Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Search - "autonomy"
-
employee: I want growth in my role
company: *installs ping pong table*
employee: autonomy?
company: *creates fully-stocked snack room*
employee: fulfilment.
company: *employs a live DJ in the office*
employee: *quits*
company: some people just aren't a good culture fit.6 -
I met with the CTO of a local tech company today for a beer, at the recommendation of a friend who currently works at the company. They're looking for Software Engineers and wanted to see if I'd be a good fit.
I'm not actively looking to leave my current job, as I love it there. I was just curious to see what other opportunities were out there.
After the beer, he pretty much offered me the job on the spot for $30,000 to $40,000 more than my current salary, along with benefits. When I asked if there was any sort of technical interview, he said that this meeting was actually the technical interview, and that by the time he had finished his first beer, he could already tell that I would be a good fit. He wants me to meet with his Lead Architect and CEO soon just to see if we all click and then we'll go from there.
The only problem is that I really love my current company. I love the work, the atmosphere, the autonomy, and my coworkers. But an extra $30k to $40k per year is a lot of money.
If everything works out and they give me an official written offer, I'm going to see if my current job will counteroffer. I know my boss would happily counteroffer if he's given authorization from the higher-ups, it's just a matter of exactly how much they're able to counteroffer.19 -
the most incompetent person that ever worked with me had no proactivity, always waited for an explicit order to start to do anything and had absolutely no autonomy. this guy would frequently ask me stuff that he could find with a google search.
when the IT team was let go, the company lined me up for another job, and my boss actually told me "you work well so i can refer you, but i can't do the same for <that guy>". i honestly thought that was his first job, but no. i have no clue how he managed to work in a hospital before that.4 -
Question to all you web developers out there: how do you survive long term in this job without going nuts? I have been working in this industry for almost 7 years and feelings of frustration have accumulated, to the point where I honestly feel like laying g bricks as a job would be more rewarding. Here are the main reasons why:
1) The fact that your job is never "finished" and it looks like and endless stream of tasks. Either the project has money being rolled in or is pretty much dead. Ever changing requirements ensure that most of what you do will be rewritten in 6 months or so. This is ok for the most part, but overtime it does give you the feeling that most of your effort was wasted, and you have the same website/app to show for it, slightly different...
2) The never ending churn of tech, particularly in the Javascript/node ecosystem. Sure, there is a good side of learning new approaches of doing things and it brings variety, but there is the dark side that you never feel you are getting better at doing your job, as every new project does not look anything like the previous. Even if all the stack pieces are the same (never happens), everyone sets it up and organises the project differently enough that you have to spend loads of time solving things you have done before. This makes it difficult to get a sense that you are mastering something...
So, if autonomy, purpose, and mastery are the keys to fulfilling work, I find this career lacking in mastery and purpose...does anyone feels/felt the same? How did you counter it?3 -
Despite some of the few bat crazy events that occur, I've got a fairly sweet dev job.
1. I only have a 25 minute drive to work. All interstate, I live close to the highway, and the business is right off the exit.
2. My current position, I have a lot of autonomy. My projects don't have deadlines and help other teams with their projects (system design, testing, etc)
3. I work with several military veterans. I think I could listen to their crazy stories all day (being a dev isn't so bad).
4. Department manager just quit. Probably going to have less and less things to rant about. Along with #2, I plan on having a lot more time for side-projects (stuff *I* want to learn about).3 -
When a client says they no longer have time for one of their websites and asks you to make it completely autonomous.
Yeah sure, I'll go ahead and install Skynet on it right away!
I no longer have any motivation to work with that client. -
I'm honestly so happy and grateful to be in the world of web development. It's an amazing space to be in when you enjoy solving problems.
Consistently fast evolving and ever changing technologies means new and exciting problems are endless!
But I swear to all that is motherfucking holy, if I have to keep solving exactly the same problems over and over because the place I work at won't let me provide permanent solutions to old problems... I'm going. To. Lose. My. Freaking. Mind6 -
I got moved to a new team. My old team was truly agile, and my manager was very "off hands" and actually let us work.
