Posts in Career (20 found)

We Need All the Disciplines

From where I sit, figuring out what to build, building it, and shipping it are all part of the art of making software. Many disciplines have emerged through the years to facilitate this work: product, design, engineering, devops, etc. We need all these disciplines to make great, dependable software (granted, in different doses). Each brings different values and judgments; each sees things the others don’t. And including all might mean going a bit slower. Human collaboration may seem less “efficient” than handing the work over entirely to the machines. But inefficiency may be the cost of collaborating with humans, rather than extracting an output from a machine. We gain not only from their judgment and expertise in a particular discipline, but from the relationship, trust, and shared understanding that blossoms from making something together. As the old proverb says: “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” Reformulated for today: If you want to go fast, go with the LLM. If you want to go far, go with your fellow humans. Reply via: Email · Mastodon · Bluesky

0 views
Dayvster Yesterday

The Best Thing About Side Projects Is Being Allowed to Care Too Much

A project can be worth your time without becoming a business, a portfolio piece or your most efficient use of an evening.

0 views
Brain Baking 2 days ago

Transparency Metrics Make Moral Decisions Impossible

The other day, a colleague scolded me for being a hypocrite when I mentioned that his Claude Code subscription directly supports fascists in USA. He wasn’t wrong. The first thing he asked was: which laptop do you have? Which OS are you running? Apple? That is responsible for forced child labour in the East to mine precious metals and assimilate their mass-produced laptops? And you talk of fascists? Ha! I did want to mention that the laptop is nearly seven years old but didn’t get the chance. The conclusion? If you want to live by a moral code, you do not work in IT. The scolding happened in a casual way amongst colleagues, as colleagues often do—but again, I think he has a point. The same point as the ridiculousness of a Free Software Foundation sticker on the laptop , or the same point as trying to decide which laptop to buy after this one . How am I as a humble consumer supposed to decide which company is the “lesser evil”? Do I buy open hardware where I can put truly free and libre software on that aligns with my ethics? Or do I buy a flashy laptop with hard-to-beat components (oh, and 100% recycled aluminium, dear colleague) that comes with the downsides of macOS and perhaps shady lawsuits brushed under the mat? I am not an expert at the field of hardware (or let’s say, IT) ethics, so I have to rely on the opinion of experts on this. Luckily, technical reports are dutifully published (and no doubt nudged in the morally just direction) containing information on CO2 production per unit produced—this is called the “Lifecycle Assessment or LCA”—giving us humble consumers a way to easily compare laptop 1 with laptop 2 when it comes to the initial environmental cost. Or so you’d think. In The Score , C. Thi Nguyen explains that such a heavily condensed metric trades trust for transparency. We simply don’t trust experts: when we ask an Apple or Samsung engineering manager “is your stuff ethically just?” what do you think the answer will be? So we invent numbers to keep the cheating at bay. But that forces experts to decontextualise these numbers, resulting in: We now created another problem: comparing these numbers became impossible. First, the last Pro versions of the Framework laptop is missing numbers. Second, what does a single number say about the ethical standpoint of the entire company? According to the Business and Human Rights Centre , forced labour in tech industry supply chains remains a huge problem. Samsung supposedly does much better than say NVIDIA. Suppose for a moment Apple works with NVIDIA: which number do you trust now? The low CO2 one or the high “uh oh child labour” one? You see, dear colleague, I take this shit seriously—because shit it most definitely is. In the end, I still think you’re right: none of these giant companies act morally just. Some form of pollution—environmental, economical, human rights-related—sticks on every single piece of circuit board. And while that’s depressing, the point is that you as a humble consumer still have the power to mitigate this by choosing the lesser evil. In Blizzard’s Diablo terms: go for Andariel or Duriel, but avoid Mephisto. Yet the best option is to postpone the purchase. I doubt this will shock anyone, so just as a reminder to myself, the best action to take is to: A few more side notes. First; for me, a MacBook (even an Air) is surprisingly enough built to outlive the average laptop up to a ratio of two to three times as long—making the perhaps “unethical” Apple a more ethical choice. Another point against transparency metrics. Second; a morally just decision is a personal one . As Seb pointed out while we exchanged conversations regarding this topic, we each have to draw our own line in the sand somewhere. For me, that’s giving money to Anthropic. I am also looking at a Framework Pro as my next laptop because I miss Linux 1 and support the idea of free and libre software. Heck, I’m typing this in Emacs—yes, in macOS. Because it’s still a Unix environment, and then I can move on with my life, as sometimes I get stuck in making these endless decisions. To me, LCA scores are meaningless. And as Nguyen has pointed out, any score can and will be gamed. I work in higher education; I’m all too familiar with cheating the system—both from the standpoint of a student as that of an institution trying to maintain the yearly funding budget by any means necessary. Almost a thousand words later, here’s a conclusion: I am postponing buying a new laptop. Yet the Linux Kernel is being built in assistance with Claude Code which is very very worrying. No worries though, we’re chugging along, collectively looking the other way.  ↩︎ By Wouter Groeneveld on 13 October 2026.  Reply via email . Apple’s 2025 MacBook Air: 155 kg CO2e Framework’s 2022 laptop: 200 kg CO2e Lenovo’s 2020 ThinkPad X1 Yoga Gen 6 20XY: 520 kg CO2e Refuse buying. You don’t need a new laptop right now. Wait another year. The RAM crisis will help with this. Repair if possible. Maximise that lifespan. Buy second hand or refurbished to avoid starting that factory production process. If you really have to; “vote with your wallet”: make a morally just decision. Yet the Linux Kernel is being built in assistance with Claude Code which is very very worrying. No worries though, we’re chugging along, collectively looking the other way.  ↩︎

