"Crying wolf" constantly like this is so frustrating. It waters down the message until they send something you really need to worry about, which you ignore like the rest of the pointless messages.
I saw someone had an idea to have a ticket system where the user chose the priority, and it displaced the current ticket at that priority, with the catch being that this ticket was sent back to the user with "are you sure?"
CEO can't login during a demo. Sandra from accounting can't print from the closest printer and confirmed this is higher priority
This is why the user can’t be trusted to assign severity. Incentives across teams aren’t aligned and they don’t have visibility into other issues even if they were aligned.
This is a bit off topic, but I always say that priority is a ranking of actual demands, it is an ordering, one that needs curating and keeping updated based on context and changes in environment.
Nothing else works for prioritisation, any other categorising into "High/Medium/Low" just fails.
By doing so you end up with the nonsense we had at a company I once worked for, where stories were all put in medium.
This was because stories in low were simply never actioned, they'd never ever get done, everyone came to implicitly understand this. It was still a useful dumping ground for the kinds of stories you know you ought to do, but no-one wanted to do, but it was useful to have noted on record. But for prioritising actual work, it was useless.
Stories in High had a special process defined in a handbook that no-one wanted the hassle of dealing with.
So everything was Medium.
This had obvious problems, and it grew larger than could be managed.
So "Just Above Medium" was born, for stories that were higher priority than your everyday stories in Medium.
This in time grew too, so "Just Above Just Above Medium" (aka JAJAM) was born.
By the time I started, there was even a "JAJAM+" category, for stories that had to be fast-tracked through the process too.
The whole thing essentially fell back to having the product/development leads come to an understanding of what work needed to be done. Which is the right way to do it, but that should simply be made more explicit and part of the process by simply having all stories ranked.
Then you don't need the mental overhead of trying to decide in a design meeting if something is "Just above Medium" or just above that...
Early on in my career my manager told me "a monitoring system that sends more than a dozen notifications a day actually sends zero notifications". Words to live by.
British nuclear subs were running Windows XP until at least 2017. It's easy to google, but the best article about it is No, Trident doesn't run on windows XP (https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-trident-doesnt-run-window...), which ironically makes it very clear that Trident subs were running on Windows XP and had no plans to replace it.
Most UK government excuse: "The programme undertaken by the Royal Navy and BAE Systems to equip the fleet with a Windows-based command system was completed in just 18 days."
Translated: "You couldn't do better in 18 days, so you don't have a right to worry or criticize. Also, don't ask why this was pushed off until the last 18 days of the project."
Huh, back in the 2001/2002 timeframe I worked at an old company that gave everyone a Windows laptop but us engineers also had UNIX accounts on the server cluster, which we logged into for dev work.
Our company was hit with one of the worms (don’t remember which). Thousands of emails constantly coming in and everyone scrambling to delete them - except people like me, who were on vacation. I returned to an inbox that instantly crashed Outlook. IT was trying to find a solution. But I logged into the UNIX cluster, opened Pine, and deleted all the crap, page by page. When I got most of it done, Outlook started working again.
IT was shocked but then told everyone else to go do what I did, eliminating their need to do any work. So I guess you win some and you lose some..
ILOVEYOU was in 2000 and behaved that way. I remember we just shut off our Exchange servers until there was a fix. Email was still new enough that the world didn't implode.
Yeah I get the point, I'm saying it's not really a good point, running Windows and Outlook on a secondary system is fine. Forcing the astronauts to learn to use some other system would be a waste of time and probably worse than whatever it is you see as the problem.
These "breaking up with Apple" stories pop up from time to time here. Cracks me up because they all follow the same pattern:
"I'm done with Apple. I've been a Mac user since since $EARLY_YEAR. I loved using $OLD_APPLE_HARDWARE to work on $VARIOUS_INTERESTING_PROJECTS. I fondly recall $FORMATIVE_APPLE_MEMORY.
But they've gone too far. $NEW_APPLE_ENSHITTIFICATION is the last straw, I can't do this any more. This will be hard because $REASONS. But I'm going to adopt $PLATFORM because it's the right thing to do."
Most of them mention Steve Jobs but this one didn't actually.
What is it that bothers you about this type of discussion? For myself I just switched back to Android after a decade of iOS so I'm always interested in what it was that was the last straw for others.
(for me it was interop issues around wearables and trackers; I want to use chipolo and a pebble watch and not feel punished every day for going out of the ecosystem)
It doesn't bother me at all -- in my post, I said it cracks me up. They all have their reasons for breaking up with Apple. FYI I'm not an Apple guy myself.
CarPlay being actively dangerous if you use it for GPS navigation and someone dares to call you, so the call prompt blocks the entire screen until you either accept or reject the call, was my last straw.
Sure, shit UX and UI is a hassle, but at least it was somewhat consistent. But that the UX department have completely left the building so they're enabling UX that puts people in real life danger? That's the stop I get off at.
"X decides to not use products from Y after longstanding loyalty, because Z"
This is a so generic template that you cannot criticize a post for matching it. It'd be like criticize a story for matching "X happens to Y, leading to Y doing Z which leads to a (happy|unhappy) ending"
The problem is that when they start using $PLATFORM, they realize that it can't do many of the things that they've taken for granted since $EARLY_YEAR.
This is a very clever idea. Unfortunately I dislike installing extensions, because so many of them seem to get taken over by nefarious owners. Sadly it's poisoned the whole extension platform for me.
FYI: On Youtube, the keyboard shortcut for changing the video speed is simply pressing < or >
Note that this extension is offered on GitHub, not the Chrome Extension store, so if you load it from source it'll never be updated unless you update the code.
I do this for any extension I give big permissions. Rather than installing it from the Chrome extension store, I just download its source and 'load unpacked extension' directly. This method is just a roundabout a way to disable Chrome extension updates. (and of course I'm still trusting the extension's code quite a bit, but at least I don't have to worry about it changing)
It's true, but for large extensions that make use of bundled 3rd party libraries, it's hard to examine the code to determine with very high confidence there's nothing malicious in it. I also tend to watch a new extension's network traffic, but of course it's not foolproof either.
This extension appears to be installed directly from the files - I don't think it would automatically update even if a nefarious owner later gained control of the repository.
Actually the shortcut for changing the video speed is typing `>` or `<`. If you simply press those keys, depending on your keyboard layout, you may only show the controls (if the video is playing) or advance forward/back a frame (if the video is paused).
Early in my career I worked at a place where the sales people would half-joke about signing deals on December 40th -- to claim it in the previous quarter/year.
Almost everyone says turmoil and bad morale is the default at Meta. The default is lots of turf-protection, project stealing, and backstabbing. It will probably get worse with these news coming out.
Recently I've also heard of teams having very little amount of time to prove themselves before they get reorg'ed - which might be one of the reasons that their progress on AI has been slow.
The only person I know that is happy at Meta is someone who works at one of the acquisitions. That specific acquisition doesn't seem to have been infected by Meta's culture too much for now.
I just hope other CEOs don't see this and get antsy about following suit.
reply