My new team is an older team that practices a bloated abomination called SAFe Agile, and the manager gets into all the details to the point of removing autonomy.
Shoot me please.
Paradise lost. -
So I let myself go by all of this talk about giving more freedom and autonomy to your team. "Don't micro-manage them", they said. "Trust them," they said. And that's the way I wish to be treated. That's how I personally work best.
Alas, this only works only when they're truly good at what they're doing. Sometimes I feel like we'd go faster if I did everything myself. These baby devs must be taken by the hand every damn step of the way.5 -
Most obnoxious company process: The newly introduced promotion process at my ex-employer.
Originally they had a run-of-the-mill process. You and your boss reviewed your performance independently, then spent an hour to compare results. If you agreed to have proven yourself, your boss did some remaining paperwork (iow he did his job) and done.
Under the guise of transparency, fairness and autonomy of employees this was changed to:
You had to find three coworkers willing to review you (favorably). You collected their feedback, processed that (strengths, "opportunities for improvement", etc) and presented it to your boss for review. These were the first two steps of four in total, of which I've forgotten the other details tbh. It became pretty ridiculous with you defining "progress indicators", your boss's boss involved in another review round and what not.
The true purpose was clear: Delaying promotions as long as possible, making the employees do all the work, and being able to just say "no" at any point. I don't know how intellectually superior managers and HR viewed themselves, because literally none of my coworkers bought this as an improvement.
But, yeah, that became the new process at a company too big to fail.1 -
Week 1 of the new job, and it seems I have some pretty low expectations to meet.
Seriously, I just did the math. Let's say one works an average of 48 hours per week, 50 weeks per year. Just as an average. That's 2400 hours in a year.
In the Micro-scale, a manager would mess up their team once every 2.4 hours (2h24m) or about 4 times per day (assuming 5 working days per week).
That is a pretty low bar to clear. It easy not to be an antsy brat that are-we-there-yet's a professional dev four fucking times a day.
And yet... that is what the complete moron who previously sat on my chair used to do.
Seriously, apparently he used to remote access the team's dev envs *while they were working* and even mess up some of their code. Just as a "monitoring measure". He logged their "keystroke time" in a day (using a primitive windowing method, I must add).
At least 7 requests for updates per person per day. I have his slack history, I checked. Dude literally did nothing else but be an annoying anxiety death pit.
And then there is his bulshit planning...
He created tasks out of his stupid whims, no team review or brainstorming, not even a fucking requisites tallying interview.
He prioritized those out-of-nowhere tasks using panic-driven-development practices and assigned them by availability heuristics.
No sizing method, just arbitrary deadlines for tasks.
I think I will need to have daily standup meetings and an open door policy (that is to say, do no actual work) for a couple months until I can instill some sense of autonomy on my new team. Shit.
Someone has another idea? How do I bring some confidence&autonomy back to devs that are used to be treated like dogs?!?7 -
Alright, guys. You have complete autonomy over this project, from ideation to execution. You can do exploratory interviews to find out what potencial customers would think, you can come up with prototypes, you can choose whatever tech stack you deem fit for the job. The only requirement is that it must be a beauty product. Oh, and that it must have a way to publish this ton of pictures of models our client has. Oh, and it must handle payments and inventory. And it may integrate with third party software. And users need to save the pictures they like. And a booking system. Is that hard to understand?2
-
I am really stressed rn. I have terrible Imposter's Syndrome coupled with this being my 2nd year as a professional (bootcamp grad) and an extreme lack of insight and support from my company. WFH has only exacerbated it. Im on a 2-ish person team handling some ancient legacy code with no one ever willing to just throw me a fucking bone. My supe is actually on my team and makes up the "ish" part and has always told me to ask questions but when I do he gets pissed and reminds me of all the people who are working and super busy and dont have time to stop what they're doing and help me. Its my first job in tech and I just need to know if this is a consistent thing across the board bc im ready to fucking jump ship. My anxiety levels are through the roof and when I go over our backlog I look at every card and ask myself how tf Im going to grt it done bc Ive never seen any of it before. Initially I thought i landed a great workplace with complete autonomy but now I just dont know. My other teammate has a habit of being condescending, whether he realizes it or not and therefore I just feel like im out here alone trying to figure all this shit out. This sprung from a card ive been working on for 2+ months but cant resolve, finally I just came to the conclusion it was above what im currently capable of and he told me he's "disappointed Im just throwing in the towel" even though ive asked for help from senior devs. Idk what to do, he even told me there'd be cards I may hit a wall on when I first started but this just feels shitty. Ive had other things going on to including surviving a fucking hurricane, having a friend murdered, and having my dad die all within a few weeks time. I am absolutely stretched to my emotional limit, but I dont know if Im overreacting. Anyway, I just needed to vent to people who could understand, thanks for reading.6
-
Haven't ranted for awhile but here it goes...