0 views
Martin Fowler 2 days ago

The Craft of Practitioner Voice

A couple of months ago Jim Highsmith explained how practitioners writing for each other forms a distinct style of writing. He now adds a section to the article with more detail on the craft of how we write in this style. How the writer shows up in the prose, its four principles, the role of story, how to sensibly use AI, three levels of editing, and clarity of the audience.

0 views
Unsung 3 days ago

“They take time. Put in the time.”

À propos the last post , from music editor Marc Weidenbaum : The first is don’t let anyone or anything, or anything acting like anyone, or anyone promoting anything, convince you that craft is outdated or will ever be outdated; you will only improve, only make the sounds you imagine in your mind’s ear and feel in yourself, by working steadily to achieve them. Also recognize that expected paths lead to unlikely ends the more patiently and curiously, guided by instinct and experience, you walk those paths. There is always an excuse to not put in the work. If you allow “AI” (I put it in quotes because it’s less a specific thing, in this context, than what is often cast as, to borrow a historical term, a specter) to become that excuse, well, it’s unfortunate, but there would have been other excuses. So, the best thing to do is put the threat you may perceive from AI in a tidy little box full of all those other excuses, don’t distinguish it from them, and get to work. […] I’ll close now as I opened, with the bad news. These two suggestions, you may have noted, have something in common: they don’t happen instantly, at the push of a button. They take time. Put in the time. (Quote discovered via Robin Sloan’s newsletter .)

0 views
Unsung 3 days ago

“I’m ready to throw up at any moment.”

I linked to his work before , and here’s The Art Of Storytelling with another interesting video – about what made Jobs such a good presenter: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/yt1-play.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/yt1-play.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> I’m not going to spoil the findings, which are presented well with good corroborating examples. But the most interesting thing to me was one short video snippet of Jobs being visibly nervous before a very early, 1978 presentation: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/1.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/1.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> It made me think about other examples of Jobs being off his presenting game. The most well-known one is likely the 2005 announcement of the “iTunes phone,” or Motorola ROKR E1 , just over a year before the iPhone. It’s a really painful watch, seeing Jobs squint at the sort of interface he usually makes fun of, regretting the whole deal, very aware of the smartphone they themselves are working on, but unable to speak about it yet (the relevant part starts at 17:24): = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/yt2-play.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/yt2-play.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> But I have another, trickier suggestion: the “Antennagate” presentation of 2010 , where Apple had to do damage control over the issue of the iPhone 4 losing cell signal when gripped a certain way: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/yt3-play.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/yt3-play.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Now, this isn’t a bad presentation. I actually think it is a great one. The arguments are valid, the data solid, and the whole thing comes together well. In the recently leaked and generally rarely witnessed slide-less Q&A portion, Jobs displays understanding of the issue and answers questions well; perhaps I’m grading on a curve here, but even his one moment of anger/​frustration seems so much better handled than the famously impatient and immature Jobs would have done earlier in his career. Both videos are worth studying and teach how to do damage control well, and how to tell stories of things you would otherwise choose never to talk about. But also, early on, it was really fascinating to see Jobs reading off of so many generic, cheap-looking slides with literal sentence fragments, breaking the “show, don’t tell” rule, and – I think – generally using the slides as a crutch walking him through the narrative. It really took me aback because I don’t ever remember Jobs doing that as prominently. = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/2.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/2.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/3.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/3.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/4.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/4.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/5.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/5.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/6.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/im-ready-to-throw-up-at-any-moment/6.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> It makes sense. Jobs had to rush back to work from vacation, and the time to put this all together was very limited. I don’t mean necessarily to pick on anyone here, but rather find in all this a confirmation of a universal truth. Sure, Jobs was smart and had a lot of charisma on stage. But in the end, at some point, slides are just like any other kind of craft. You design the slides, you revise them, you practice, you let the practice influence the content, you get feedback, you kill your darlings, you revise again, and repeat all that so many times you get sick of it all. It’s clear to me that the team here ran out of time for this, and there’s something comforting in the fact that even Jobs couldn’t wing it, and still had to put in the work.

