doppel

I feel it's completely acceptable to wish to stay in an IC position, but to refuse outright to give advise or share the experience (it's hard to tell from your short paragraph) seems... odd?

It's acceptable to want to stay in a specific role, but I am not certain I feel it's acceptable to eschew an increasing responsibility or mentoring role as you gain experience. That way lies the "genius programmer that works alone and writes code no one else wunderstands".

Bacs in the UK will alert the account holder that a debit has been set up, but to set it up just requires knowing the sort code (routing number) and bank account number. Much like ACH.

The account owner can at any time go in and cancel that mandate, but they do not have to pre-approve it have it set up.

I imagine the free plan also doubles as a trial for a paid subscription. Moving issue trackers can be a hassle, so having unlimited time to test out the workflow and features for a small team or project makes good sense, and if you decide to switch it should be easy enough to upgrade.

I can't know where you're working or worked, but please don't think that this is every tech job in every company. There are plenty of smaller businesses doing great work where you get to have your say, good colleagues and some (at least) moderately interesting problems to work with.

My last 3 jobs (over 10 years) have all been with companies in the size of 30-50 people, with 20-50% being product/engineering, working on a SaaS product. My jobs have been nothing remotely like the Silicon Valley TV-series, so I'm quite surprised and appalled when people say how spot on (even if it's a mocking caricature) the show is. And your description of Dilbertesque politics fall very much in that same category.

Will smaller companies have the Big Engineering Problems that FAANG companies have? Of course not. But there's a huge middle ground in lots of different sectors. I'm working for a company that makes a platform for childcare centers, and we have a ton of challenges and opportunities - not what I'd expected 10 years ago. But the work is rewarding, even if I don't get to have a lot of challenges revolving super hard algorithms, huge data sets or whatever else might be all the rage. Most of our challenges is scaling on a budget, nurturing expertise in different areas in a 10-person team, translating feature requests between customer lingo to something we can implement, and many more similar not-wild-and-crazy tasks.

I do feel lucky, but I also do not feel like I was lucky and somehow found three magical unicorn companies to work for. And there's plenty of things that could be better, and I could make more money working at bigger companies but in my mind it's not worth the trade-off.

I really don't believe that to be true. For our application(s) at work, the database is always the hardest part to scale and tehrefore also the biggest performance bottleneck, and the difference between good and bad SQL can be magnitudes of order of performance impact (on the query itself and locking up the DB for other queries).

Only in a "Every database has 2 TB of memory and 64 cores"-world is SQL (and database design) a negligible skill.

Having done something similar to transcode h264 to fragment mp4, there are a ton of pitfalls, weird settings and flags that need to be set to get a "correct" output that will play in most players. FFmpeg/libav provides a ton of functionality, but sometimes it's like reading javadocs, where you get the interface but have no idea of what to put in.

Same situation with private beta features, which "can not" be officially supported in the official SDK for the product.

Related: In Denmark (where I live), we have an officially designated "NemKonto" (translates to "EasyAccount"), which is where most employers, public institutions, etc. put paychecks, payouts, etc. automatically. So if you change banks, you can simply designate the new account your official NemKonto, and the money will automatically be routed there - no need to contact anyone.

This, in addition to how easy our PBS (DK version of ACH) is to use means switching banks is something that can be done easily. I know of people who will regularly contact 5-10 banks with their current mortgage details and ask for a better deal, and then go back to their current bank and tell them "match this offer or I'm switching".

We also have a simple interest on overdraft (usually 8-15% annually on any amount over draft), though excessive overdraft will get your account locked. But beyond that, no fees for hitting negative $0.05. Is there any US bank that offer a similar fee structure? I imagine people would migrate in droves if that was already the case.

At my previous job, we had Fastly as a potential new CDN provider set up against our existing CDN provider and two other new potentials. After a few rounds of calls for bids, Fastly won out.

Based on my experience with the other providers they were also, by a large margin, the most modern - it felt like moving from a 2008 integration to a modern, fully RESTful API with great documentation and decent UI.

This is all anecdotal, but they did combine a great technical platform with great support. If transit prices are the same or similar for all providers in that size category, they have to fight on features and support instead.

When would you say you are "done" for a given period with "not having a catastrophic data breach", regardless of OKR? I know some tasks, such as this, is never really done. But for a given period (such as a month or a quarter), it does not help to have a task that just says "Don't have a catastrophic data breach" - you have to turn that into something you can actually do, within a given timespan, and that works fine with OKRs (and should be done without OKRs as well)

I can understand the dilemma if you intend to go to Melbourne and "test the waters" and potentially want to move back again. But if you move to Melbourne permanently, I would expect you to sell your house in the EU.

As Apple says in the article, they put quite a few resources into making the whole App store platform, including in-app payments. The issue is that there is no opt-out for the end user - you cannot use a different app store to install applications for your phone, and jailbreaking is getting harder while at the same time border-line illegal in some jurisdictions, not to mention being quite technically challenging.

Imagine buying a car sold by a gas station chain saying "We made the BEST gas stations you can imagine, but you can ONLY buy gas here. It's a fair marketplace, everyone who wants to sell gas at our stations can do so equally, and we'll take the same cut from everyone!".

You can track the money going from the cold storage wallet into an account that the mixer service owns. Say it's 10.000 coins.

The mixer then transfers 37, 185, 205, 1002, and other random amounts to other accounts, which in turn transfers it to other accounts, and at some point they get funneled to one or more accounts owned by the person who originally transferred the money into the mixer.

Couple this with a lot of other people doing the same at the same time for the same mixer service, and you cannot say who owns the coins being transferred between the accounts. It is public what money was transferred back and forth, but without some serious analysis it's practically impossible to track who is likely to own the accounts where the money end up.