He gave me one last tip. If I ever want to have a career in a management role, like CTO in the future, I must emphasize more on “taking credits” from the beginning of my career. He said being humble or modest is overrated and it would not do me any good for my career.
I don't really know if any of this is true, or what the context is. Maybe this is how it is in American Corporate culture, but it's not really how I experienced it.
If you're a beginner programmer, sure, you can brag about how cool your code is, and how much you've build. But if at some point you become a lead developer and you're still doing that, it seems kinda toxic.
As lead developer in the standup or reports I'd usually downplay what I did - like instead of saying "I build this cool new feature" - present it as "The backend team build this cool new feature". If someone else build something cool, I would specific say something like "Bob build a really cool feature"
I must emphasize more on “taking credits” from the beginning of my career. He said being humble or modest is overrated and it would not do me any good for my career.
A good Team Lead or CTO needs a good team, and the team usually appreciates it a lot more if you're spreading the credits around instead of taking them for yourself.
Besides that, a random developer in a big company is very unlikely to just become the CTO by not being humble. If you want to become a CTO, you either join a startup or start your own company
I don't know if this is a relatively "new" computing paradigm, though if you compare it to the pre-2010 area, its pretty much the standard for bigger applications. And I think it's very much tied in with the Move to Cloud Computing paradigm.
In the good old days everyone just had their own servers running somewhere, so what are you going to do when its super busy on your platform? Add a new server for a couple of days? If you have a new server anyways, you'd just permanently add it to the network.
With cloud computing, as you mentioned, there's Service orchestration like kubernetes, auto-scaling of bare-metal machines, and Serverless Applications that just keep track of usage and allow you to very easily temporary add more power based on demand, and upscale your infra for the time that it's needed.
If you start getting into paradigms like that, you might end up with 100s of services running at the same time (multiple copies of the same services for load balancing, or edge-locationing etc) - Then you also don't want to put cross-cutting like logging and analytics hard-coded in every service like you'd potentially do in a monolith. And you need those kinda metrics to see that everything is still running healthy, and to automatically kill unhealthy services to replace them with new ones, etc
Just wondering, what's the purpose of the logo / where is it shown? If the logo is just the favicon - you could create a very elaborate logo, but it doesn't really show up in a 25x25 image
Yea, I kept my original comment language-agnostic (Just referring to it as y language) - but added the extra wink to Rust because generally they seem to be the highest offenders.
I have years of experience in loads of languages: PHP, Ruby, Java, Python, C#, C++, Rust - And that's probably how I'd order the level of elitism. PHP Devs know everything they're doing is shit - Python should probably be next in ranking of how shit they are, but they're not self-aware enough - (Sarcastic elitism aside here - )
Anyways, besides that - at the end of the elitism-spectrum there seems to be Rust. Someone like me says something about Rust in a general unrelated-to-Rust thread like this - and a Rust enthusiast sees it, and it would just devolve into a dumbass back-end-forth about how good Rust is
Could you elaborate in what context and to what extend? I can agree that bigger companies with large user-bases should have a focus on accessibility and internationalization -
But generally a lot of projects start with just one dev solving a problem they have themselves and make their solution Open-Source. Anecdotally, I'm dumping my solutions on Github that are already barely accessible to anyone somewhat tech-illiterate. No one is paying me anything for it. Why would I care whether it's accessible or internationalized for non-English speakers?
This. I've had someone in my team that was completely self-taught with no relevant education that was a great dev.
I've also interviewed someone that supposedly had a master degree and a couple of certificates and couldn't remember how to create a loop during the interview.
I don't know how you could properly implement "standardization of qualification and competencies" without just min-maxing it in a way that favors academics
Well sure, it depends on the context. If it's a shitpost on /c/programmer_humor, whatever, meaningless banter.
If it's a serious question, (maybe for a beginner) asking how to do something in their language, and the response is "It would be a lot easier in y language" - I don't think it's particularly helpful
Probably less elitism. "Oh you build it in x language? Well that's a shit language. You should use y language instead. We should be converting everything to y language because y language is the most superior language!"
(If this feels like a personal attack, Rust programmers, yes. But other languages as well)
$22k is pretty nice. Through I have no idea what "the prettier JavaScript tests" even means.
Is there a unit-test bootstap project someone could download that verifies this requirement? I'm already too confused deciphering what the contest even is
How do you stop this? (Sorry I only have paint on this machine)
Computer/Network is compromised
User requests public key from Server
Hacker intercepts it, sends his own public key
User tries to connect with "verification" servers
Requests get redirected to compromised servers to OK the verification
User sends request to Server via Hacker with Hacker PubKey
Hacker decrypts it, re-signs it with Server PubKey
Sends it to server, gets response
Hacker decrypts server response, re-encrypts it with Hacker Private Key
Users receives message, can decrypt it with Hacker PubKey, everything looks normal
You're just substituting a local "Chain of Trust" with a server based trust system... Why would you trust that you can securely call the verification servers, and even if you can, why trust the verification servers?
Really I don’t understand why we are still using a chain of trust that is
It would basically be mutually assured destruction if one of these trusted root certificates would hand out false certificates. If evidence comes to light that a Root Certificate Authority creates false certificates or can't be trusted somehow, they get delisted. For example, look up "TrustCor" - they were too closely tied to US intelligence that everyone (Mozilla, Microsoft, Google, Apple) removed them as trusted CAs
a DNS record that hold the HASH of the public key of the certificate of the website !
How are you getting that record safely, over the internet? There's DNS cache poisoning and other attack vectors on DNS related services that would still let you MITM https.
Systems that rely on you to go on the internet to check if the internet is safe can just as well be compromised. How do you ensure the "internet based trust lookup" can be trusted?
From the screenshots it looks pretty easy to compile:
If they just ripped their entire git repos or something, and it's complete, it should be pretty easy to compile.
Edit: Compile instructions: https://pastebin.com/igt8BM4S