer off the top of my head taking 10 minutes of my time, show them the relevant sections of the code, and give them ideas on what to check for. One way wastes lots of their time, the other slightly inconveniences me. The second is far better. If it begins to impact your schedule, then you need to talk to your manager and redefine expectations, obviously mentoring and helping is a larger part of your role than previously expected.
I'm not going to say there aren't exceptions. But if asking the question will save you at least an hour, it's right to ask more than 90% of the time.
It has benefits for *you*. It has detriments to all of your coworkers and your employer. It's one thing if you need to do it once in a while. Things happen, and it's a nice way to avoid sick days. And if your employer is happy with the amount of work you put out, then it's all perfectly fair. In my next job, I'm hoping to find a place that will let me work from the road a week every month or two so I can do more traveling. But be honest about it- if you're doing it regularly you are lowering the teams output from what it should be. The other forms of communication and collaboration don't come within an order of magnitude of the same effectiveness as face to face.
In my experience, people expect an instant response to IMs and get extremely upset if there isn't one. At least with email they expect a lag of 15 minutes to several hours. IMs are the worst possible way to communicate- there's an expectation of fast response combined with the lack of non-written communication methods. Plus the annoying notifications themselves which annoy me more than being asked if I'm busy.
Plus 20 minutes is an exaggeration. There's a cost, but it's more on the order of 5-10 minutes of reduced (not zero) efficiency. Whereas IM tends to be much worse- rather than 5 minutes of answering followed by 5-10 of getting back into the groove, you have 10 minutes of slowly typing back and forth waiting for responses where you get very close to 0 work done, followed by the same 5-10 minutes of getting back into the groove. It's a net loss. Which is why I refuse to ever install IM aplications- email me or come talk to me, don't waste my time on messaging.
There's no business where this isn't true. If I can take 2 hours and figure out something for myself, or ask someone and get an immediate answer, I'm asking. It's the right thing for me and the business. And the same thing in reverse (they come ask me all the time). This is especially true in a senior or lead position- if I was not to show up at the office on a given day, I'd probably cost my team half a day of productivity (even assuming I get a full day of work in). You can phone, but it isn't as effective when you can't pull up code and show them a function or show them a bug. You can email, but same problem plus a time lag. In person communication is the most efficient, by an order of magnitude- provided you use it effectively (not on minor issues).
It's nice to be able to do it when necessary. It's a nice perk to have it to enable other life balance issues- take a vacation without using vacation days by working from the hotel evenings (or days if you're there visiting friends). But as a permanent way of working? It's just not effective.
Never on a long term deal for a car. Over the lifetime of a car you'll be paying far more. The only reason to lease is if you can't afford to buy a new car- which really means you ought to buy a used one. Leasing a car is always foolish.
I've never received poor service in Europe. I receive different service due to cultural differences- they don't try to turn tables as fast as possible, they wait until asked to bring a check- because the other way is considered rude to them. But the quality of service I receive is on par with what I get in the US, without tip. If I could trade our system for theirs I would in a heartbeat.
Because you aren't. If you were investing in a company, you'd be giving them capital to use for purchasing/hiring/research. Unless you're buying in an IPO or secondary, you're not giving the company any money at all. So it's not investing, it's legalized gambling where you wager on companies, not invest in them
I don't think anyone disagrees that there are cases where it actually does help and is needed. What people are saying is that its use is too widespread and most of the children on it just need parenting and discipline. Your child may well be one of those who do actually need it. The question is how do you discern one group from the other and prevent those who don't need it from being placed on it.
Every time I've gotten a response to a resume sent to Craig's List, it's been a legit job. Perhaps this differs by category (I'm a programmer), but I don't see many scam jobs- just the occasional person who thinks programming is an order of magnitude cheaper than it is.
Advertising is the next bubble. Advertising budgets are relatively fixed, but the number of companies chasing those dollars are growing at an expanding rate. The dot com crash will be followed by the mobile app crash and web 2.0 crash in the next few years.
Ooh, I know. We could have a central authority that serves the domain->key mappings via an internet protocol. We could call it DKS- domain key service.