0 views
neilzone 3 days ago

Environment and climate risks, technology law, and legal advice in England and Wales

I need to say up front that I do not have all the answers here. Rather, this is a blogpost on a topic which I have been mulling for a while, and which I thought was interesting enough to document, even at this nascent stage. The nub of my pondering is this: if a client comes to me, a solicitor in England and Wales, to what extent must I explain environmental and climate risks? The Law Society has published a guide to the impact of climate change on solicitors . This says that: climate change may have an impact on a solicitor’s duty to warn clients of the legal risks in certain contexts. It goes on to say that that: In the context of climate change, this means that a solicitor who becomes aware in the course of acting on a retainer that there are climate legal risks that might impact the client’s interests in scope of the retainer should disclose such risks to your client in a clear and understandable way. “in scope of the retainer” language seems key, but I wonder how far the Law Society considers it to stretch. If, for example, a solicitor is asked to advise on a specific issue, it seems reasonable to me to conclude that the solicitor’s duties are limited to that specific issue . That is the scope of their retainer. If there is a “climate legal risk” within that scope, then the solicitor is expected to be able to identify it and explain it, and that seems fair enough. From a professional competency perspective, it says: You may need to be able to discuss climate-related legal issues competently with your client and potentially encourage certain clients to engage with climate issues where they are relevant or material to the particular client or matter. I don’t know whether it is intentional or accidental that it says that a solicitor may need to be able to discuss “climate-related legal issues”, but that they may need to encourage clients to “engage with climate issues”. The latter phrase seems to me to be much broader than “climate-related legal risks”, but it might be an unintentional discrepancy. The Law Society has also published a Climate change risk examples and checklist for legal practice , which seems to take a broader approach. For example, it says that solicitors should: Consider the impact of physical risks on clients’ businesses (such as when advising on property transactions and asset purchases). Perhaps this is par for the course in property transactions and asset purchases. I genuinely do not know. If a client asks a solicitor to review a contract for the procurement of connectivity, I would be a bit surprised that it might be the role of the solicitor to comment on the possibility of the fibre optic being hit by a hungry backhoe. Similarly, it asks solicitors to consider: How will the client mitigate their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adapt to be climate resilient? I might be being dense, and if, so I have some more work to do, but is this really legal advice ? Lastly (in terms of examples), the guidance says that solicitors should: Be aware of how changes in client demand or stakeholder sentiment could affect asset values and operating costs. For example … the sale value of a company with a high carbon footprint or large net negative impact on nature could change rapidly I am careful not advise on whether something is a good business decision for a client or not, or whether something is worth the price that the client is being asked to pay, as I am simply not in a position to do so. But, again, perhaps if I did mergers and acquisitions work, for instance, this would already be second nature? I’d like to think that I am already in tune with environmental issues in a general sense. We certainly try hard as a small business. So, my scepticism that some of this guidance seems to suggest duties which stretch beyond giving legal advice aside, I obviously want to do a great job for my clients, and also help protect the environment. I do not do conveyancing (buying or selling real property), nor do I work on deals to build things, such as data centres. I have not been asked to advise on AI training or the rollouts of the physical infrastructure of new communications networks. I do not get involved in mergers and acquisitions, or valuing assets. Most of my work tends to be quite specialised and specific. I do not, for example, take on “fractional general counsel” work, where I might reasonably be expected to have a broad generalist knowledge. So, in terms of the stated scope of the guidance, I’m probably mostly if not entirely outside it. I guess that the main outcome of this reading is that I am - I hope - more attuned to the possibility of needing to flag climate or environmental (legal?) issues, even if I do not expect this to be a regular part of my day’s work based on what I do at the moment.

0 views
iDiallo 4 days ago

Why I Get Bored

For me, boredom is just a signal. It means I've hit a roadblock and my brain is trying to convince me not to go any further. "Give up. This sucks anyway. Why are you still wasting your time on this silly thing?" That's how I feel when I do things I'm really bad at. I think I'm not good at making YouTube videos. Whenever I think of a subject I find really exciting, I start writing, record a first pass, and then load DaVinci Resolve. With my current schedule, job, family, and responsibilities, I've found that it takes me a whole week to polish three minutes of video. That means I hear the same material I wrote and recorded over and over until it becomes completely boring. After a few weeks, I lose interest in the subject and have no motivation to finish it. But I think that's just an excuse I tell myself. I like the videos I've managed to complete. I wish I could change some parts, but I still like the final product. It's just that the process gets in the way, and it does so because I have no expertise in making videos. But then again, I always go back to my trusted method: if you're bad at something, do it at least a hundred times before you decide to give up. We all suck at the beginning, and we're in no position to judge a craft until we've practiced it enough to love it or hate it. So here's to another attempt. I'll be publishing videos in the coming weeks. The first one will be just a minute long, the second will be two minutes long, the third... you get the gist. Hope you enjoy it.

0 views
Chris Coyier 4 days ago

Dave’s Rule of Life

Dave, from #735 : Never trust an adult over 35 who can’t explain what they need from you in a bulleted list. I’m thinking like a laptop sticker or t-shirt, right? A little AI slop to help pick a direction can be helpful. We’ll see we’ll see.

