Just don't start with a range based on your experience and the value you bring blah blah blah and then ask me to explain why I'm worth that much.
Or even worse, waste both of our time on multiple rounds of interviews just to try and undercut me.
Remote.
When it comes to software development, I'm convinced that 99% of the work can be done remotely far better and more efficiently than in an office.
Unless we're building a rocket ship or submarine, which we're obviously not.
No, unless we're building a rocket ship
Head of NALBSQ*.
I'm a strong believer that a lot of meetings are a waste of time.
45 min Daily, Refinement, Refinement of Refinement, Retrospective, etc.
Seen a lot of teams trying to artificially implement some agile practices to fill the void, and it just doesn't work. First of all it affects productivity of the developers, and second of all it's just not effective.
Better to have a culture where everyone can reach out when needed and brainstorm things, while keeping the meetings to a minimum.
Hm. software engineer at Airbus. 🤣
Or working on something that makes positive impact on people's lives, on something that people use daily.
It automates the boring stuff, and that's a good thing.
But its side effects are far more concerning.
A lot of AI generated code, makes it harder to debug and understand the code and overcomplicates things.
Even worse, letting another model without context to fix it, just wastes n amount of hours feeding context into the model and getting anywhere.
In the industries I've worked in, I like to see code that is easy to understand and maintain.
Future-proof code, that can be easily modified and extended.
Separated concerns, that are easy to test and debug.
And of course, code that is easy to deploy and scale.
I've seen a few.
But I've seen a lot of bad tech leads and architects that make such a mess of things, that it's hard to tell if the developer is bad or they are.
* NALBSQ - National Association of Let's Ban Stupid Questions