Or you know, that could be why it was hierarchial to begin with. Peer to peer isn't always the right answer.
Good point. And my current schedule reflects this- my 6 month bonus is going to send me to Europe for a few months. What I wanted here was more to get opinions, see what others in this situation have done.
I agree, that definitely helps. My current job has been cool in that respect- I've heard people talking about my software on the bus, in lines at stores, etc. It's made it a lot more fun to work on.
Maybe I'm trying to figure out what I should find in the next job? I'm not staying with the new company because I dislike the new owners. They actually bought the previous (and totally unrelated) startup I worked for as well.
Not in the games industry. The last job was mobile software. Eh I was going to be mysterious so I couldn't be traced back to my name, but screw it. I worked at a company called Swype making mobile phone keyboards. I was the lead developer for the Android platform, which included responsibility for most of the core (since Android was more than 95% of volume shipped).
That sounds like my job. I'm 50% dev, 50% PM, and 20% people manager. There are weeks when I don't code at all, just respond to bugs with various forms of "by design", "won't fix", or comments on how to fix it and ship it off to some junior engineer. I try to fix one or two real bugs myself, but my days are so full of talking to PMs, managers, etc that I just don't have time.
I don't hate the role. There are times when the lack of coding annoys me, but there's other times when I actually enjoy my additional responsibilities (seeing a junior dev I mentored coming into his own) and the force multiplier it can bring (just being able to write down how to fix a problem I know off the bat and not having to go through all the trivial work of implementing the solution). But I don't have much of the management overhead other than dealing with my team- I don't do budgets, planning meetings, etc. And I'm not sure I would want them, so I've been hesitant to move up in the management side.
To form a startup (I have no interest in being a consultant type, I despise business networking and self-salesmanship) I'd need a brilliant idea. I'm out of those at the moment. I'd also need someone else to do the business end. I understand business, but I'm not enough of a people person to do the sales/marketing stuff with non-technical people.
Also, I have a mortgage. That makes me leery of not having income for more than a year. I'd need to get angel funding very quickly, which once again requires a hell of an idea. I'm really not the type of guy who comes up with revolutionary ideas, I'm the type who figures out how to implement one or does small evolutionary type ideas.
I've had a pretty varied career so far. My first job was firmware, I did that for 4 and a half years. I did back end web services for 2 and a half . I did porting to proprietary OSes for two. I've now done Android development for 2 more. I did some short contract stints in between doing odds and ends, the longest one programming for a really bad ERP system.
Another change in domain (or going back to one I haven't done in a while) would definitely be a possibility. It would make it seem less of a move sideways. I'm definitely keeping my options open on that front.
IF you're just starting your own company and buying a house, you are an idiot. At that point you continue renting to minimize your outgoing cash flow so you can survive longer if the business is slow to break even. Why would you take on debt at a time when your incoming salary is uncertain?
They have that in the US too, both parties have a whip in both the senate and the house. It's considered the #2 leadership position within the party for that body (#1 being the majority or minority leader, depending on who has more members).
It also depends on what exactly your job is. As a programmer, I make double that with stock. It's actually not too far from what I made at my first job ten years ago. Help desk will make far less. Lumping everyone together makes these surveys useless. It's like averaging nurses with surgeons and reporting an average "medical field" salary. Pointless, noone makes that- they make far more or far less.
WHich is why trying to use the term "IT" for all of these different jobs is stupid. They're completely different categories with no meaningful relationship. Break it into two groups (programming/architects and network admin/system admin/help desk) and you at least break it into functional groups that do the same thing (although still only marginally useful, as help desk is usually paid so much less). But doing anything across both groups at once is pointless, it only serves to confuse people.
Slashdot Mirror
After a decade's experience including being a project lead- you're almost always going to save more total time by asking than not if it's non-trivial to examine it yourself.
