Do you happen to have a link to the other announcement handy? We use Flow at $WORK and today I had a great time banging my head against the wall because it was both not happy with me adding a custom matcher in Jest so that internal DateRange type tests would produce some better failing output and also had to be instructed to not freak out about jsverify so that the aforementioned tests could be property-based.
And documentation for Flow built-in types like $ReadOnlyArray simply not existing is its own level of awfulness and.. if a bunch of high profile projects are missing maybe I can get leverage to push for Typescript internally, too.
This leaves out a pretty important part of work: you work on a team. Increasingly it’s acceptable for people to work hours that suit them, and for many people that means coming in at 10 or 11. That means they are staying later and they are probably most productive around 3 or 4 or 5. That means they’ll be dropping the most PRs on you then or asking the most questions.
That isn’t to say that this suggestion won’t work, but you probably can’t just institute it and call it a day. The post doesn’t even mention colleagues or teams.
This leaves out a pretty important part of work: you work on a team.
I don’t think it matters whether you work 9-5 or 11-7. If other people on the team are working within a certain time period (such as 11-7), then by all means try to accommodate them by adjusting your hours to overlap with theirs to the extent that doing so doesn’t impact your productivity or get in the way of the rest of your life.
The fundamental principle is to do a solid day’s work in eight hours or less because unpaid overtime is for suckers. Not only are you not getting paid for the extra hours when you draw a salary, but working more than 40 hours a week reduces the amount of money you earn per hour.
It’s not only stupid, but unethical too. If somebody works overtime without pay, it creates pressure for other workers to do it as well. If you do it regularly, your output gets worse, which means that your employer benefits nothing either. It’s just loss/loss.
I know that. You know that. Managers refuse to know it. They’d rather make wild promises, letting their egos cut checks that their own asses won’t be called upon to cash.
I would agree if the workday were actually one solid block of nothing but writing code or thinking about writing code. However in the real world (or at least MY real world) the workday consists of that plus a whole host of scheduled and unscheduled interruptions like meetings, chats with manager and coworkers, etc.
When you add in those things, a 4-6 hour workday starts to look kinda sketchy :)
I don’t think it’s sketchy. I think it’s something we should have forced down management’s throat in the 1960s. In the meantime, when you add in the bullshit that comes with a coding job, you end up with an eight hour workday.
For teams, I think it’s fundamental to estabilish a common ground from the get go. I feel that team members should (ideally) agree on a (flexible as much as possible) schedule that accomodates everyone needs, instead of just individually decide which work hours suite them. Personally, I think that, when other team members depends on some measure of your availability, showing up “whenever you feel like it” is a sign of lack of respect for your peers (and I won’t allow it on my team).
My team is doing mostly 10-8 (so working more than the 8h/d).
Now I usually do 8-4/5 (depending on the work pressure, my commitments, if I took an additional personal time at lunch break …) if a team member throws a PR when I have to leave, I have absolutely no scruples to let it for tomorrow. Once or twice some asked for a review when I was leaving. To that you just have to answer that you’re leaving because you called it a day and that except if it’s critical to have it reviewed it today, it can probably wait for tomorrow.
To me the teams are not an issue as long as you communicate.
In my experience it’s better to let important reviews wait for the morning, when my judgement is clear, rather than wave them through at when I’m tired.
He’s encouraging people to grab his videos by giving everything away for free. All he required was a login which may have monetary value later that timetoplaytypus’s share negates. It’s possible, though, he thinks they can only grab a small amount of videos with some portion of people paying for the rest after deal expires. That’s on top of new, recurring revenue from it on future videos. Maybe this hurts him on at least gap between what he though could be shared and what would be. In that case, he’d have made a gamble that may or may not pay off vs offering a limited number of videos with a clear prohibition on sharing them.
On ethical side focusing on results, I don’t think there’s a huge difference of someone here sharing his videos all at once in convenient form for free vs him saying grab as many as you want after you log in for free. Given freeloading users vs type and number that would pay him, I don’t think he’d have many losses in that scenario if any at all. The kind of people that would pay him would probably mostly still pay him. Hopefully, no effect.
He’s encouraging people to take a free look at his work and see if they think it would be worth for them to pay for more of it in the future. Shitty people that don’t care about anything else but themselves might interpret this offer as an invitation to take advantage of someone’s work, and even actively undermine this someone’s livelihood. I think these people are at least half of what is wrong with the word and they should all go live in a cave and never interact with anyone else ever again.
