What is the technical hill you are willing to die on in your industry?
Ask Lemmy
41
İleti
17
Yayımlayıcılar
28
Bakış
-
A dirty hack that exists now is infinitely better than a properly developed tool that has gone through all stages of approval and quality control at some theoretical point in the future.
My shitty report.pl script was heavily frowned upon when I put it on the production servers. Not only was it an undocumented script, but there was going to be a "proper" tool for that soon. Well, the proper tool never arrived and now three years later everyone is using my script because we are all too lazy to compile a list of warnings manually.
Jack it together now but then a Italy run the proper fix. Don't leave dirty hacks in production or test.
-
Does infiniband run IP?
No
-
Every industry is full of technical hills that people plant their flag on. What is yours?
Your favorite AI enabled LLM does a very, very good job of simulating language tests based on previous tests and there's no reason at all not to use it to study and prepare.
-
It doest run CLNS either.
-
Your favorite AI enabled LLM does a very, very good job of simulating language tests based on previous tests and there's no reason at all not to use it to study and prepare.
It can write you a poem, it can't write you a play.
-
But then how will I ship my machine seeing as it works for me?
Damn, I haven't thought of that! Looks like I have to use a subdirectory of your Homedir from now on.
-
Damn, I haven't thought of that! Looks like I have to use a subdirectory of your Homedir from now on.
Just symlink my home folder to your PC and we are good to go.
-
Every industry is full of technical hills that people plant their flag on. What is yours?
IT restrictions should be much more conservatively applied (at least in comparison to what's happening in my neck of the woods). Hear me out.
Of course, if you restrict something in IT, you have a theoretical increase in security. You're reducing the attack surface in some way, shape or form. Usually at the cost of productivity. But also at the cost of the the employees' good will towards the IT department and IT security. Which is an important aspect, since you will never be able to eliminate your attack surface, and employees with good will can be your eyes and ears on the ground.
At my company I've watched restrictions getting tighter and tighter. And yes, it's reduced the attack surface in theory, but holy shit has it ruined my colleagues' attitude towards IT security. "They're constantly finding things to make our job harder." "Honestly, I'm so sick of this shit, let's not bother reporting this, it's not my job anyway." "It will be fine, IT security is taking care of it anyway." "What can go wrong when are computers are so nailed shut?" It didn't used to be this way.
I'm not saying all restrictions are wrong, some definitely do make sense. But many of them have just pissed off my colleagues so much that I worry about their cooperation when shit ends up hitting the fan. "WTF were all these restrictions for that castrated our work then? Fix your shit yourself!"
-
Every industry is full of technical hills that people plant their flag on. What is yours?
Workplace safety is quickly turning from a factual and risk-based field into a vibes-based field, and that's a bad thing for 95% of real-world risks.
To elaborate a bit: the current trend in safety is "Safety Culture", meaning "Getting Betty to tell Alex that they should actually wear that helmet and not just carry it around". And at that level, that's a great thing. On-the-ground compliance is one of the hardest things to actually implement.
But that training is taking the place of actual, risk-based training. It's all well and good that you feel comfortable talking about safety, but if you don't know what you're talking about, you're not actually making things more safe. This is also a form of training that's completely useless at any level above the worksite. You can't make management-level choices based on feeling comfortable, you need to actually know some stuff.
I've run into numerous issues where people feel safe when they're not, and feel at risk when they're safe. Safety Culture is absolutely important, and feeling safe to talk about your problems is a good thing. But that should come AFTER being actually able to spot problems.
-
IT restrictions should be much more conservatively applied (at least in comparison to what's happening in my neck of the woods). Hear me out.
Of course, if you restrict something in IT, you have a theoretical increase in security. You're reducing the attack surface in some way, shape or form. Usually at the cost of productivity. But also at the cost of the the employees' good will towards the IT department and IT security. Which is an important aspect, since you will never be able to eliminate your attack surface, and employees with good will can be your eyes and ears on the ground.
At my company I've watched restrictions getting tighter and tighter. And yes, it's reduced the attack surface in theory, but holy shit has it ruined my colleagues' attitude towards IT security. "They're constantly finding things to make our job harder." "Honestly, I'm so sick of this shit, let's not bother reporting this, it's not my job anyway." "It will be fine, IT security is taking care of it anyway." "What can go wrong when are computers are so nailed shut?" It didn't used to be this way.
I'm not saying all restrictions are wrong, some definitely do make sense. But many of them have just pissed off my colleagues so much that I worry about their cooperation when shit ends up hitting the fan. "WTF were all these restrictions for that castrated our work then? Fix your shit yourself!"
You pay me to admin 400 servers on a couple million dollars worth of hardware. Let me install a fucking app on my own machine without 4 levels of bullshit.
-
Workplace safety is quickly turning from a factual and risk-based field into a vibes-based field, and that's a bad thing for 95% of real-world risks.
To elaborate a bit: the current trend in safety is "Safety Culture", meaning "Getting Betty to tell Alex that they should actually wear that helmet and not just carry it around". And at that level, that's a great thing. On-the-ground compliance is one of the hardest things to actually implement.
But that training is taking the place of actual, risk-based training. It's all well and good that you feel comfortable talking about safety, but if you don't know what you're talking about, you're not actually making things more safe. This is also a form of training that's completely useless at any level above the worksite. You can't make management-level choices based on feeling comfortable, you need to actually know some stuff.
I've run into numerous issues where people feel safe when they're not, and feel at risk when they're safe. Safety Culture is absolutely important, and feeling safe to talk about your problems is a good thing. But that should come AFTER being actually able to spot problems.
I'm always in favour of actually testing safety stuff.
Does that fall arrest line actually work? Go walk over to that way until you can't.
Can this harness hold you without cutting circulation off to your legs? Go sit in it for an hour and see. -
You pay me to admin 400 servers on a couple million dollars worth of hardware. Let me install a fucking app on my own machine without 4 levels of bullshit.
Until you install solarwinds between 2015 and 2020......
-
Every industry is full of technical hills that people plant their flag on. What is yours?
Don’t fucking paste content from a word doc into your IDE. Some people I work with think it’s a time saver.
-
Don’t fucking paste content from a word doc into your IDE. Some people I work with think it’s a time saver.
Do it via an actual text editor like Notepad++ to clear out all the bullshit.
-
Every industry is full of technical hills that people plant their flag on. What is yours?
This is a non technical hill but it is applicable to my technical career. The hill is that REMOTE WORK WORKS. I am so frustrated that so many businesses are going back to hybrid or full RTO.
-
This is a non technical hill but it is applicable to my technical career. The hill is that REMOTE WORK WORKS. I am so frustrated that so many businesses are going back to hybrid or full RTO.
RTO mandates are employees reduction schemes, nothing more.
-
So does the TCP/IP model and that is what systems actually use.
This is going to blow your mind but there are other systems out there that do not implement TCP/IP at all.
-
This is going to blow your mind but there are other systems out there that do not implement TCP/IP at all.
And they all have their own models to learn.
