Some parts of this are probably good advise, at least with respect to clocking titular promotions. No disagreement around visibility of delivered "big wins" being key.

However, I feel like this article is subliminally pro-management, with the thesis statement essentially being just make your manager (and their manager) happy. But what happens when there's no clear direction from management on what the team's goals are? Or when priorities shift on a weekly, or even daily basis? It seems pretty hard to deliver anything meaningful, if by the time you're finished they've already moved on to the next shiny thing.

Additionally, in my experience this "make your manager happy" approach goes hand-in-hand with a "yes boss" manager-subordinate relationship. Managers are empowered to flurry out executive dispatches on what, when, and how things ought to be done, and engineers are encouraged to follow orders. Results are normally not great.

However, I did attend a GT program during elementary school. This school was a "regular" public elementary school in the sense it had a local geographic boundary, and kids in the area attended this as their default public school. However, then kids who qualified for GT would be bussed in from around the county to go to this school.

Within the school, past the 3rd grade classes were segmented into GT and "base" classes (i.e. non-GT). The "base" classes were local kids who did not qualify for the GT program. GT qualification was based off a single test score, taken in the second grade. Kids in the GT and base classes were often respectively referred to as GT or base kids.

In retrospect, it's always appeared super detrimental to me that those kids were called "base" as if they were a somehow more basic version of the GT kids. The name "base" in itself was probably intended as a kind euphemism, to not otherwise default to calling them non-GT kids, i.e. non Gifted nor Talented.

Anyway, all of this to say GT programs probably have a place, but in my own anecdotal experience they were not always executed flawlessly.

> Moments like these don’t happen often. When they do, it’s the people that put themselves right at the bleeding edge that find the opportunities

I hate this framing, and the associated mindset. This "creating a sense of urgency" is a tactic employed by car salesman and phishing emails.

Nothing but respect for the people doing cutting edge on LLMs/GenAI, but this post and video exude a sleazy, get-rich-quick vibe. It feels similar to the crypto hype-rush, which is unfortunate because in contrast to crypto, it seems there's real utility in LLMs/GenAI.

I think the part that rubs me the wrong way is they don't even pretend to care about the technology itself, how people might use it, or build businesses around it. They even directly acknowledge this at 3:00 with "we're not even saying we know the ideas".

It's all just "I smell money" and a rush to try and cut yourself a slice of the pie. I've never founded a startup so maybe I know nothing, but if a founder was asked why are you starting this business and their answer was "to get rich before anyone else", I don't know if I'd bet on that business.

I also had an experience with a delayed bag once, which took about an hour to come out on the carousel. It was long enough that I went to the help desk to get help and potentially report the bag as lost. I got a 300 dollar travel credit, and my bag turned up shortly after.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsAOh89b7mE&list=PLVAaokG6re...

Some of my favorite clips were from early in the vlogs in the Southwestern USA like California, Airzona, and New Mexico:

https://youtu.be/UJ12FHCUMTg?list=PLVAaokG6re_rwP-h3gtJMG54C...

I also wonder if this goes through, does this set a precedent for enforcing similar divestment expectations for any companies operating in China. Is this isolated to social media platform, or could this also eventually extend in to other industries like manufacturing?

The plot of Github Stars over Time: Supabase vs. MongoDB seems particularly silly (imo).

Not a hater by the way, I think their YouTube channel is actually pretty good, and I think it will become increasingly common for startups/businesses to have something like this for product/brand awareness, getting users up and running, etc.

I think if the goal of the post was focusing on platform maturation and growth, it might have been better to focus exclusively on the plots of database/users over time, and simply link out to the various social channels.

Overall though still cool to see, and congratulations to the Supabase team!

It seems like the whole "capped for-profit within a non-profit" is not going to to work long term.

I recently started on a new Rust project, and despite not having to worry about things like sanitizers as much, I followed a similar approach of getting it to compile locally, getting it compile in a docker container, setup automated CI/CD against all PRs.

Although I would order the steps as 1, 3, 4, 2. Don't get out the chainsaw until you have CI/CD tests evaluating your code changes as you go.

I'm realizing now another (and potentially stronger influence) is just years of muscle memory starting pipelines with cat.

Things like this:

head -n 500 access.log | grep ...

head -n 500 Feel like you start with the filename, then go leftwards to the first operation, then start reading rightward again through the pipe. At least in my brain, it feels slightly more awkward.

This youtube video was particularly helpful in learning about consensus algorithms, specifically Paxos/MultiPaxos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEpsBg0AO6o

John Ousterhout (author of Raft) walks through Paxos/MultiPaxos as outlined by Leslie Lamport, and then talks about a series of optimizations to improve performance. One key optimization is transitioning from performing consensus on a single log-slot proposal, to the entire log-slot altogether, which mitigates failed consensus rounds, and is where concepts like leader nodes emerge. If your familiar with Raft and Paxos, while listening to these optimization applied to MultiPaxos, you can kind of notice it to begin to resemble Raft.

The course I took was through Georgia Tech, but was largely based around a framework developed at the University of Washington called dslabs:

https://github.com/emichael/dslabs

https://ellismichael.com/dslabs/452%20Discussion%20Section%2...

It was super informative for my learning about the foundations of distributed systems, namely consensus algorithms. I'd highly recommend it for anyone interested in learning more. Although fair warning, the programming assignments were quite difficult and time consuming.

However we did learn the hard way that RDS Blue/Green cannot be used to apply arbitrary changes. In our case, we discovered RDS Blue/Green can only be used to move up engine versions, not down.

We discovered on MySQL 8.0 one of our stored procedures had very occasional failures, and considered the option of using RDS Blue/Green again to move back down to 5.7. Turns out that's not an option.

- Virtual desktop experience at least as good as a single 27inch monitor

- Doesn't make me nauseous or hurt my neck

- Isn't egregiously expensive (3,500 is pretty steep)

I think if there is a company that could really kick of mainstream VR/AR headset adoption, Apple probably has the best brand to do it.

That being said I have a Quest 2 with a couple years of accumulated dust in a closet, so who knows.