I just got another attempt at recruitment for a Javascript developer for some company in Colorado, looking to "disrupt" online education, as sooooooo many other companies have tried to do before and failed outright.

Here is my response. (thread)

Hoooo boy are you barking up the wrong tree.

I hate Javascript with every fiber of my being.  It, in large part, has been a significant contributor to my industrial burnout.

I also do not partake in "full stack" anything anymore.  I am a software developer, but I can only work on one problem at a time.  Dividing my time among a thousand little problems, most of which aren't of any consequence to the success of a company, is a surefire way to get trash as a result.

Show thread

Observe how many big profile companies have had major data breaches of late; yeah, let's talk about how "one person can do everything" works out for them.

And, think of it this way: the more frameworks a company ends up using (and in Javascript, **EVERYTHING** is a #(*%ing framework!), the more employees they need to hire to manage that complexity, and aggregate software development productivity asymptotically drops to zero.

Show thread
Follow

Observe how Facebook and Google have entire *cities* worth of people working for them at any given campus, and yet, they have never replicated their early successes since. Google Checkout, Wave, and Orkut were all disasters. Facebook's having a bear of a time trying to manage abuses of its product, having been caught red-handed in accidentally helping to manipulate the 2016 election.

Finally, software development and engineering are team efforts; I don't want to "own" anything. I've been there, done that, got all the t-shirts the companies I worked for provided, and I can say definitely, it's the wrong model.

Show thread

NO CODE OWNERSHIP. That's what underlies the success of extreme programming, and Kent Beck had it absolutely right. Code ownership is bunk. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either grossly inexperienced in the industry or trying to sell you on their misguided attempts at being a "thought leader." Whatever that means.

Show thread

No thank you. Respectfully, I will pass on this opportunity. But, thank you for reaching out. Maybe some day, there'll be a good fit for me. Or, maybe, I'll end up working at Walmart again. Whichever comes first. 🙂

Show thread

@vertigo I've noticed some CODEOWNERS -type files in a few Github repos. It feels very 1993, but in a bad way.

@alrs The nice thing about having a file like that is, if you have a question about the code, you can reach out to them to ask it. But, the *ownership* model is, IMO, a bit broken for much of everything else.

If I were ever to adopt a similar convention, OWNERS or CODEOWNERS would never be my first choice of filename. Maybe EXPERT or OFFICE-HOURS or some such instead.

@alrs In any event, the latter approach would also differ in that it's voluntary to list yourself there, not compulsory like so many corporate or high-profile FOSS management teams require.

@vertigo "git-blame" tells you more than any CODEOWNERS.

@alrs That tells you who tweaked the code, but they may not have the complete picture of how the code should work, or how it fits into the bigger picture of the complete system. I find that having an 'architect'-like role on the team is invaluable.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!