I hear you. It’s a sensible perspective. I prefer he keeps getting paid for doing good work, too. I also agree that this should be the norm instead of pervasive parasiting.
On one hand when someone publishes a free software and people use it for their benefit without any pay then they are shitty? When someone decides to publishing something for free, then the factor that some people may not pay for it must be calculated into that decision.
I believe that the ad-supported word is a bigger threat, as makes the feeling that stuff are for free a norm.
Neither of those examples apply. OP is publishing something for free for a LIMITED amount of time, with the very obvious intention of giving people a preview of his product. Free software and free content are very different propositions.
I still think that the possibility had to be factored into this offer, and it likely was. The style and language are still harsher than I think the situation justifies.
let’s be real here. the first thing i thought of when i saw this was “can i write a script to download everything before the deadline” and im pretty sure 99% of people here thought something along that line.
given the target audience of his screencasts, you kinda have to expect this.
Everybody thinks stupid thoughts, but not everyone acts on it. And since we’re a big part of Gary’s target audience, wouldn’t it be nice, if it turns out he overestimated the amount of dicks among us? By the way, first thing in my head also was “Hmm, can I download it?”, but then I remember the guy has to eat.
This is the second Facebook project (after Jest) to announce switching from Flow to TypeScript in the past week or two. 🤔
The 2nd we know of.
Do you happen to have a link to the other announcement handy? We use Flow at $WORK and today I had a great time banging my head against the wall because it was both not happy with me adding a custom matcher in Jest so that internal DateRange type tests would produce some better failing output and also had to be instructed to not freak out about jsverify so that the aforementioned tests could be property-based.
And documentation for Flow built-in types like $ReadOnlyArray simply not existing is its own level of awfulness and.. if a bunch of high profile projects are missing maybe I can get leverage to push for Typescript internally, too.
I suppose that would be Jest? (edit: sorry, I misread the OP, it is Jest) (Accepted) Proposal thread here: https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/7554
Got it, thanks! Somehow wasn’t able to find this through google
It seems that antirez decided to revise his decision, in the name of doing what’s best for the redis community: https://twitter.com/antirez/status/1038330162822238208
Edit: ongoing discussion on github, detailing the decisions so far: https://github.com/antirez/redis/issues/5335
This leaves out a pretty important part of work: you work on a team. Increasingly it’s acceptable for people to work hours that suit them, and for many people that means coming in at 10 or 11. That means they are staying later and they are probably most productive around 3 or 4 or 5. That means they’ll be dropping the most PRs on you then or asking the most questions.
That isn’t to say that this suggestion won’t work, but you probably can’t just institute it and call it a day. The post doesn’t even mention colleagues or teams.
I don’t think it matters whether you work 9-5 or 11-7. If other people on the team are working within a certain time period (such as 11-7), then by all means try to accommodate them by adjusting your hours to overlap with theirs to the extent that doing so doesn’t impact your productivity or get in the way of the rest of your life.
The fundamental principle is to do a solid day’s work in eight hours or less because unpaid overtime is for suckers. Not only are you not getting paid for the extra hours when you draw a salary, but working more than 40 hours a week reduces the amount of money you earn per hour.
It’s not only stupid, but unethical too. If somebody works overtime without pay, it creates pressure for other workers to do it as well. If you do it regularly, your output gets worse, which means that your employer benefits nothing either. It’s just loss/loss.
I know that. You know that. Managers refuse to know it. They’d rather make wild promises, letting their egos cut checks that their own asses won’t be called upon to cash.
This was my take too. 9 and 5 are arbitrary fence posts. The key here is working an 8ish hour day and not a 10ish or 12ish hour day.
4-6 hours would be better, IMO, but I find myself turning into some kind of dirty long-haired pinko as I approach middle age.
I would agree if the workday were actually one solid block of nothing but writing code or thinking about writing code. However in the real world (or at least MY real world) the workday consists of that plus a whole host of scheduled and unscheduled interruptions like meetings, chats with manager and coworkers, etc.
When you add in those things, a 4-6 hour workday starts to look kinda sketchy :)
I don’t think it’s sketchy. I think it’s something we should have forced down management’s throat in the 1960s. In the meantime, when you add in the bullshit that comes with a coding job, you end up with an eight hour workday.