0 views
Sean Goedecke 5 days ago

Software's centaur age may last decades

We are currently living in the age of centaurs (2022-20??). Right now, human engineers paired with AI coding systems are more effective than either by themselves. For future generations of software engineers — human or otherwise — this will be the most significant fact about the current period. As in chess’s own centaur age, people are always ready to claim that the centaur age is over and the age of AI supremacy has begun. But the age of centaurs in chess lasted about twenty years, and previous centaur ages have lasted far longer . This should be encouraging to many of us. If software engineering goes along similar lines, we may be able to ride it out another decade or two: enough to make serious plans about what comes next, or to finish out our careers entirely. It began with GitHub Copilot, which launched in 2022 as AI-powered autocomplete. A confident engineer who knew exactly what they wanted could tab-complete their way through lines of code and sometimes entire functions. Being able to chat with language models like GPT-4 provided the next upgrade. Although the models would still get things wrong, it was helpful to have a generalist on tap for areas that were a complete mystery. Coding agents rose to prominence with Cursor’s “agent mode” in 2024 and Claude Code in early 2025. Early agents needed close supervision to prevent them from going off the rails, but were still helpful to automate straightforward tasks. Current agents — after the November 2025 release of Claude Opus 4.5 — are reliable enough to run entirely unsupervised. Their output still needs human review, but the kind of mistakes they make are more mistakes of alignment than regular bugs: not matching the organization’s technical values, over-engineering certain areas and under-engineering others, deciding where to spend effort, and so on. It is no longer possible to credibly argue that an unassisted software engineer can beat a centaur team. The value provided by coding agents is just too great: not just the speed of producing code, but the speed of review and testing. However, we are not yet at the point where an unsupervised coding agent can beat a centaur team either. All the impressive work I’ve seen from LLMs has had a competent human software engineer in control. Centaurs are on top. Would we expect our centaur age to be shorter? On the one hand, chess is a much simpler problem than software engineering, and is more amenable to learning methods like self-play. On the other hand, software engineering is massively more lucrative to solve, and many orders of magnitude more funding is being plowed into the problem than was with chess. On the third hand, “solving” software engineering means creating much more software, which increases the total work-to-be-done, so even if the relative human share of that work is shrinking, the overall amount of human work might grow. On the fourth hand, the level of generally-capable AI needed to address software engineering will have huge effects on other fields, the ripple effects of which are likely to negatively impact software engineering jobs (for instance, crashing the economy, widespread social unrest, and so on). On the fifth hand, we might think that chess had an unusually fast centaur age. Previous centaur ages lasted much longer. In knitting, where a human and a knitting-frame could outcompete any hand-knitter, the centaur age lasted two hundred years . On the sixth hand, technological change is moving ever faster . I could probably find a seventh, eighth, and ninth hand if I wanted to 1 . But overall I think we have no real idea of how this is going to turn out. Chess is the most recent example of a centaur age we have, and it’s attacked by the same AI-based forces of automation as software is. It’s thus reasonable 2 to make a default assumption that the length of software’s centaur age will be similar to chess’s. Suppose I have convinced you that human-AI partnerships will be the dominant force in software engineering for at least the next decade. What then? Don’t quit! Don’t give up on software engineering and go become a carpenter, or open a cafe, or try to get a retail job. Unless you are somehow really, really passionate about doing those things, it is going to suck : unrewarding, grueling work that you are not good at. A decade of software engineering work is long enough to take your time and think seriously about your next steps. Lean into the partnership. A guaranteed way to fail in a centaur age is to refuse to become a centaur. The idea that AI is a passing fad was a reasonable position to hold in 2023, but we’re way past that now. The AI financial bubble popping will not mean the end of AI . It’s here to stay. Think hard about what value humans can still add. This is going to change over time, and getting it right is the difference between being an effective (and employed) centaur and being a meat proxy . In 2023, technical expertise was the primary source of human value. Today, I personally think it’s going to come down to alignment , but this is still early days. I’ve also seen arguments for taste, though it’s hard to define that non-circularly. We need a lot more engineers thinking through this problem. It’s a common fear response to try and skip ahead to the worst-case scenario. But those of us working in the age of centaurs should avoid that. We need to think about how the job of software engineering functions now , not how it might function in twenty years when AI has completely transformed the landscape. People are too quick to declare that we’re in the software engineering apocalypse. We can certainly see it from here, but we’re not there yet. The spectre of full automation can loom on the horizon for decades. If you panic and jump ship early, you could be giving up on an entire normal-length career. Maybe: AI as fundamentally different technology; diffusion of even radically better technology is slow in practice and bottlenecked by organizational friction; human software companies will get outcompeted? I don’t really know what I think about these arguments. This move should be familiar to anyone with a philosophy background. If you have one argument and one counter-argument, the most recent counter-argument is probably right. If you have a stack of arguments and counter-arguments going back a thousand years, the most recent counter-argument should be treated with suspicion: better to take in the whole debate holistically and judge which side is more compelling to you. Maybe: AI as fundamentally different technology; diffusion of even radically better technology is slow in practice and bottlenecked by organizational friction; human software companies will get outcompeted? I don’t really know what I think about these arguments. ↩ This move should be familiar to anyone with a philosophy background. If you have one argument and one counter-argument, the most recent counter-argument is probably right. If you have a stack of arguments and counter-arguments going back a thousand years, the most recent counter-argument should be treated with suspicion: better to take in the whole debate holistically and judge which side is more compelling to you. ↩

0 views
Stratechery 1 weeks ago

An Interview with Katie Harbath About Disrupting Politics at Facebook

An interview with former Facebook Head of Global Elections Katie Harbath about her new book Disrupting Politics, and how things change for the company in the 2010s.

