geekster777

Honestly, I've been hand waving this somewhat. We'll be on my wife's insurance for the next several years at least, and live in an area where public schools are quite good (Massachusetts). My assumption is that each kid will add ~$15k in cost a year, though I could be underestimating this. I'm planning a few layers of buffer here. 1) My wife wants to keep working past 6 years from now and has no interest in FIRE (this is huge, but 6 years is a long time for her to change her mind). 2) Once kids are old enough for elementary school, I can go back to work. If my math is wrong, 7ish years of overspending shouldn't set back our FIRE too considerably. 3) Being a stay at home dad to start should seriously eliminate the expensive childcare costs. 4) My FIRE numbers don't include my 401k/IRAs, which I can dip from (with penalties) if necessary.

I quit in May. I'm a bit worried though. The gig was good, people were great, but writing on the wall was that management expected devs to be so bullish on AI that no handwritten code would exist moving forward. Simultaneously, deadlines were getting aggressive and OKRs more optimistic now that everyone can be a 10x engineer with Claude. I probably could have ridden it for another year if I really wanted to coast, but ultimately I'm too burned out to do that sanely.

Financially, I'm in a place to (lean) FIRE, but my wife is 6 years away from FIRE. The plan is for me to be a stay at home dad (supplemented by the above FIRE income), while my wife who is also in tech continues to work and advance her career. In our soonest timeline, that leaves me 10 months to pursue hobbies and projects before an infant makes focus time more difficult. I've spent the last two months on my backlog of videogames, writing some music, hitting the gym, and exploring new hobbies (mahjong, climbing, and drawing). I'm hoping to focus my pursuits into quarters (Q3 being music and Q4 being video game development). Hopefully, this will cement habits enough that they'll continue as my life transitions.

But to circle back to my worries above. I'm planning on exiting the workforce for good if possible. If I enter it again, it will most likely be in 6-8 years (as kids enter school). This is a long time, and likely the industry will shift significantly in that time. I fear the cash cow that is software development will be less lucrative in that time, or that my skills will be too outdated. So while I desperately want the year off, another year of work would put us in a more secure financial position. And I'm most in my prime now, and therefore able to secure a high paying gig right now. It's /probably/ fine, but becomes an issue if we hit road blocks in the next few years (layoffs, injuries, economic disaster, etc). That's a lot of financial anxiety that I probably don't need to have, but it's still present. While the economy remains shaky, I don't necessarily feel confident that my purchasing power will keep parity over the next few years.

I live in a tourist town (population 45k, with 2M visitors this past season). It's truly lovely. Our museums kick ass, the food and cocktails punch above their weight, and there are countless activities in the off season. Sure, I can get a cheaper burger or pay less rent just a few miles down the road, but instead I stay and benefit from tourists pushing the quality upwards. I often see folks focusing on the low-effort schlock shop, damning all tourists, before heading to one of the 8 local coffee shops (who could never survive on locals alone). The best thing a local can do is to openly give recommendations, helping to hold competition and quality to a high standard.

Every cheat sheet like this highlights the surprisingly high learning curve of the git cli. It's an interface that really ships it's underlying data model rather than optimizing for common workflows. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I often feel like the target audience of git is the power user, leaving me uncertain anytime I need to perform an intermediate level action.

Lately I've been enjoying Graphite as a tool to interface with git. Commands are based around atomic actions I want to perform, despite often triggering multiple git commands under the hood. This has reduced my overall mental overhead, and removed many footguns.

Been playing with this as a beta user for a few months. I really like how the cli removes a ton of the footguns I've come to find with git. With Graphite I don't have to think too closely about navigating and reordering branches. It's removed a lot of my fears of "will this command clobber my workspace". The guard rails are up, but you can always drop into git if you need something specific.

Interesting, I've had the opposite experience. I'd love to develop in native with something like Flutter or React Native, but I find CSS to be much easier and more flexible to use. The base components always /seem/ flexible enough until I want to do something visually complicated like add an animation that blurs an image on hover. I know CSS is horrendous in consistency, but it's piecemeal development has led to it having every UI feature I could really want/need now that I've paid the price and met its learning curve.

Practice for sure. One thing I noticed with covid was just how out of practice I got. I felt vastly more critical of myself in social situations that would have been very normal pre covid (for example, being the first one to a social gathering and needing to make small talk with the host). Isolation really compounds awkwardness, since awkwardness (generally) leads to more isolation.