In a meeting with a front end user yesterday. They don't like the entry screens on our Oracle ERP system. They want us to provide them with a tool so they can create new entry screens to replace those they dont like. They want full autonomy over that tool and no interference from IT. Oh, and they want unfettered database access to the production data, including full ability to execute DML. I so wanted to say 'Are you high?'.1 -
*this is gonna be a long one*
This year has been a Year™️. I'm kinda fed up with the industry in general, and I'm not sure how I'm gonna get back to working.
I also got an official autism diagnosis, which makes me feel like there isn't really gonna be a workplace where I'm not gonna want to die. It's fucking exhausting to deal with corporate bs and I don't have the bandwidth for that.
Recently I've been focusing on finishing my studies and I've been considering a hard turn to academia. tbh it's not an idea i like to entertain, but i do like that it has more autonomy and room to breathe. I also like teaching, that's not the problem for me, i just hate the research culture in general. I find it pedantic and gatekeepy in a way that really pisses me off.
Anyway, I'm mostly exhausted, but i do enjoy this field, I just don't know where to go from here.3 -
why is it everybody wants to hire a head of a department all the time
like that's just super weird to me
wouldn't it make more sense to hire someone into a lower position, have them learn from head of a department, then get promoted because you know they'll head the department to your standards then?
but most posts want you to already be head of a department... and it's like, I don't know your department. what the hell happened to the last head of department? why do so many people need heads of department? why the hell are they choosing to get them from outside the company?
somehow none of this makes any sense to me
like I'm literally just so confused why people hire seniors and expect them to automatically know the way the company does things
it just literally doesn't make sense
promote your underlings? then hire more underlings to sus them out?
WHY ARE YOU HIRING SENIOR STAFF FROM OUTSIDE YOUR COMPANY, LITERALLY NOBODIES, AND GIVING THEM TONS OF AUTONOMY AND CONTROL OVER OTHERS IN YOUR COMPANY, THATS SO CONFUSING
worse yet I hear most people just lie when they apply so it's like... are you rotating irresponsible lying people through senior positions at your company over and over again, as they attrition your underlings and eventually get fired for incompetence?
WHAT IS THE STATE OF THIS ECOSYSTEM5 -
now I'm becoming much more aware how I'm shadowbanned on YouTube...
I watch a lot of small channels and I literally can't talk to them, I just realized...
shaodwbanning means it's one way communication only. you have to listen to the propaganda box and you don't matter and can't give any feedback at all
I wanted to give some business takes on someone analyzing some companies, and I can't... because I'm in the propaganda box. I'm not considered a person who deserves a voice, on anything now, ever, for the rest of time. I'm just a receptacle
reminds me of the philosophical definition of objectification some feminist wrote about: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/...
instrumentality: the treatment of a person as a tool for the objectifier’s purposes;
denial of autonomy: the treatment of a person as lacking in autonomy and self-determination;
inertness: the treatment of a person as lacking in agency, and perhaps also in activity;
fungibility: the treatment of a person as interchangeable with other objects;
violability: the treatment of a person as lacking in boundary-integrity;
ownership: the treatment of a person as something that is owned by another (can be bought or sold);
denial of subjectivity: the treatment of a person as something whose experiences and feelings (if any) need not be taken into account
we are all irrelevant playthings to some narcissistic speakerboxes3 -
I'm pretty much at my dream job currently. A lot of autonomy as a developer, solo projects, as there are only two developers in-house and each of us is covering roughly half of the systems, we rarely work on the same thing at the same time. We do have weekly sync checkins to keep each other appraised and offer a helping hand/eye when needed.