0 views
David Bushell 1 weeks ago

A sustainable web career, for when all this blows over

For better or worse the web industry is going through a bit of a phase. The reasons are largely irrational. People still need the web, nothing has changed there. Regardless, the financials of this business are a struggle. Longterm career prospects are looking dicey. Because I openly reject the driving force intent on destroying my profession, and ruffle a few feathers doing so, I often get asked privately for advice from like-minded peers. I can only offer an uninspired but sensible reply: don’t quit a paying job without a fallback. Go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for all of this to blow over. I’m confident the situation will improve. Before it does, what can we focus on to accelerate past the intellectual slump, and better position ourselves once things calm down? For a sustainable web career, where better to look than critical skills in desperately short supply? My focus is on front-end development, but these areas of knowledge are relevant to anyone in the business of making websites. Accessibility has always been a foundation of web development but it’s never been more critical for everyone to champion it. Understand why accessibility is for everyone. Learn how to talk about accessibility in respect to real needs and practical implementation. Accessibility has unfortunately become a virtue signal for certain tech groups. (I’m told LinkedIn is rife with misinformation.) Accessibility is not a feature that can be tacked on to a website like garnish. Accessibility issues can’t be fixed with an automated process at the end. Web professionals must be able to counter this mindset by respecting accessibility in all decisions from day one. Learn and adopt the guidelines as your baseline. Speak to and test with real people. Defer to specialists who are eager for you to understand the realities. CSS is the most vibrant and evolving of the front-end standards. To architecture a good stylesheet takes deep understanding of the language features. Newer features like cascade layers and selectors that reduce specificity make this much easier. CSS has always been equipped to handle well organised styles, but developers who refuse to learn and respect the language have sought to push complexity elsewhere, using simplified abstractions or “CSS-in-JS” solutions. These are inherently limiting, lead to poor performance, and don’t actually solve the problems they claim. CSS should be hard and learning it will give you the ability to express creativity beyond cookie cutter web design. CSS skills will be highly desirable as more websites wish to stand out against the convergence of a generated aesthetic. Communication is a “soft skill” in short supply (for obvious reasons). It’s a great skill if you wish to stand out as an expert, or simply be heard amongst the noise. Learn brevity and focus on important points. Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Address concerns tactfully and early before they escalate. Don’t point fingers, but “cover your ass” — everyone on a project should be working towards the same goal, but some may be misguided in their approach. Remain positive and don’t meet negativity head-on. If you can communicate well you’ll be highly respected in your role. You probably weren’t expecting this one, but here we are. The luxury of not “getting political” has abated. Far-right political ideology is on the rise and dormant hatred is waking up in tech. The epicentre of fash-tech is Musk’s “X” with people like David Heinemeier Hansson spewing racism and abusing authority in communities to push an agenda, and Guillermo Rauch taking a selfie with a war criminal . Large tech giants like Digital Ocean are funding this power grab . Be wary of those denying this threat. If you want to avoid being pushed away from this industry, recognise and reject fascism before it comes for you. Don’t stay silent. I’ve covered topics that’ll see us well for the future, but what should we forget? Facebook’s experiment turned cargo cult is a legacy framework that still lingers, but there’s no reason to learn it today. React has entrenched itself as a lingua franca of code extruders. React code is generated faster than any human can possibly read it. Suffice it to say that despite stale job vacancies still demanding experience, React is not worth investing time. The days of high-paying React development are numbered. GitHub is now a liability. For private repositories use self-hosted git forges. I’d recommend Forgejo . One of the many Tailscale-like services is an easy way to gate remote access. Don’t make stuff public for the dead internet to attack! For CI/CD go local too, or use independent services not tied to tech giants. Take the time to learn basic commands. A little technical and infrastructure knowledge goes a long way. These people are handsome, charismatic, highly personable. I’m talking about: developer relations, youtubers, start-up founders, etc. When the tech industry met us halfway, influencers were entertaining and a good chinwag at after parties. Now the game has changed and we should not allow false narratives to dominate and dictate a closed-web future. Normal people still use the web. Incredibly few can afford to pay for the novelties that influencers peddle. Their attention economy is no longer our concern. So that’s my focus for a sustainable web career, when all this blows over. Remember that above all else: the web is a human creation for human needs. Those needs are not going anywhere. Drop the dead weight accumulated in times of prosperity. Go back to basics and position yourself well for when professional demand returns. Thanks for reading! Follow me on Mastodon and Bluesky . Subscribe to my Blog and Notes or Combined feeds.