For example, right now I'm training up new people to Android who previously worked on our product on Meego. They can spend literally a day or two trying to figure out the Android code for something, how it interacts with our core, and how Android itself acts. Or I can give them an answer off the top of my head taking 10 minutes of my time, show them the relevant sections of the code, and give them ideas on what to check for. One way wastes lots of their time, the other slightly inconveniences me. The second is far better. If it begins to impact your schedule, then you need to talk to your manager and redefine expectations, obviously mentoring and helping is a larger part of your role than previously expected.
I'm not going to say there aren't exceptions. But if asking the question will save you at least an hour, it's right to ask more than 90% of the time.
It has benefits for *you*. It has detriments to all of your coworkers and your employer. It's one thing if you need to do it once in a while. Things happen, and it's a nice way to avoid sick days. And if your employer is happy with the amount of work you put out, then it's all perfectly fair. In my next job, I'm hoping to find a place that will let me work from the road a week every month or two so I can do more traveling. But be honest about it- if you're doing it regularly you are lowering the teams output from what it should be. The other forms of communication and collaboration don't come within an order of magnitude of the same effectiveness as face to face.
In my experience, people expect an instant response to IMs and get extremely upset if there isn't one. At least with email they expect a lag of 15 minutes to several hours. IMs are the worst possible way to communicate- there's an expectation of fast response combined with the lack of non-written communication methods. Plus the annoying notifications themselves which annoy me more than being asked if I'm busy.
Plus 20 minutes is an exaggeration. There's a cost, but it's more on the order of 5-10 minutes of reduced (not zero) efficiency. Whereas IM tends to be much worse- rather than 5 minutes of answering followed by 5-10 of getting back into the groove, you have 10 minutes of slowly typing back and forth waiting for responses where you get very close to 0 work done, followed by the same 5-10 minutes of getting back into the groove. It's a net loss. Which is why I refuse to ever install IM aplications- email me or come talk to me, don't waste my time on messaging.
There's no business where this isn't true. If I can take 2 hours and figure out something for myself, or ask someone and get an immediate answer, I'm asking. It's the right thing for me and the business. And the same thing in reverse (they come ask me all the time). This is especially true in a senior or lead position- if I was not to show up at the office on a given day, I'd probably cost my team half a day of productivity (even assuming I get a full day of work in). You can phone, but it isn't as effective when you can't pull up code and show them a function or show them a bug. You can email, but same problem plus a time lag. In person communication is the most efficient, by an order of magnitude- provided you use it effectively (not on minor issues).
It's nice to be able to do it when necessary. It's a nice perk to have it to enable other life balance issues- take a vacation without using vacation days by working from the hotel evenings (or days if you're there visiting friends). But as a permanent way of working? It's just not effective.
Since the average lifetime of a car is far more than 3 years- yes, it's always foolish to pay for that. If you lease a car, you're a fucking moron.
Neither does copyright. Google George Harrison, MY Sweet Lord, and subconscious plagiarism
Never on a long term deal for a car. Over the lifetime of a car you'll be paying far more. The only reason to lease is if you can't afford to buy a new car- which really means you ought to buy a used one. Leasing a car is always foolish.
I've never received poor service in Europe. I receive different service due to cultural differences- they don't try to turn tables as fast as possible, they wait until asked to bring a check- because the other way is considered rude to them. But the quality of service I receive is on par with what I get in the US, without tip. If I could trade our system for theirs I would in a heartbeat.
Because you aren't. If you were investing in a company, you'd be giving them capital to use for purchasing/hiring/research. Unless you're buying in an IPO or secondary, you're not giving the company any money at all. So it's not investing, it's legalized gambling where you wager on companies, not invest in them
I don't think anyone disagrees that there are cases where it actually does help and is needed. What people are saying is that its use is too widespread and most of the children on it just need parenting and discipline. Your child may well be one of those who do actually need it. The question is how do you discern one group from the other and prevent those who don't need it from being placed on it.
Every time I've gotten a response to a resume sent to Craig's List, it's been a legit job. Perhaps this differs by category (I'm a programmer), but I don't see many scam jobs- just the occasional person who thinks programming is an order of magnitude cheaper than it is.
