“vi
Oh boy. Here we go. Type vi index.html. This going to open vim which is an editor that's all in the command line.”
Not to sound pedantic, but vi is not vim. While vim was designed as vi-improved, instructing users of vi to use vim direction is not going to be a complete match and may cause confusion for those not familiar with it.
CentOS:
[jachee@jachee:~]
[00:12:29] > ls -l $(which vi)
ls: cannot access alias: No such file or directory
ls: cannot access vi='vim': No such file or directory
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 2294208 Oct 30 2018 /usr/bin/vim
[jachee@jachee:~]
[00:12:53] 2 > which vi
alias vi='vim'
/usr/bin/vim
Homebrew:
[jachee@gyrate:~]
[00:14:15] ▷ ls -l $(which vi)
lrwxr-xr-x 1 jachee admin 29 Aug 6 11:14 /usr/local/bin/vi -> ../Cellar/vim/8.1.1800/bin/vi
[jachee@gyrate:~]
[00:14:28] ▷ ls -l /usr/local/Cellar/vim/8.1.1800/bin/vi
lrwxr-xr-x 1 jachee staff 3 Aug 3 12:17 /usr/local/Cellar/vim/8.1.1800/bin/vi -> vim
No-Homebrew Catalina:
[jacobachee@jachee-mbp15:~]
[00:17:24] ► ls -l $(which vi)
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3 Nov 19 11:46 /usr/bin/vi -> vim
Why stop with monitoring the computer? It would be easier to just plant a device to monitor thoughts and every action. Surely, this would only be used for good, and after all, it’s all about safety.
The monitoring for safety argument is merely an excuse to eliminate the right to privacy and shift the power to a government entity. Never in the history of mankind has this power ever been abused.
Communication is definitely huge with remote work. I think it’s the crux for a lot of newly remote workers. You have to adjust your communication style when working remotely, which some people just can’t handle. This goes for all sides as well though. I’ve been in a situation where onsite employees refused to participate with remote employees, which obviously didn’t end well.
This is where the follow up email to your attempt comes in handy. You try to speed things up by the phone call, but if you don’t get an answer, then you send an email and mention that you called as well. In the cases where you do speak with someone, then you can adjust the content to reflect your appreciation for them speaking with you and then outline the issue(s) still remaining, assuming they weren’t resolved. There are obviously various iterations and combinations but the gist is to be persistent and try to take more control of the situation by incorporating a follow up into the mix.
Yes! This is something that took me longer to learn than it should have. Even if the call went well, send a followup email briefly summarizing the discussion and end with actionable things.
I find phone or in person much better to gauge tone and emails can more easily be dismissed.
No offense, but that approach would make me not want to hire someone like that or work with someone like that. It may appear that you’re pulling one over on your previous employer, but if anything, that is probably a blessing for them to no longer have someone that operates in a shady fashion like that employed by them.
Edit: The undesirable behavior was in reference to the lying about a personal crisis. I personally believe in transparency and wouldn’t attempt to capitalize on an employer’s sympathy by lying to them.
I wouldn't lie about a crisis, but it's business. It's not unheard of to take a better offer and offer to work as a consultant at the previous employer.
The lying about the crisis is the part that I was referencing was shady. Working as a consultant for a previous employer is completely acceptable and provides mutual benefit.
Crisis story can be looked at as advertising or setting the table. You leave your old company with a reason and everyone feels better. Your image is safe and your backstory.
If anyone feels like this is dishonest what do you tell your new employer about why you are truly leaving the old position. Do you tell them the owner was rude and you told him off or do you say you left because of a bad personality fit? You are not lying but perhaps a little dishonest. You can have a personal crisis and that could be the new job.
> Crisis story can be looked at as advertising or setting the table.
I'm sorry, it's simply bald-faced lying. If I found out any of my hires had done this, I'd fire them.
> what do you tell your new employer about why you are truly leaving the old position.
I rarely need to tell them anything, but if they ask, I say "I'm seeking new challenges". It's not a lie, and it avoids potentially bad-mouthing prior employers. But I'll be honest here -- it's only happened twice in my career that I left a job because of something bad about the job.
Seeking new challenges is not being honest either. But it makes you see the person in a different light compared to the other more accurate version. That's what is happening with the personal crisis story.
Would you fire that same person if you discover a year later new challenges meant hated old boss and told them off?
Just curious are the positions you manage that easy to fill that you can fire at random?
If someone I knew was fired for that reason a lawsuit would be very likely. The manager would be let go after they lost cost the company so much money. I'm not in the US so I understand the rules might be different but usually you can't fire someone because they broke your personal moral code.
Agreed. The information presented currently serves a point. Removing items from the design for the sake of removing them is not efficient design. If anything, that is counterproductive.
The presented design would be better received as a personal preference. The tone presented is I’m right and if you don’t recognize that then you’re wrong.
Adults or not, the issues here are reasonable expectations and support. As easy as it is to shift the blame to the employee, the real blame belongs with management. As a manager, I accept responsibility for my team and if their performance is lacking then that is something that we address accordingly. If they can’t perform and the proper channels have been explored, then that is where continued employment should be evaluated.
That noise is the exact reason why I think the design over the years hasn’t strayed away as captured in the screenshots. One of my favorite parts of using GitHub is that the design is clean and easy to navigate. Throwing twenty widgets on there and cramming everything on top of each other adds clutter and distracts users from being able to visually navigate the page. I can’t speak for everyone, but given the chance, I prefer using GitHub over BitBucket and GitLab because the design is much cleaner and easier to navigate.
I block the requests to google-analytics.com, newrelic.com, and statuspage.io.
I allow the requests to atlassian.com, cloudfront.net, "bytebucket.org", and bitbucket.org.
For comparison GitHub connects to github.com, githubusercontent, githubassets.com, and githubapp.com. I am blocking the githubapp.com requests, though.
And finally sourcehut doesn't make any requests outside of sr.ht
Thanks for the feedback on GitLab’s UI density. We’re working to improve the aesthetics and usability of our system, and feedback from the rest of the community helps us do that. If you have specific feedback, please feel free to share more here.