For teams, I think it’s fundamental to estabilish a common ground from the get go. I feel that team members should (ideally) agree on a (flexible as much as possible) schedule that accomodates everyone needs, instead of just individually decide which work hours suite them. Personally, I think that, when other team members depends on some measure of your availability, showing up “whenever you feel like it” is a sign of lack of respect for your peers (and I won’t allow it on my team).
My team is doing mostly 10-8 (so working more than the 8h/d). Now I usually do 8-4/5 (depending on the work pressure, my commitments, if I took an additional personal time at lunch break …) if a team member throws a PR when I have to leave, I have absolutely no scruples to let it for tomorrow. Once or twice some asked for a review when I was leaving. To that you just have to answer that you’re leaving because you called it a day and that except if it’s critical to have it reviewed it today, it can probably wait for tomorrow.
To me the teams are not an issue as long as you communicate.
In my experience it’s better to let important reviews wait for the morning, when my judgement is clear, rather than wave them through at when I’m tired.
Tarball of all the videos: https://timetoplatypus.com/static/das.tar.gz
This is literally how the guy makes a living, so, maybe don’t do that?
I took it down.
Very considerate of you! :)
Ya I didn’t intend to upset anyone, it was purely a convenience thing.
“First, everything is free all week”
He’s encouraging people to grab his videos by giving everything away for free. All he required was a login which may have monetary value later that timetoplaytypus’s share negates. It’s possible, though, he thinks they can only grab a small amount of videos with some portion of people paying for the rest after deal expires. That’s on top of new, recurring revenue from it on future videos. Maybe this hurts him on at least gap between what he though could be shared and what would be. In that case, he’d have made a gamble that may or may not pay off vs offering a limited number of videos with a clear prohibition on sharing them.
On ethical side focusing on results, I don’t think there’s a huge difference of someone here sharing his videos all at once in convenient form for free vs him saying grab as many as you want after you log in for free. Given freeloading users vs type and number that would pay him, I don’t think he’d have many losses in that scenario if any at all. The kind of people that would pay him would probably mostly still pay him. Hopefully, no effect.
He’s encouraging people to take a free look at his work and see if they think it would be worth for them to pay for more of it in the future. Shitty people that don’t care about anything else but themselves might interpret this offer as an invitation to take advantage of someone’s work, and even actively undermine this someone’s livelihood. I think these people are at least half of what is wrong with the word and they should all go live in a cave and never interact with anyone else ever again.
I hear you. It’s a sensible perspective. I prefer he keeps getting paid for doing good work, too. I also agree that this should be the norm instead of pervasive parasiting.
I think you see the situation a bit radically.
On one hand when someone publishes a free software and people use it for their benefit without any pay then they are shitty? When someone decides to publishing something for free, then the factor that some people may not pay for it must be calculated into that decision.
I believe that the ad-supported word is a bigger threat, as makes the feeling that stuff are for free a norm.
Neither of those examples apply. OP is publishing something for free for a LIMITED amount of time, with the very obvious intention of giving people a preview of his product. Free software and free content are very different propositions.
I still think that the possibility had to be factored into this offer, and it likely was. The style and language are still harsher than I think the situation justifies.
Fortunately, I don’t care what you think.
You should reconsider your approach to commenting on lobste.rs.
That is your right to do so.
let’s be real here. the first thing i thought of when i saw this was “can i write a script to download everything before the deadline” and im pretty sure 99% of people here thought something along that line.
given the target audience of his screencasts, you kinda have to expect this.
Everybody thinks stupid thoughts, but not everyone acts on it. And since we’re a big part of Gary’s target audience, wouldn’t it be nice, if it turns out he overestimated the amount of dicks among us? By the way, first thing in my head also was “Hmm, can I download it?”, but then I remember the guy has to eat.
The swearing you demonstrate in your comments is disturbing. I hope it will not become the norm in the comments section.
I believe you could also communicate your point very well without using words like “shitty people” and “dicks”.
I come to comment on this because I remembered this tweet he posted on the matter, a while ago: https://twitter.com/garybernhardt/status/870721629440983041
I’m glad it’s been taken down already, I think its just fair to the author’s work.
I probably should have read the comments before spending 20 minutes writing a scraper.
The HTTP 451 is intentional, no?
Any endpoint on my site that doesn’t exist returns HTTP 451
Edit: for example, https://timetoplatypus.com/abc
FWIW it looks like the HTTP response is only a 404. is this because many clients/servers don’t respect 451 yet?
Nah, it’s just a mistake on my part. I’ll get around to fixing it…eventually