nathanb
Joined 17 years ago
Joined 17 years ago
Remote: Yes
Relocate: No
Technologies: C, C++, SAN, SCSI, Ruby
Linkedin: https://nz.linkedin.com/in/nathanb-nz
Email: [email protected]
I have 8 years of experience doing OS-level coding in the storage industry. I've dabbled in embedded on the low end and userspace / application development on the high end. I've worked remotely from New Zealand for a US-based company for about a year and have proven my effectiveness as a remote employee. Also completely keen for working locally with an Auckland company.
I think it's important to note that a fear or anxiety reaction may not, as you say, keep us safe. When I'm calm and rational, I make better decisions than when I'm gripped by fear.
As an avid hiker and explorer, occasionally my fear of heights interferes with my enjoyment of my hobby. I try to push past it as much as possible, but when my heart is racing and my legs are shaking, a situation which would otherwise be safe can become dangerous.
Also, unlike you, I do have two friends who suffer from PTSD (it's common enough that one may be surprised to find that a friend one has known for years wrestles with PTSD in some aspect of life but doesn't advertise that fact). One of those friends has gotten off an elevator early because being in an enclosed situation with a stranger gave her a panic attack. Another called me on the phone nearly in tears because she had to stay late at work and walking across the deserted, dark carpark to her car was almost more than she could handle.
I think it would be great if a drug could help people like these two friends of mine go through life without feeling controlled by anxiety in situations like these. I also think it would be great if people like me whose day-to-day lives are unmarred by fear can do more things -- safely; the drug does not impair reason -- through this therapy. The tradeoffs are important to know (and as you say, the article does a great job exploring them), but to me this sounds really promising.
Getting upset at the loss of jobs is the luddite position. The more socially liberal position is getting upset that the savings from the loss of said jobs are rolled up into the pockets of corporate executives and working to ensure that wealth is equitably distributed. The socially conservative position is that the additional wealth freed up by the automation will create new job opportunities elsewhere that the recently unemployed individual can seek out and pursue. I lean more to the socially liberal side (and hopefully this bias did not creep out in my description of the conservative point of view), but either one is preferable to putting the kibosh on progress because it might step on someone's toes.
We use multi-factor authentication just to get in the corporate network and a separate, airlocked engineering network to store our IP. From what I've talked to from my colleagues at other major device manufacturers, this is becoming the industry standard (seven years ago I scoffed at Ericsson's paranoia for having a sequestered engineering network. Turns out they just saw the attacks earlier than we did).
In our case, doesn't seem to be the NSA. Looks more like China. Could easily be either one, or yet another party. This is the world we live in.
Windows version: x64
Mac OSX version: x64
Linux version: x86
Why? Why do companies not release 64-bit versions of their programs for Linux? This seems to happen all the time, and it utterly baffles me.
Either he was deluded at the time and overcame his delusion without ever realizing he was deluded (which is possible) or there's more to it than you make it seem. Because I think someone who says "this used to work and now it doesn't" may have something profound to say that the person saying "this has never worked" needs to hear.
Perhaps you're right and software outsourcing has never worked, in the sense that from a total cost standpoint it has never been better to contract development of a software project to a third party than to create it in house. I don't agree with this, but we'll accept it for the point of argument. You're still ignoring his point that the change in economics has caused a cultural change in the attitudes of those who lead outsourcing entities.
The article claims that previously, the economics allowed them the luxury of trying to deliver a result to their customers. Now, they are not able to do so because the economics require them to milk their customers for every cent in order to break even.
This may not directly affect you if you have always believed that outsourcing doesn't work and you disagree with his opening statements attempting to rebut that mindset. But it's still an interesting view from the inside.