dudeman13

>it is in fact the case that getting new stuff done is the only way to benefit the company

>[work that will] drive future productivity, of course I think this is valuable

These 2 aren't compatible. Seems like you've walked back on the former from this last reply.

>it is in fact the case that getting new stuff done is the only way to benefit the company

I spent a few weeks just refactoring 6k lines of code into +- 300 lines on my current job.

If my company was run by you, the best course for me woould have been leaving that mess around. Which would have led to either the same refactoring under far more stressful time constraints, or even more shit code by applying a band-aid into the old code (this code makes us some serious money, and an unexpected third party change would have broken it in such a way that would be seriously hard to fix with the old code).

Also, there are loads of features that were far easier to implement after the refactoring.

Maintenance job isn't coasting around. It has a multiplicative effect on anyone who works in the system. It needs to be done, if you want the org to not slow down to a snail pace - and when someone leaves a mess, it isn't even neccessarily easier than pumping new features since you have to figure out all observable behaviours from messy stuff.

If there's no incentive to getting your hands dirty, no one will want to get their hands dirty. People will fight to not do neccessary jobs if the only way of advancing their career is avoiding those jobs.

>You're asking for title inflation

You're asking for feature bloat. If the only way of winning is getting new stuff done, new stuff will be done regardless of the benefit or cost to the company.

That does sound like Google alright, though.

>typically more harmful for more people on average than the feminine expressions of same

The equivalent feminine expression of the same kind of dominance is a reputation war.

Reputation wars can destroy lives and relationships. If I have to choose one, I for one much prefer to deal with people winning at how awesome they are (and how lame I am) than a reputation war.

Civilized places have cracked down on violence, so male dominance contests almost never end up with a face punched anymore. Toning down the violence made them much safer.

Female dominance contests are still as deadly as they have always been.

>Why not a 1000 character long line?

I work in a codebase where a previous dude constantly did this. I do not find those lines amusing.

Whenever I'm un-fucking his stuff one of the first things to do is expand his infinite lines into usually 5-50 lines because visualizing and reasoning about 50 lines of code crammed into one requires someone who is totally a way, way better programmer than me.

I don't need to git blame to know when the code was written by that guy.

Bootcamps don't ask for almost half a decade of their lives and what's possibly crippling debt (depending on circumstances).

If it matters, I have a Computer Engineering BSc and I don't regret it. Although I might have if it had costed me a kidney.

>People who complain about the charge port on the bottom don't use the mice.

People who don't like pink bags don't buy pink bags.

Will definitely take a long while. People in general aren't up to be criticized on that one, even indirectly.

Children are like cute kitties: no one wants to see them tortured, but they don't really get to be treated respectfully in any way or form. The flag for "do I respect them?" is always set to True and yet it is almost never reflected in the actual behaviour towards them.

People are at least willing to entertain the thought that you aren't an absolute idiot, might be acting in good faith and have some sort of internal capacity for morality or ethics if you're an adult.

Do you mind sharing how you got those references? I.e. which search strings/websites you used, or if you had them at hand with f.e. Mendeley or maybe already knew about them?

I wanted to read some papers in the subject a few days ago but couldn't come up with a good search strings nor good initial references. It's not my field of expertise :x

I mean, Myers-Briggs is bollocks anyway so we shouldn't be using it for anything but funsies.

I have a dream that one day we will shit hard on that sort of stuff instead of validating it. See also "alpha male".

The words just before it were "a sketchy patched executable". People are bound to infer there is something wrong with it, regardless of whatever your intentions might have been.

I have a feeling if OP had read some of the papers surrounding Daniel Kahneman (and the works Kahneman cited) he wouldn't be so sure about mankind's rationality.

It's like the vast majority of experiments on the subject ends up with "and then they proceeded to use their intuition and who they like more to make their decision".

Also, I think it was "Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student" that also said that logical arguments are the weakest kind of rhetorical arguments since basically anything else is more likely to convince people.

>At one point, all of the relevant facts and figures were loaded into your working memory, and with that information you arrived at a conclusion

You are awfully optimistic about the rationality of humans, aren't you? :)