particularly move your cv to the blank email
"we've had one break fast, yes. What about second break fast?"
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
814 points (99.0% liked)
Programmer Humor
31034 readers
767 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Do you work in devops?
Dev oops
I believe we call that a "fast follow".
Like all sayings, there is context for moving fast and breaking things.
The saying means that when creating something new for profit, don't worry too much about trying to figure out all the details beforehand and figure it out as you go. This will inevitably cause things to break, but being able to quickly fix that when it happens is the same skills needed to create new features as you go.
The saying does not work with large and complex established systems where breaking things wreak havoc.
It also feels like they chase the βbreak thingsβ part as if not breaking stuff is a bad thing, and like we should be proud of them for releasing broken and poorly tested updates.
Move fast, break things, fix the broken things, push update/product whatever. They keep forgetting the third step.
Like the startups that 'disrupt' the established system by ignoring laws and breaking the parts that worked and selling it like an improvement.
'Ride sharing' (unregulated cabs) was only cheaper because of investor funding allowing them to undercut on pricing, abusing the concept of contract workers, and the companies ignoring laws. That isn't 'disruptive' by being innovative, that is cheating the system.
And thatβs exactly it. Capitalism rewards having money and how you get it isnβt important. It doesnβt breed technological innovation but it sure as shit pumps out new, fun ways to spew propoganda and avoid laws! And oh boy is paying employees well not even close to a metric by which to measure a successful company.
Itβs the least people clever in the room having the volume to make sure that no one smarter than them can speak and then claiming theyβre geniuses when only their idea gets through.
I think there is another aspect that is important: limit the blast radius. Shit inevitably happens when you create something new and complex, and when it does, youβd rather minimise the impact where possible.
What, you mean I can't just read rich guy memoirs and blindly apply the platitude under each chapter heading? /s
It works fine for anyone with the foresight to be born into an ultra wealthy family.
Or at least a sorta-wealthy family, and the further "foresight" to be in the exact right place at the right time.
That's the background of most of the Western ultra-rich, just as a consequence of there being vastly more sorta-wealthy families than already ultra-rich ones. Some of them are bound to stumble into situations that add a digit or two to their net worth. For an example, Elon Musk is notable for being tangentially involved in a huge success like three times, despite being a well-known moron.
My favourite introduction to the mathematical modeling of how inequality happens.
come to think of it, at this company devs aren't needed, just QAs and a toxic manager would suffice
oh, that's how you end up with APERTURE SCIENCE
We do what we want, because we can
For the good of all of us, except the ones who are dead.
for those who wanna drown in nostalgia a bit
but what about the auto tests
Tests are for nerds.
Always remember, the silicon valley ethos of "break things" wasn't about their applications, it was about breaking industry, society, laws and your ability to oversee or regulate them.