0 views
Kev Quirk 1 weeks ago

My Hobby Is Learning

I've had lots of hobbies over the years. To name a few off the top of my head, there's been fish keeping , guitar, harmonica, fountain pens, watches, motorbikes, this blog, web development, 3D printing, tattoos, digital minimalism, table tennis, and many more. Some of my hobbies have stuck, but I've never gotten so enthralled into a hobby that I become obsessed. Instead, there's generally 4 steps in the process: I don't always get to step 4. For some hobbies, like watch collecting and motorbikes, I continue to invest some time and money into them, and they continue to bring me joy. But I'm not obsessed. I see someone wearing an interesting watch; it piques my interest and we can have a conversation about it. But I'm not the type of person who can tell a watch brand from across a room (unless it's a Casio). Similarly, I love riding and working on my motorbikes - both bring me genuine joy. But I'm not the kind of biker who has to get out on their bike as much as possible, where driving the car is some kind of punishment. I enjoy driving too. While walking the dogs this morning I was idly thinking about all the random possessions I have scattered around the house that are the culmination of many abandoned hobbies. I started to think about why that is, and it dawned on me… It's not guitars, or harmonicas, or fish, or motorbikes, or watches, or anything else. It's learning about those thing that I find so enjoyable. It's the nitrogen cycle of an aquarium . It's learning to place your fingers at the right part of the fretboard on a guitar. It's learning to ride a motorbike safely and smoothly through some technical twisty roads, or learning how a clutch works and how to strip it down. It's learning. Learning is my hobby. And once I've decided I've learned enough about a topic, I'm good. I don't want to be the next Eric Clapton , Valentino Rossi , King of DIY , or Teddy Baldassarre . I want to be good enough at those hobbies, then move on to the next thing I can learn about. I think that's why computers have always interested me, because there's always something new to learn with them. So in future, instead of going neck deep and spending money on the next frivolous hobby, maybe I'll just spend some time learning about the thing to see if that satisfies my learning hobby. It probably won't though, as I'm something of a magpie when it comes to shiny things. But hey, at least I'm having fun and I'm not hurting anyone, right? Thanks for reading this post via RSS. RSS is ace, and so are you. ❤️ You can reply to this post by email , or leave a comment . I decide I want to take up a hobby. I read, watch videos, and obsessively learn about the topic. Invest lots of time and/or money into the hobby. Decide I've learned enough and move on.

0 views
DHH 1 weeks ago

Redundancy is the engine of progress

In the 18th century, 90% of Americans worked in agriculture to feed themselves and the nation. Today, it's around 1%. In the 1950s, there were hundreds of thousands of telephone switchboard operators. Today, they're all gone. There used to be well over a million professional typists too, but word processing largely killed those jobs as well. This is what progress usually looks like: redundancy. Technological advancement has always rendered some jobs unnecessary. That is literally the progress! Freeing humans from a class of work that used to consume their time and talent so they can pursue new problems. Individually, this isn't a picnic. I'm sure lots of the farm laborers displaced by the combine harvester didn't much care for "progress". They cared about having a job. Same too for the switchboard operators and typists. This isn't just a history lesson either. The Minneapolis City Council just voted to require self-driving cars to have a human "safety monitor". Lots of jobs are on the line if cabbies are no longer necessary! Thankfully, the mayor vetoed it. But note that New Jersey still requires a trained attendant to pump your gas. This kind of job-protection thinking is widespread. So it's not hard to see why some programmers are on edge about agents, given the historical precedent of technological progress creating redundancy. But I don't actually think the majority of them ought to worry. With the price of software creation cratering, we're likely to see an unprecedented bloom in apps and services. There's still so much paperwork and other white-collar toil we could automate, and we'll still need agent wranglers to do the work. What is entirely possible, however, is that some companies won't need as many programmers as they did before, while others will hire their first programmers or staff up dramatically. It's very unlikely that the labor market for programming will remain static given the magnitude of this paradigm shift. But, again, that's the progress! That isn't a license to be glib about it. We all need to live. We all need to eat. What's good for humanity at large in the long run may well be temporarily tragic for the individual in the short run. Sympathy and compassion are in order for anyone affected by the changes. Just don't end up like the Minneapolis City Council and think you can legislate progress to a halt. That has never worked.

0 views
Robin Moffatt 2 weeks ago

I am so tired of this bullshit

some strong feels as I try to navigate this.

0 views
Corrode 2 weeks ago

Rust Conferences 2027

Planning your Rust conference trips for 2027? Here are the events with confirmed dates so far. We’ll add more conferences, ticket prices, and call for proposals (CFP) deadlines as organizers announce them. Come say hi if you see us at any of these events! (We’ll bring Rust in Production stickers.) For this year’s events, see Rust Conferences 2026 . Rust Nation returns to London with a one-day, three-track conference at a new venue in the City of London. A separate workshop day is being planned for February 17, but is not yet confirmed. After its first edition in 2026, TokioConf returns to Portland. It’s a conference for developers working with Tokio, async Rust, and high-performance network applications. RustWeek brings the Rust community together in Utrecht for talks, workshops, a hackathon, and social activities. The week also includes the invitation-only Rust Project All Hands. Hosted by the Rust Foundation, RustConf heads to Vancouver in 2027, with online participation available too. More details about the program are still to come. We haven’t found official 2027 dates for the following conferences yet. These are events to keep an eye on, not confirmed 2027 editions: Browse our dedicated Rust conference recordings page where you can filter by year, topic, and conference! Missing an event? Spot an error? Feel free to edit this list directly or let us know. Check the organizers’ websites for the latest details before booking travel. See you at the next conference! 🦀 When : February 18, 2027 Where : 1 Basinghall Avenue, London, UK Format : 1 day of talks across 3 tracks Focus : Rust developers of all experience levels Links : Website When : April 26-27, 2027 Where : Portland, Oregon, USA (venue to be announced) Focus : Async Rust and Tokio Links : Website | 2027 Announcement When : May 24-29, 2027 Where : Utrecht, Netherlands Format : 1 day of workshops, 2 days of talks, a hackathon, and social activities Focus : Broad, open to Rust developers of all levels CFP : Open — closes January 10, 2027 at 23:59 CET. Workshop proposals are handled separately via email . Links : Website | CFP Announcement When : September 7-10, 2027 Where : Vancouver, Canada, and online Focus : Rust and its open-source ecosystem Links : Website Rust in Paris