I think that social skills really are muscles that need to be developed and maintained. Have you ever tried brushing your teeth with the wrong hand? No amount of thinking and focus will get you the same fluidity as using your usual hand. Instead, you need to just suck for a while and practice until the muscles passively develop. Others have mentioned going to bars or the gym, but I'd also recommend joining a hiking group, a book club, or even attending a church that matches your beliefs. Basically, any sort of activity that has a somewhat consistent group of attendees and where the main focus of the event isn't talking. That way you can still feel successful even if you say very little, which can hopefully reduce the overanalyzing and self doubt that comes from awkwardness.

Man, I felt this hard and I'm surprised burnout isn't on the poll. For me, I have no real complaints about my team or work, and the ones I do have ping me more as a symptom of burnout - e.g. I'll get frustrated that the team likes to over engineer, when realistically it's to a small enough degree to never meaningfully impact maintenance costs. The work is chill, I work fewer than 8 hours a day and get pretty decent praise. But still I want to leave. I even get paid more than I will in most places, but it doesn't matter because I can't make myself feel anything but dread at working somewhere else. I just want to take 3-12 months to reset. Luckily, I have few enough obligations right now that I should be able to manage that. I just want to make it another 40 days (but who's counting) until yearly bonus and equity pay out.

I think lying is a reasonably fundamental part of human research, or at least obfuscation. You don't tell the participants what you're testing for, since you don't want the results to be biased, and often obfuscate what you're measuring.

I think the real ethical issue is actually that the email reads like it's coming from a lawyer. It's weirdly formal and cites that a response is legally required within 45 days. As other comments have mentioned, this has the real world consequence of heavy stress where most folks would (and should) lawyer up. This is the biggest ethical issue, since the study is costing its participants nontrivial money, and without consent.

I consider mental models more to be good decisions made in bulk (though not necessarily the best decisions). Of course you'll break the model when it's convenient or when you know better, but when you're taking your day on autopilot it'll keep you moving towards your goals. Like in the runner example, the mental model of "put one foot in front of the other" may not help, but a "I run for an extra 90 seconds after I get tired" might keep you pushing to always improve. Maybe this is just a difference of definition of "mental model". I saw it being complained about elsewhere, but the thread seems to generally be defining it as "rules of thumb".

You do have a good point that folks tend to have a lot of difficulty breaking mental models they used as crutches while learning. In playing guitar, I've found folks who rely heavily on things like the box model or pentatonic scale who plateau and get "stuck" at a certain skill level because of it. So it raises the question - Is it better to use a model that provides quick wins and a notable plateau, or risk never getting traction but having an easier time at the high level? Of course that all depends on the specifics of each scenario, but my rule of thumb is to do the more fun thing and re-evaluate when my skills plateau.

I work at FB right now, and one of the more stressful things are the timelines for promotion. I think you have a year and a half to go from New Grad to E4, then 2 and a half years to go from E4 to E5. If you fall behind on those timelines, your performance reviews just start getting measured against E#+1 until you either get promoted or more likely fail. A lot of pressure is placed in those early levels to get promoted quickly and efficiently, with not a lot of opportunity to coast. As someone who's very ok with the compensation and responsibilities at E4, I don't really want to get promoted and it's exhausting. It means that "meeting expectations" isn't enough. I need to be exceeding expectations so I can prove I'm working at the next level. This often involves seeking out ambiguity for ambiguity's sake and making projects unnecessarily formal.

The other main "issue" is how incentives are structured, although this one seems to be working as intended. By focusing so heavily on personal performance and impact, Facebook can pretty reliably delegate project planning to their engineers in a bottom up fashion. Engineers will then adjust to ruthlessly prioritize only the most impactful work on the team. Velocity also gets highly prioritized. You don't have to assign many tasks, since engineers are afraid of the mythical "poor performance review". This leads many teams to feel chronically understaffed, and bad for choosing impact over polish on many projects. The flip side is that if your team is overstaffed, it's a struggle to find enough meaningful work to get more than a meets expectations (which may be too low depending on what level you are).

I've struggled with the accuracy of statements like this as someone who writes a lot of music. Writing the melodies is always the easiest part (lyrics are the hardest). So how much is it brain wiring vs just practicing an order of magnitude or two more than most? I have thousands of hours spent improvising over random songs - just setting Spotify to shuffle and jamming to whatever pops up. It's fun for me, and something I generally do to procrastinate other work. I couldn't imagine someone practicing nearly as much if they didn't innately enjoy it. So it makes me wonder, is it fun because I'm good at it, or did I get good at it because I find it fun? I personally believe the latter, but it's hard to really tease apart the nature vs nurture in such a subjective art. It reminds me of comic artists trying to illustrate just how much art they have to produce to go from amateur to pro.

Note, I don't mean to imply I'm part of that small elite you mention. I'm no prodigy, it's just that I've had many musicians (in far less competitive circles) express a similar sentiment about my skills.