Advertising is the next bubble. Advertising budgets are relatively fixed, but the number of companies chasing those dollars are growing at an expanding rate. The dot com crash will be followed by the mobile app crash and web 2.0 crash in the next few years.
Ooh, I know. We could have a central authority that serves the domain->key mappings via an internet protocol. We could call it DKS- domain key service.
Or you know, that could be why it was hierarchial to begin with. Peer to peer isn't always the right answer.
Good point. And my current schedule reflects this- my 6 month bonus is going to send me to Europe for a few months. What I wanted here was more to get opinions, see what others in this situation have done.
I agree, that definitely helps. My current job has been cool in that respect- I've heard people talking about my software on the bus, in lines at stores, etc. It's made it a lot more fun to work on.
Maybe I'm trying to figure out what I should find in the next job? I'm not staying with the new company because I dislike the new owners. They actually bought the previous (and totally unrelated) startup I worked for as well.
Not in the games industry. The last job was mobile software. Eh I was going to be mysterious so I couldn't be traced back to my name, but screw it. I worked at a company called Swype making mobile phone keyboards. I was the lead developer for the Android platform, which included responsibility for most of the core (since Android was more than 95% of volume shipped).
That sounds like my job. I'm 50% dev, 50% PM, and 20% people manager. There are weeks when I don't code at all, just respond to bugs with various forms of "by design", "won't fix", or comments on how to fix it and ship it off to some junior engineer. I try to fix one or two real bugs myself, but my days are so full of talking to PMs, managers, etc that I just don't have time.
I don't hate the role. There are times when the lack of coding annoys me, but there's other times when I actually enjoy my additional responsibilities (seeing a junior dev I mentored coming into his own) and the force multiplier it can bring (just being able to write down how to fix a problem I know off the bat and not having to go through all the trivial work of implementing the solution). But I don't have much of the management overhead other than dealing with my team- I don't do budgets, planning meetings, etc. And I'm not sure I would want them, so I've been hesitant to move up in the management side.
To form a startup (I have no interest in being a consultant type, I despise business networking and self-salesmanship) I'd need a brilliant idea. I'm out of those at the moment. I'd also need someone else to do the business end. I understand business, but I'm not enough of a people person to do the sales/marketing stuff with non-technical people.
Also, I have a mortgage. That makes me leery of not having income for more than a year. I'd need to get angel funding very quickly, which once again requires a hell of an idea. I'm really not the type of guy who comes up with revolutionary ideas, I'm the type who figures out how to implement one or does small evolutionary type ideas.
I've had a pretty varied career so far. My first job was firmware, I did that for 4 and a half years. I did back end web services for 2 and a half . I did porting to proprietary OSes for two. I've now done Android development for 2 more. I did some short contract stints in between doing odds and ends, the longest one programming for a really bad ERP system.
Another change in domain (or going back to one I haven't done in a while) would definitely be a possibility. It would make it seem less of a move sideways. I'm definitely keeping my options open on that front.
IF you're just starting your own company and buying a house, you are an idiot. At that point you continue renting to minimize your outgoing cash flow so you can survive longer if the business is slow to break even. Why would you take on debt at a time when your incoming salary is uncertain?
They have that in the US too, both parties have a whip in both the senate and the house. It's considered the #2 leadership position within the party for that body (#1 being the majority or minority leader, depending on who has more members).
It also depends on what exactly your job is. As a programmer, I make double that with stock. It's actually not too far from what I made at my first job ten years ago. Help desk will make far less. Lumping everyone together makes these surveys useless. It's like averaging nurses with surgeons and reporting an average "medical field" salary. Pointless, noone makes that- they make far more or far less.
WHich is why trying to use the term "IT" for all of these different jobs is stupid. They're completely different categories with no meaningful relationship. Break it into two groups (programming/architects and network admin/system admin/help desk) and you at least break it into functional groups that do the same thing (although still only marginally useful, as help desk is usually paid so much less). But doing anything across both groups at once is pointless, it only serves to confuse people.
The name doesn't help. "Man driva" sounds like a gay porn.