0 views
neilzone 2 weeks ago

How does one genuinely identify one's own, non-technical, learning and development needs?

As a solicitor, each year, I need to make a statement of solicitor competence . Aside from the regulatory requirement, I want to do a great job for my clients: it is a source of my own personal, professional pride. Similarly, most of my work comes from word of mouth referrals so, simply from a grubby money-making point of view, doing a good job just makes sense. The requirement, at a high level, is pretty obvious: the ability to perform the roles and tasks required by one’s job to the expected standard The Solicitors Regulation Authority helpfully breaks this down into a number of different areas: Crucially, based on the SRA’s list, technical competence - the “knowing and applying the law” bit - is just one facet of overall competence. In terms of learning outcomes / knowing what continuing education I need, this is pretty straightforward: I know that I need to keep on top of my stuff. For me, this means both law and technology, since much of what I do draws heavily on both aspects. In practice, I do this through keeping track of numerous different sources of information, and most of my reflections end up as posts on my work blog . Sure, there is an awful lot of change in both technology and law, and keeping on top of all the various legal issues can be challenging, but at least I can work out what I need to do reasonably easily. I find it harder to assess my learning needs in other areas. Not in a box-ticking sort of a way - actual, genuine, “this would be useful”, development. Stuff that it is worth spending my time on. I have no colleagues, and while I’ve asked clients for feedback, specifically what I can do better, or things they’d like me to do differently, or things that they have valued in other professional advisors, I have turned up nothing. I will keep asking every so often, but I cannot rely on this as a source of learning needs. I do my best to assess my own performance, but I struggle. I keep a document of “practice reflections”, in which I note down issues which cross my mind. Looking back on it for this year, themes include ethics (below), IT and cybersecurity, and, perhaps inevitably, AI. I mentor people, but I have not been mentored. Perhaps that is something to explore. Nevertheless, I do what I can - this year, I had a particular focus on ethics, in the light of the Post Office scandal - but I’d like to be better . I could be led by what is on offer, in terms of seeing what CPD providers are offering, and what other resources are available, and seeing if I fancy any of them. But that feels like the wrong way round to me, since it is not centred on my own learning needs - but it could still be a good source of inspiration. So I asked other professionals in the fediverse what they did for their own continuing professional development. (Importantly, I did not ask what they think that I should do, but rather what they themselves did.) I got a range of answers (including many focussed on technical competence), which I have paraphrased / collated here: a company gives a week off each year for CPD, but the training must be nothing to do with their everyday work. I keep a journal, including things that I find myself hesitating to do, or something that I feel that I did poorly. A variation of this was a “leadership lessons” log, with things that the author saw others do well/poorly, and what they themselves did well/poorly. annually, I prepare a document that contains low points, high points and what I learned from the previous year, and new things I want to try or do / things I want to continue doing / things I want to stop doing for the next year. breadth first and depth first investigations. focussed time, periodically, thinking about my career and role. pay attention to the long term changes. paying for a business coach. looking at people I admire and what they can do, that I wish I could do. talking to people in relevant areas, asking them about challenges they face and skills they have, and comparing it to what I can do or struggle with, and asking what they are up to formal reflections following a template. browse the CPD section of their professional institute, for inspiration. I will see what I can take on board here, for the coming year. And, if you are a client, and you think of something that I can do differently, or better, please do let me know! A Ethics, professionalism and judgment B Technical legal practice C Working with other people D Managing themselves and their own work a company gives a week off each year for CPD, but the training must be nothing to do with their everyday work. I keep a journal, including things that I find myself hesitating to do, or something that I feel that I did poorly. A variation of this was a “leadership lessons” log, with things that the author saw others do well/poorly, and what they themselves did well/poorly. annually, I prepare a document that contains low points, high points and what I learned from the previous year, and new things I want to try or do / things I want to continue doing / things I want to stop doing for the next year. breadth first and depth first investigations. focussed time, periodically, thinking about my career and role. pay attention to the long term changes. paying for a business coach. looking at people I admire and what they can do, that I wish I could do. talking to people in relevant areas, asking them about challenges they face and skills they have, and comparing it to what I can do or struggle with, and asking what they are up to formal reflections following a template. browse the CPD section of their professional institute, for inspiration.

