[HN Gopher] Get me out of data hell
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Get me out of data hell
        
       Author : pavel_lishin
       Score  : 583 points
       Date   : 2024-10-31 19:01 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ludic.mataroa.blog)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ludic.mataroa.blog)
        
       | jaygreco wrote:
       | I really like the author's writing style here. The quips about
       | the tea especially.
        
         | remram wrote:
         | It reminds me of the classic series on /r/talesfromtechsupport
         | by airz23. It's uncanny.
         | 
         | They would almost always feature a "I sip my coffee. It tastes
         | like <feelings at the time>" Example:
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromtechsupport/comments/203qx...
        
         | alex_suzuki wrote:
         | Same. For me the association was the Bastard Operator From
         | Hell, with a darker, more cynical view of life. Just very
         | enjoyable reading.
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | Very much appreciate the kind words! From you and the other
         | commenters too.
        
       | ctippett wrote:
       | > of course, we're serverless, because how can you hurt yourself
       | without a cutting-edge?
       | 
       | A beautiful epigram.
        
         | storafrid wrote:
         | Yes, but I'm surprised that they attribute "cutting-edge" to
         | Lambda. It's about as old as Docker.
        
           | zdragnar wrote:
           | I was part of a company that went all in on using lambdas for
           | the majority of their web facing APIs. That was 7 years ago.
           | 
           | The cutting edge bit is a nice quip, though I agree not
           | exactly accurate anymore.
        
             | stackskipton wrote:
             | I worked for a company that went all in on Lambda as well.
             | The knots they had to twist themselves into so that
             | everything ran nice and smooth in Lambda environment was
             | mindboggling. We have certain actions like orders that
             | would pass through 8 Lambdas before completion because of
             | execution time or just the big code base would result in 7
             | seconds start up time (node) so it would get broken down.
             | If any of them failed, and it felt like failed a ton due to
             | Amazon backend stuff, it was a nightmare to resolve.
             | 
             | All of it could probably been handled by larger node
             | application in docker container somewhere but AUTO SCALING,
             | FAILOVER, SERVERLESS!
             | 
             | Once I started as SRE for a new team, we built a larger
             | monolith using Node and docker on EC2. We would get massive
             | complements for our uptime and reliability but there were
             | some architects extremely unhappy when I revealed in
             | division presentation that it was just Docker + m4.xlarge
             | running Ubuntu 18.04. When I left, more and more Lambdas
             | were being broken down into docker running on EC2. They are
             | probably on some container managed solution now.
        
           | sph wrote:
           | It sounds like you like to deal with much sharper edges than
           | I am comfortable with.
           | 
           | Or maybe I am too old with this shit. Still haven't found a
           | use for "serverless" knives.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | For a bank, Lambda is brand new.
           | 
           | You haven't worked in conservative industries I take it? Late
           | adopters, every one.
           | 
           | OP is still trying to replace Cobol. I know an insurance
           | company that started that process 15 years ago. Fifteen
           | years.
        
           | Aeolun wrote:
           | It's what everyone runs to when server based stuff would save
           | them so much pain.
        
         | the_af wrote:
         | On one hand, yes. Beautiful.
         | 
         | But on the other, the same sentence could be written about
         | software deployed to traditional servers. "Because of course,
         | how can you hurt yourself without the joys of badly configured
         | servers?".
        
           | skydhash wrote:
           | You can hurt yourself with a badly held butter knife, and you
           | can hurt yourself juggling katanas. Which situation would get
           | people saying you're crazy?
        
             | zdragnar wrote:
             | Well, if you narrow down the metaphor to just knives, a
             | dull knife is more dangerous to a chef than a sharp knife,
             | because you need to apply more pressure and you get less
             | control over the cutting action.
        
               | downut wrote:
               | The people juggling aren't chefs.
        
               | zdragnar wrote:
               | Clearly, you haven't seen a good chef at work.
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | Yes, but which one will people say you're _crazy_?
        
           | hackable_sand wrote:
           | It's a pun.
        
         | layoric wrote:
         | Came here to praise the same sentence, well done author, gave
         | me a good laugh!
        
       | salt-thrower wrote:
       | Beautifully written and fun to read. Blog posts like this give me
       | a boost of mental strength to keep going during my worst episodes
       | of burnout.
        
