I imagine you’re saying that as a software engineer :). As a manager of both software engineers and product managers, I think this view is a bit of a stretch.
Some software engineers would make good product managers, some product managers would make good software engineers, and the majority of both are best suited to their current job.
You're correct I've spent most time as a software engineer or a engineering manager. I actually started my career as a web designer though. I've also been effectively an active PM in roles where there was no formal product management funtion. I've also been a co-founder of a two person operation where I did all the product and tech, and my co-founder did all the biz and operations. Another startup I co-founded I was "CTO" but was effectively the number 2 in a 100 person company and had veto power over our first PM hire. I've also been part of a larger scaleup that was acquired in a scenario that left a number of folks orphaned, so for a while I was also managing a handful of designers, program managers, and an IT manager.
So yeah, I understand your point, and if I ran a cross-functional team like that I would hopefully hire well enough that I felt the same. So maybe to restate my thinking in a way that may be slightly less controversial: AI is eating a lot of the low-level mechanistic work that used to define being a software engineer, however I never believed that was where the value was for engineers anyway. While some PMs are incredible and would no doubt be able to get good at vibe coding, the majority in my 25 years experience do not have the patience to get to a precision of requirements which is absolutely still a requirement to get anything out of AI.
Health in old age is something that you invest in, much the same as wealth. Of course you can suffer an accident, or lose your investments from bad luck. But in both cases you're guaranteed bad results if you don't put the effort consistently and starting when you're younger.
For health, this means making exercise, good sleep, and good diet a part of your daily routine. Much like investments, you can go as deep on that as you like, but if you start early all you need is basic knowledge.
Personally I'm not sure why people are fixating on this particular point - companies rarely tend to lay off their high performers. Sometimes they might axe entire divisions and that would include both high and low performers, but whenever it's not that the implication is clear.
I did spend the first half of my career in banking though, so maybe I've got a different baseline.
This applies to everything, a mechanic, a lawyer, a dentist. You can't have all the prerequisite knowledge on every field where you may need to make big choices so eventually you'll need to talk to someone.
If it's not the bank, and it's not you, it has to be someone else. You can ask over email for all the information available on the products from the bank and take it to an independent advisor. Eventually you'll run into the need to have a live chat with that trusted advisor or risk moving one mail per day in each direction trying to explain what you want and what you could get.
Yes, the $5 wrench in action. The only protection against that is to not have the information on the device or in any account associated with or used from the device.
Impractical for a normal person who wants to just live their life.
I’d argue that what an NFT really is is a vehicle for laundering huge amounts of dirty money.
The banana, the angle of the banana the certificate itself are all theatre, designed to be a plausible high value good that can be created from thin air with the sole purpose of being an excuse to transfer someone some money that they can then claim to be legitimate earnings regardless of where the money originally came from.
Anyone who gets suckered into this scene without understanding its true nature is, well, a sucker.
Correct, as a London bike commuter for over a decade I can confirm that nobody in their right mind uses a shared cycle path. They’re dangerous for pedestrians, and you can’t make any kind of decent progress on them as they’re filled with bins, lampposts, blind driveways, and best of all even bus shelters. Then when you get to the end of it at some random point you’re not expecting there’s no way of joining a road without having to cede priority.
Kids riding to school is the only use case they satisfy.
I was aware of this being the case when dealing with consumers, but had assumed that because B2B contracts are assumed to be between 2 sophisticated parties that there is little legislative protection that could override the terms of the contract.
My understanding of law is generally UK based, but I'm not aware of legislation what would supersede a contract term limiting liability when the event that created the liability was one of general diligence/competence in carrying out the contract rather than relating to health and safety or some other area that is heavily legislated.
For that reason I'm unconvinced on the article's statement that this isn't just a "French Legal System" thing and that the same kind of judgement might be made in other jurisdictions.
As the article already states, in most jurisdictions you cannot void gross negligence liability in contracts. It will probably come down to that in those jurisdictions.
If they willfully did not implement staged rollouts that look like negligence to me but ianal. You kill canaries for a reason.
Well for starters it did impact health and safety domains; hospitals and emergency services were severely degraded. There absolutely will be preventable deaths directly traceable to Crowdstrike.
I think the general idea is that gross negligence is a breach of contract. Every contract implicitly assumes that both parties are making a good faith effort to honor the terms of the contract. If you are not doing that, you may be in breach of contract, and the liability limitations may no longer apply.
Alas in the world of B2B, contracts from larger companies nearly always come with lists of specific requirements for security controls that must be implemented, which nearly always include requiring anti-virus.
It just not as simple as commenters on this thread wish!
The contracts are rarely specifying stuff like antivirus explicitly, but instead compliance with one or more of the security standards like PCI DSS. Those say you have to use antivirus, but they all have an escape hatch called a "compensating control" which is basically "we solved the problem this is trying to solve this other way that's more conducive to our overall security posture, and got the auditor to agree with us".
My source: I review a lot of contracts. It's very common for things to be explicitly required.
Yes you can go back and forth and argue the toss, but it pushes up the cost of the sale and forces your customer to navigate a significant amount of bureaucracy to get a contract agreed. Or you could just run AV like they asked you to...
Can you propose an example of a compensating control for an "antivirus" that had a chance to pass? Would you propose something like custom SELinux/Apparmor setup + maybe auditd with alerting? Or some Windows equivalent of those.
compensating controls ftw. the spirit of the law vs the letter of the law. our system was more secure with the compensating controls, vs the prescribed design. this meant no having to rotate passwords because fuck that noise.
reply