But.
There's always a but.
Our IT department used to service 500 to 1000 employees 7 years ago, and now, through growth, opening new sibling companies, and merging with our competitors we're at 6k, give or take.
Maybe it's the aftermerge crunch to harmonize our IT systems but I've been working 10+ hours from August. It's an interesting couple of new pieces of software that I'm writing but, the deadlines are pretty tight and business requirements are anything but tight still.
I love my job, but I wish to get the bigger stuff done soon so I can take it easy. -
I'm torn between my current boss that gives me freedom and autonomy and my first boss. My first boss taught me development can be fun, especially the hardest parts.
We'll call it a tie. -
HP Process Automation. Hideous abortion of a product for eForms and workflow. HP took it on when they acquired Autonomy the original developers. And Autonomy are now getting in trouble for possibly lying about their success figures before being acquired.
-
I have dilema..
Should I go to a small software company that use latest angular + .net core and have tech lead..
OR
continue working in large non-it mnc department where I have autonomy to do things however I want see I fit.
I think going to software house is good. The payment is good, but maybe it will cost some of my life due to I have to be fullstack.
At the large non it mnc company is better I have to do front end using Angular and I have total control. No one point out what is my mistakes.
I am young 24 and not married yet3 -
1. Purpose: Being at the forefront of discovering how and helping to automate business processes in all domains and learn about "how things work"
2. Relative autonomy
3. Mastery (of languages, concepts, methods) -
#Suphle Rant 2: Michael's obduration
For the uninitiated, Suphle is a PHP framework I built. This is the 2nd installment in my rants on here about it.
Some backstory: A friend and I go back ~5 years. Let's call him Michael. He was CTO of the company we worked at. After his emigration, they seem to have taught him some new stack and he needed somewhere to practise it on. That stack was Spring Boot and Angular. He and his pals convinced product owner at our workplace to rebuild the project (after 2+ years of active development) from scratch using these new techs. One thing led to the other, and I left the place after some months.
Fast forward a year later, dude hits me up to broach an incoming gig he wants us to collab on. Asks where I'm at now, and I reply I took the time off to build Suphle. Told him it's done already and it contains features from Spring, Rust, Nest and Rails; basically, I fixed everything they claimed makes PHP nonviable for enterprise software, added features from those frameworks that would attract a neutral party. Dude didn't even give me audience. I only asked him to look at the repo's readme to see what it does. That's faster than reading the tests (since the docs are still in progress). He stopped responding.
He's only the second person who has contacted me for a gig since I left. Both former colleagues. Both think lowly of PHP, ended up losing my best shot at earning a nickel while away from employed labour. It definitely feels like shooting myself in the foot.
I should take up his offer, get some extra money to stay afloat until Suphle's release. But he's adamant I use Spring. Even though Laravel is the ghetto, I would grudgingly return to it than spend another part of my life fighting to get the most basic functionality up and running without a migraine in Spring. This is a framework without an official documentation. You either have to rely on baeldung or mushroom blogs. Then I have to put up with mongodb (or nosql, in short).
I want to build a project I'm confident and proud about delivering, one certified by automated tests for it, something with an architecture I've studied extensively before arriving at. Somewhere to apply all the research that was brainstormed before this iteration of Suphle was built.
