The nice thing about it is that you can add whatever you like, however you like. Want components with default owners for tasks? Want milestones? Want stakeholders? Want sign-off reviewers? Want to integrate with existing tools like Linear or Notion or JIRA or even email inboxes or Slack messages? Add entities for Incidents, that automatically make a dedicated Slack channel when you create them?

Want proper 1:1 or 1:manu or many:many links between Tasks and Milestones and Sprints and Incidents and Teams and Components and whatever?

Want single assignees? Or multiple ones?

Want flexible custom reports on all of it?

Or just want a simple flat Todo list, that can evolve later to fit your needs?

Stop having the tools dictate to you how you work and instead set it up how your company actually wants to work. That's Fibery.

(I am not connected to the company, just a very happy user.)

> The maintainers of setuptools get paid by Tidelift to

> implement industry-leading secure software development

> practices and document the practices they follow.

Well, that really doesn't seem so in this case now, does it?

I have fond memories of implementing a Mandelbrot set renderer on a CASIO fx-7000G graphics calculator. 422 bytes of programmable memory! The TI-93 I did it on later was considerably faster and easier to make it fit in. :-)

It now has a thread view so you can replace tools like Slack with it, and entity-grouped notifications, so you can easily catch up on things if you are away for a few days. Plus it does a much better job of proper knowledge management, with references, proper relations, build a domain model of your business, per-entity and linked-entity permission models if you need that, etc. etc.

It provides integrations for existing tools, so migrating to it is much less big bang (sync in your JIRA tickets, Linear, Slack conversations, etc.).

Two-panel nested views on entities make navigating through status on task boards, projects, etc. a joy. You can build automations (create a new Slack channel and invite the assignees to it when I make an Incident, add a 'priority' labels when certain people comment or certain keywords are used", etc.).

Add meeting minutes, automatically convert the follow-up bullet points in those into Tasks for people and assign them, without ever leaving the same single page view.

You can use it a bit like e-mail, and a bit like JIRA, and a bit like Slack. And you can pick and choose those "bit like"s to best fit your needs.

We haven't completely replaced Slack with Fibery, but we've moved most of our more intentional communication into it. We no longer feel we need to "complete Slack" to catch up on the state of the world.

We love Fibery and are very happy customers. ♥ It's great.

Office space

Hardware and software, SaaS licensing, cloud costs, etc.

Hiring costs (recruitment, recruiters, time lost in selection and hiring)

Secondary cost to rest of the business to change processes, retrain, integrate, help the dev team understand requirements, effectively build and iterate, etc.

Quite possibly a bunch of compliance, security, audit, pen testing, and other regulatory costs depending on the demands their clients have, etc.

Running a team != hiring a bunch of freelancers as a one-off.

* A staggered process for the roll-out, so that machines that are updated check-in with some metrics that say "this new version is OK" (aka "canary deployment") and that the update is paused/rolled back if not.

* Basic smoke testing of the files before they're pushed to any customers

* Validation that the file is OK before accepting an update (via a checksum or whatever, matched against the "this update works" automated test checksums)

* Fuzz tests that broken files don't brick the machine

Literally any of the above would have saved millions and millions of dollars today.

Lay-offs happen for all sorts of reasons. It may be very reasonable to have X number of people one year, but changed market conditions, or financing rates, or whatever else mean it no longer does the next year.

People don't have magic crystal balls. But even if they did, it may still make sense to hire people while financing such a thing is cheap, and to lay those same people off when it isn't any more. Make hay while the sun shines, and all that.

You may not like the fact, but getting rid of poor performers makes businesses stronger and better. Rounds of lay-offs undeniably make such decisions easier to make and justify in large companies.

CEOs who do the same (or more) with fewer resources are generally rewarded. As a shareholder in the company you'd want them to do more with less and make you more value, right?

You might as well argue that any CEO who needs to hire more people has failed. That sounds obviously silly, but it's genuinely an almost equivalent argument.

All of this may not be pleasant for those involved and especially those who are losing their jobs, but that's capitalism for you. Big business doesn't tend to optimise for people's feelings - it cares more about the bottom line and being competitive.

In this case there is an obvious and pressing need. The streaming music scene may be a tremendously complex place to operate a business in, with all it's licensing and labels and countless jurisdictions and legal complexities, but both Apple and Google are sitting there ready to eat Spotify's lunch if they can't figure out profitability.

Don't forget if you're doing back-of-the-envelope stuff that there is also 20.6% corporate tax on revenue that has originated in Sweden. And companies resident in Sweden are taxed on their worldwide income, although if they are taxed elsewhere then this elsewhere amount can be deducted. But this means you are paying at least that amount. I imagine some chunk of Spotify's workforce exists to optimise and figure out all of that, given the number of legislatures and tax environments they have subscribers in.

They are all surprisingly hopeless. For example, none of them have SCIM integration to make managing your teams in them automatic. All of them have clunky calendar overrides. None of them seem to integrate well with Outlook / Google Calendar, particularly none take into account holidays. Many have no Terraform provider to manage them, and the ones that do are clunky at best, and hard to set-up/manage. OIDC is hit-and-miss. For example, for PagerDuty you need to call up their support team and get them to manually tweak something that's not in the UI settings to get OIDC for Azure AD sign-ins to work.

It's not that management is apathetic. We genuinely don't want to engineers spending their time working around vendor inadequacies and lashing this stuff together with barely-maintained scripting that they resent having to write in the first place. Why would anyone want that? Given there's seemingly no product out there that lets you avoid that, what should we do? When they're all rubbish, you either choose PagerDuty because everyone does, or Opsgenie as a protest vote, because at least both have Terraform providers and plug-ins for other things like Slack and Sentry, etc.

https://evcompare.io claims a real-world winter range in miles of:

192 for the BMW i4 M50

241 for the BMW i4 eDrive40

252 for the Tesla Model 3 Performance

282 for the Tesla Model 3 Long Range

So yes, the much slower i4 with the 18" wheels gets a similar range to the much faster Model 3 Performance with the 20" wheels. That's not really apples-for-apples though is it?

If you don't want the M50 / M3 Performance speed, then save the £6k and get a Model 3 Long Range. You'd have more performance and more range than the i4 eDrive40, and a car that weighs nearly half a tonne less.

(That's before options - it's about £9k to get all the things that are standard on the Tesla, like keyless entry, a heated steering wheel, electric seats, lumbar support adjustment, auto-dipping headlights, wireless phone charging, drive recorder, active cruise + lane keeping (autopilot), a glass roof, etc.)

A Model Y long range which is faster (by 1.4s to 60mph) and has better range is £2k cheaper.

Techies might (gross generalisation warning) tend to: a) Have higher than average disposable income b) Be early adopters of new tech c) Care less what other people think of them than an average person d) Judge things more objectively than an average person.

So it's hardly surprising a lot of them end up buying a Tesla Model 3. They are very well-packaged, fast, have good range, the Supercharger network, and are fairly mid-priced as cars these days go (similar to say a slower BMW 3 series diesel, at least in the UK).

The BMW i4 launched recently. The Tesla Model 3 is a six year old design. And yet the i4 has much worse range, is either slower or much more expensive, and according to all the critics seems to be less fun to drive.

Heaven forfend that anyone buy a car on its merits, as opposed to what other people think of the badge.