0 views
Manuel Moreale 2 weeks ago

The life triangle

Over the past few years, I spent way more time than I probably should have thinking about my life. And the way I usually look at it is by asking two fundamental questions. The first question is “do I want to have a life?”. You might think this is a silly question to even ask, but since I was a teen I’ve always had a weird relationship with the concept of death, and as a result of that, the whole idea of being alive at all has never been an absolute certainty. Which is why I periodically ask myself the question, and so far the answer has clearly always been yes, and that is why I’m still here. Figuring out an answer to this question is often pretty straightforward, and the answer is binary, so there’s no point in discussing it further. The second, and more interesting, question I ask myself is “what kind of life do I want to live?”. Finding an answer to this one is a lot trickier. But one framework I’ve been using lately is to visualise my life as a triangle. I’ll explain what I mean, but I don’t plan to add a drawing so you’ll have to picture this in your head. The first vertex represents the “individual me” . These are all the things that are related to myself as an individual, as if I was existing in a vacuum. Things like health, personal aspirations, dreams and goals, experiences I want to live, skills I want to acquire, my job and so on. I know we don’t really exist in a vacuum, but you get the point. The second vertex is the “social me” which is the collection of things that are related to other people: relationships, responsibilities toward others, shared goals and dreams, and so on. The third and final vertex is reality. It represents the current state of my life at this specific moment in time. These three points are obviously connected; this is a triangle after all, and the distance between them represents how far my current life is from what I want and also how far apart my individual life is from my social life. Those points also define a plane that represents the infinite number of possible lives that are available out there. In a perfect world, this triangle is collapsed down to a single point, because that would mean that there is a perfect overlap between what I want for myself, what I want for my relationships with the other people in my life, and the life I’m actually living. The aspiration is to get to that point, but making the triangle as small as possible is a worthy endeavour. I find this framework helpful because if the goal is to make the overall area smaller, there are a couple of different ways I can go about achieving that. I can try to improve my life and move that vertex closer to the other two; that is one obvious approach. But I can also decide to willingly move one of the other two vertices: I can change my goals and my ambitions, for example, or I can change the people I surround myself with in order to live relationships that are more aligned with the life I want for myself. Or I can combine all those approaches; there’s plenty of flexibility here. What I do know is that lately I felt this triangle grow bigger, which is precisely what I don’t want it to do. But I also lost track of where those dots are, which is also not ideal. It’s funny how there are people who have some things figured out , and I’m sitting here, looking inward, and the more I look, the less all this mess makes any semblance of sense. But I guess that’s part of the fun. Thank you for keeping RSS alive. You're awesome. Connect via email :: Sign my guestbook :: Support for 1$/month

0 views
David Bushell 2 weeks ago

Leaving them behind

Quick note before we begin: this is the first of two posts I’m publishing today. You’re welcome to skip ahead to: Shin honkaku — it’s far more fun! I’ve waited long enough! I’ve entertained one “wait six months” too many! The TL;DR for my updated AI policy has changed: The absolute vileness of the AI industrial complex knows no bounds. Beyond morality — because let’s be honest few care — it’s very simple: There is no worthwhile career in AI- anything . Simple as that. The AI industry is designed to dehumanise and commoditise labour. Everyone who has dedicated their life to token servitude has become a dull fungible meat proxy. The software and web development industries are leading this brain drain. I’ve observed devs go from the giddy thrills of gambling with their employer’s tokens, to the depressing realisation that they’ve been fooled by a small group of grifters and influencers. So many developers are giving up. Many have literally left the industry unable to find meaningful employment. Many more have figuratively quiet-quit. They clock in to babysit chatbots with no incentive to care about the output beyond quantity. I’m done pretending there is any hope for the AI industry to redeem itself. I’m moving on to more interesting things. Barring a monumental power shift, collapse of the industrial complex, and rise in free range grass-fed “local AI” (lol) I won’t be looking back. Wake me up if anything changes! What does that mean, practically? First and foremost I will continue to build websites for real people . I set up shop as a limited company after a decade of freelancing to bolster my commitment. I will observe the AI industrial complex cautiously from afar, but I won’t allow the bullshit I see to rage-bait me. There will be times I’m obliged to call out egregious insults to my profession . Otherwise, I’ll strive to ignore the echo chamber to protect my mental health. I am distancing myself from peers I once respected who are lost to chatbot psychosis. It is not my task to help them. I have no interest in anyone wilfully funding billionaires’ fantasies. There are new people to meet who respect humanity. I feel happier about my future now. There is no longer any lingering doubt. The perpetual tech circus may be a threat to my patience and sanity but it won’t take my career. So to immediately move on to more interesting things: my latest obsession is shin honkaku detective fiction! I’d highly recommend The Tokyo Zodiac Murders by Sōji Shimada , and The Moai Island Puzzle by Alice Arisugawa — both satisfying reads. Read part two of today’s double feature: Shin honkaku! Thanks for reading! Follow me on Mastodon and Bluesky . Subscribe to my Blog and Notes or Combined feeds.

0 views