Misleading role description!
- They only search for an onsite/hybrid role as they have an office starting this month (but their comment lists remote, too) and “want” to work there.
- Disappointing: CEO [name redacted] finds it for some reason important to answer from a generic jobs address hiding his name, similarly attributing the office policy to the team. — Lack of ownership of management. But might fit to the automotive industry’s culture.
I wonder if they have a problem with the core functionality of the program. Maybe they do not want any Windows Recall clones popping up before they can offer their own solution, so they've decided to stamp down on this (screen recording timelapse software) because it is vaguely in the same category.
Years ago I ditched Celery in favour of using BLPOP with redis.
It was multiple times faster than Celery. Is this still the case today?
So with vanilla Redis you need less workers for same throughput; if you need more throughput, spawn multiple workers.
The only new cars I'd consider are the Mazda MX-5 and Dacia, to be honest. Porsches are also generally good, but they are way too expensive new and too good for the street. Even the old ones have so much potential that pushing them to the limit on the way to work is straight up dangerous and antisocial.
To which extent was the implementation in C# benefitting off both the clarified requirements (so the Rust experience could be seen more as prototyping mixed with production)?
Was it actually in major parts just a major refactor in a different language (admittedly with much more proven elements)?
I challenge this:
How do you measure processing time?
From first customer interaction? Or from all input data are present?
I assume in most situations they are not present upfront.
Therefore it’s a tedious back and forth. Sure, that compounds with the roundtrip time.
Digitisation is a trap because it doesn’t change the paradigm to full-kit upfront necessarily. Digitisation can be a nice entry-point to this, but unfortunately digitising data does not necessarily introduce the full-kit.
The system needs to be designed in a different way:
“We guarantee processing within x hours (weekdays) from the point you’ve provided us a full-kit.”
This, in turn, requires thinking backwards from the result through all steps, resulting in a definition of what a full-kit entails. Of course this requires a different (system) thinking which is contradicted by the rigid hierarchy (and no, doing away with the hierarchy isn’t a solution either).
Work force would not be busy 80% of their time = capacity to go back and forth to figure what’s missing and switch around cases. When starting with full-kit, 80% of their wasted time becomes processing time. In turn, their throughput was 20%, it goes up to 100%, or x5.
We were searching for a long-lasting washing machine 2 years ago.
We asked local electrician shops with their classic Miele sign.
Not one but many were recommending us AGAINST Miele due to recent quality problems. One electrician went with us to the models he had in-store.
They changed the door now from metal to plastic.
While Miele is bragging about their internal tests “our machines are tested to hold up against usage for up to 20 years”, they offer you a meagre 2 years warranty (that is compulsory in Germany). Well, guys, if you brag about your reliability, why can’t you even offer a 3 (!) year warranty for no additional cost if your product cost up to twice the price of a BSH device. “Well, you can purchase warranty extension for additional cost.” FU.
…and recently Miele has problems selling their stuff for quality problems and they try to compensate for that by cutting costs by moving production out from Germany.
There is a market for old Miele washing machines. If they get defect, it’s usually shock absorbers or other easily repairable parts. Once repaired they last long. Of course with the higher electricity & water consumption.
Dishwashers…
My father in law had rust issue with their dish rack of their Miele dish washer. The replacement part cost > 50% of a new dish washer. So he went with a a new Miele dish washer. Result: The new dish washer uses less water to save water. How does it work with less water? Doubling the runtime. Doubling the runtime doubles the wear and tear of parts. Assuming still same quality parts, the dish washer’s life time is halved. He should have been better off with replacing the dish rack.
I’ve turned some time ago a build and deploy script (single production server) some bash scripts into Haskell using Turtle [1].
What I enjoyed was the ability to reduce redundancies significantly.
It was significantly shorter code afterwards.
I recently tried Turtle but ended up throwing it out in favour of typed-process.
Afaik a Turtle program has a single current directory, which makes it hard when you want to run concurrent jobs that need to be executed from particular directories. I partially solved the problem by using locks/queues/workers. But it got too much for me when Turtle started failing due to its current directory being deleted.
In contrast, typed-process lets you spawn separate processes, and execute within a working dir (rather than needing to cd there), so it works great for big, complicated workflows.
And it also has good support for OverloadedStrings, which means you can generally copy & paste what you would have typed into bash, and it just works.
I also use the interpolate package (with QuasiQuotes) to make the raw strings nicer in the source code, but it's not compatible with hlint, so I'm thinking of looking for a different package for string-handling.
Author of Shh [0] here. I've replaced a lot of Bash with Haskell (it's great!). I wrote Shh to help me out with that.
I ended up liking PyF [1] for quasiquoting. A friend of mine worked with the author a while ago to strip down it's dependencies, so it's easy to justify. It's what I recommend in my cargo culting guide [2].
Pauses. I am experimenting with basic scheme of 25 mins focus and then 5 mins pause. It is mind blowing how it lowers frustration and sort of ensures that I start work only on a clear task which I often tend to loose to easily.
The biggest surprise are the pauses (no, no email checking or web browsing; get up and move around). While formerly I experienced it that I don't have enough time to do what I want to do, I experience just the opposite of it during pauses. Now, what do I do in this time? Wow. That's new.
But also hard to stick to it. But there is more to it, the rules and principles that go along with it.
Sounds like the Pomodoro Technique [0] (also mentioned in the article). Glad it is working out for you!
I tried that to help with my ADHD with very little and very fleeting success.
The classic Pomodoro is said to be 25minn + 5 mins break, which adds up to half an hour, which is a common measurement unit for time worked. I've discovered that for my needs, a 20 min pomodoro with 5 mins rest works better.
The problem is that Pomodoros are hard to count if you hit flow state and find it hard to stop when the timer rings.
To add a data point, I used to do Pomodoro timing (25+5 min) but now switched to 15 min timer with a loose 2-5 min break. It's still hard to actually pull out of hyper-focus/anxious perseveration sometimes, but the shorter timer period seems to match my task cadence better. And the non-timed break just vibes better because it doesn't feel like punishment then.
reply