My mode of software development is to just start trying things. But I love working with people who need to read all the docs first.
I used to think that was a waste of time & I wanted a whole team like me, but it turns out - my mode isn’t always the right way to go.
I also like to use boring, reliable technology. But I love working with people who are into the new hotness.
Because it turns out, boring & reliable isn’t always the right answer, and I need people pushing me to consider the new hotness - because sometimes they’re right.
My goal is to write more great software, and while you might SOMETIMES get great software from a team of people who all think like me, you will CONSISTENTLY get great software from a team of people who have a variety of approaches.
We all need to trust each other, and we also need to put a lot of energy into understanding each other. We will write less code than the all-Sarah team. But we will write better software.
PSA: There is currently no way for web components to be accessible if you use the isolation feature (called “shadow dom”).
Isolate the label from the input field, for example, & you break all the assistive technology - which requires they be tied together with ids.
There will eventually be a plan for dealing with accessibility across web component isolation boundaries, but the discussion is in the early stages, and we’re not likely to see consensus for several years.
Until then, isolation via shadow dom is a nonstarter.
So when you see all this stuff about how using web components can isolate your changes and take the cascading out of the CSS - mentally add “in 2-3 years” to all the claims.
Part of the problem is that he’s a rich tech executive who is actively contributing to the income inequality that leads to these property crimes, yet instead of addressing that, all he does is demand MORE resources.
There’s a slide deck somewhere on some VC’s computer that is the “exploit gig workers handbook” - and it includes this move, because for awhile after you do it you still get higher-level work done for pennies because your workers trusted you & engaged with your platform.
They can’t all move off right away. So they protest, & maybe organize. You string them along with platitudes (“our shoppers are the reason we exist!”) to slow attrition. Meanwhile you onboard new, lower-quality, more desperate workers at the new rate as fast as you can.
When I was younger & often the only woman on a team, I found that the white men in my team could jump straight to “X is terrible” & have it cheerfully explained to them.
I & my PoC male coworkers, on the other hand, often got defensiveness & tone policing when we did that.
So even though it took me awhile, I still think I picked up this skill (because I had to!) before many of my white male colleagues did.
I can’t stop thinking about this bit in the Theranos book.
Company executives (Balwani was one) used this functionality to convince people that their machines were working - just slowly - when they were, in fact, not working at all.
These demonstrations were used to cement partnerships, wow journalists, and secure company funding - all on false pretenses.
And worse - these non-working machines ACTUALLY INJURED PEOPLE.
One lawsuit in progress alleges a man suffered a preventable heart attack because the machine returned incorrect blood test results that, if correct, would have indicated the danger.
Reminders: 1. The @fsf board is still run by Alexandre Oliva, who has more compassion for Stallman than for his harassment victims
@fsf 2. The @fsf has not separated itself from its main project - GNU - a project that Richard Stallman continues to run. The FSF provides all of the project's funding and organizational support.
@fsf 3. The board has issued no statement on the departure of its founder and board chair, beyond a 57-word strictly factual account published almost 2 weeks ago.