I want autonomy, not to argue over things I'm sure about. He denied me this when we worked together. I may not mind swallowing them for the money, but a return to amateur mode in Spring is something I hope I never get to experience soon
So, I'm wondering: if his reaction reflects the general impression PHP has among developers globally, it means I've built a castle on a sinking ship. If someone who can vouch for me as a professional would prefer not to have anything to do with PHP despite my reassurance it'll be difficult to convince others within and beyond that there could be a more equipped alternative to their staple tool. Reminds me of the time the orchestra played to their deaths while the titanic sank8 -
The Turing Test, a concept introduced by Alan Turing in 1950, has been a foundation concept for evaluating a machine's ability to exhibit human-like intelligence. But as we edge closer to the singularity—the point where artificial intelligence surpasses human intelligence—a new, perhaps unsettling question comes to the fore: Are we humans ready for the Turing Test's inverse? Unlike Turing's original proposition where machines strive to become indistinguishable from humans, the Inverse Turing Test ponders whether the complex, multi-dimensional realities generated by AI can be rendered palatable or even comprehensible to human cognition. This discourse goes beyond mere philosophical debate; it directly impacts the future trajectory of human-machine symbiosis.
Artificial intelligence has been advancing at an exponential pace, far outstripping Moore's Law. From Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) that create life-like images to quantum computing that solve problems unfathomable to classical computers, the AI universe is a sprawling expanse of complexity. What's more compelling is that these machine-constructed worlds aren't confined to academic circles. They permeate every facet of our lives—be it medicine, finance, or even social dynamics. And so, an existential conundrum arises: Will there come a point where these AI-created outputs become so labyrinthine that they are beyond the cognitive reach of the average human?
The Human-AI Cognitive Disconnection
As we look closer into the interplay between humans and AI-created realities, the phenomenon of cognitive disconnection becomes increasingly salient, perhaps even a bit uncomfortable. This disconnection is not confined to esoteric, high-level computational processes; it's pervasive in our everyday life. Take, for instance, the experience of driving a car. Most people can operate a vehicle without understanding the intricacies of its internal combustion engine, transmission mechanics, or even its embedded software. Similarly, when boarding an airplane, passengers trust that they'll arrive at their destination safely, yet most have little to no understanding of aerodynamics, jet propulsion, or air traffic control systems. In both scenarios, individuals navigate a reality facilitated by complex systems they don't fully understand. Simply put, we just enjoy the ride.
However, this is emblematic of a larger issue—the uncritical trust we place in machines and algorithms, often without understanding the implications or mechanics. Imagine if, in the future, these systems become exponentially more complex, driven by AI algorithms that even experts struggle to comprehend. Where does that leave the average individual? In such a future, not only are we passengers in cars or planes, but we also become passengers in a reality steered by artificial intelligence—a reality we may neither fully grasp nor control. This raises serious questions about agency, autonomy, and oversight, especially as AI technologies continue to weave themselves into the fabric of our existence.
The Illusion of Reality
To adequately explore the intricate issue of human-AI cognitive disconnection, let's journey through the corridors of metaphysics and epistemology, where the concept of reality itself is under scrutiny. Humans have always been limited by their biological faculties—our senses can only perceive a sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum, our ears can hear only a fraction of the vibrations in the air, and our cognitive powers are constrained by the limitations of our neural architecture. In this context, what we term "reality" is in essence a constructed narrative, meticulously assembled by our senses and brain as a way to make sense of the world around us. Philosophers have argued that our perception of reality is akin to a "user interface," evolved to guide us through the complexities of the world, rather than to reveal its ultimate nature. But now, we find ourselves in a new (contrived) techno-reality.
Artificial intelligence brings forth the potential for a new layer of reality, one that is stitched together not by biological neurons but by algorithms and silicon chips. As AI starts to create complex simulations, predictive models, or even whole virtual worlds, one has to ask: Are these AI-constructed realities an extension of the "grand illusion" that we're already living in? Or do they represent a departure, an entirely new plane of existence that demands its own set of sensory and cognitive tools for comprehension? The metaphorical veil between humans and the universe has historically been made of biological fabric, so to speak.7