       | reverius42 wrote:
       | > I've even degraded team morale because I've convinced some of
       | the engineers that things should be better, but not management,
       | so now some of the engineers are upset.
       | 
       | Oof, that hits a little close to home.
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | The good news is that, since the others are also looking for
         | work elsewhere, there will be more engineers out in gen pop
         | that actually thinks tests are useful, hah.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I have this illusion in my head that I stayed so long at my
         | last company that almost all of my favorite people left, but
         | one of my coworkers had my number.
         | 
         | After a person I liaised with on another team left, I asked his
         | superior if there was someone else I should build bridges with.
         | We started talking about one of the team members and he said,
         | "I don't want you to talk to him. We like him, and if you talk
         | to him he'll leave."
         | 
         | This was on Slack so I don't know if this was a jest or he was
         | serious/mad. But it's entirely true. I've convinced at least
         | half a dozen people that we should expect better from a team
         | environment and ourselves, and that this org (not the whole
         | company, just this division) is a cult of stupidity.
         | 
         | I was trying to recruit collaborators to fix the bullshit but
         | apparently they decided it would be much easier to just start
         | over.
        
           | refulgentis wrote:
           | There's some finer points to parse in your comment that I'm
           | not 100% on (ex. if "this org" is your division or the
           | partner division), so I'm out on a ledge a little bit here,
           | might not relate to what you meant.
           | 
           | I was lucky enough to get ~6 years running my own tech
           | company after 6 years as a waiter. Then I sold it, yadda
           | yadda, went to Google 6 months later, got ~7 years in there.
           | 
           | It really, really, really, disturbed me how approximately
           | every situation, in every division, with any people, ended up
           | being boiling down to "how do we muddle through one more day
           | without challenging anyones preconceptions", 95% of the time
           | it was tribal antisocial stuff, and no one would speak up
           | about it.
           | 
           | Direct example, for posterity.
           | 
           | I don't wanna speak too directly to it, so lets imagine
           | Google Division A (hereafter, dApps).
           | 
           | New division lead (ex-dApps) joins dBytes with apparent bias
           | against partnering division (dConsumer). Despite the project
           | being previously framed as top priority, new lead
           | consistently undermines dConsumer in meetings and shows
           | little interest in understanding their work. Team adopts
           | leader's negative attitude, becoming obstructive and
           | uncooperative. I ended up carrying a critical launch,
           | virtually alone, for 6 months. At performance review time, my
           | boss questions why I didn't get more team involvement -
           | despite the hostile environment that prevented exactly that -
           | and speaks glowingly about how we need to support peer going
           | for promotion based on their excellent job on part Y...which
           | they didn't do. They spent 2 days on it then said it was
           | impossible. And they were definitively the most cooperative
           | because at least they tried, and wouldn't actively be
           | aggressive in meetings with the outgroup.
           | 
           | Everything, always, came down to: A) don't cause conflict at
           | all, at home, or you will be buried B) we'll bend over
           | backwards to accomodate conflict you invent, as long as we
           | can clearly define them as an out-group with 0 ability to
           | affect us day to day.
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | At prior jobs we had an escape hatch for this: go to a
             | fancy coffee shop with the dissenters and have all of our
             | bitchfests out of earshot of the muggles.
             | 
             | But it's trickier to coax people still on the fence to come
             | out for multiple coffees.
        
       | SynasterBeiter wrote:
       | I hate whining like these. Just do your job and get over it. No
       | need to be theatrical about it.
        
         | incognito124 wrote:
         | A creative outlet is a need, to some. You sound like OP's
         | employees.
        
         | baq wrote:
         | Let the man _live_ will you. Not everyone wants to be a drone
         | for hire.
        
         | hobs wrote:
         | If this was a job with a non-abstract input and output process
         | they would have OSHA saying it was genuinely unsafe (and
         | definitely stupid.)
         | 
         | Many of us build systems to manage automatic actions to take
         | care of this stuff, if I had an engineer I had to take 100+
         | steps to get something done I would definitely be considering
         | 1) What the hell am I paying for and 2) Why the hell am I
         | paying for it?
        
         | hprotagonist wrote:
         | you know, he had a post about exactly this comment not too long
         | ago!
         | 
         | edit: https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/the-violent-role-of-
         | relentle...
        
           | tgv wrote:
           | That's pretty good. I'm somewhat curious now about his
           | writing aspirations.
        
             | ludicity wrote:
             | I was offered a book deal and turned it down, hah. I read
             | in spectacular volumes and books have a very special place
             | in my heart. Growing up in Malaysia, most of my English was
             | initially mastered from a gigantic pile of Enid Blyton
             | books my family had lying around after the British
             | occupation. We even give everyone at Hermit Tech a day off
             | per week to study non-IT things and let the subconscious do
             | some processing on work. Not because I'm a weirdo (though I
             | am), but because I genuinely believe this produces a
             | higher-quality experience for our clients, and no one can
             | stop me from testing things like "five day work weeks are
             | too long".
             | 
             | In any case, the book deal had constraints like "no
             | swearing", and it was implied they'd find their own artist
             | for the cover. I didn't even intend to swear, but I care
             | too much to let them assign an editor and impose arbitrary
             | constraints. I ended up chatting a bit with Ed Zitron after
             | the AI rant article went super viral, and he told me that I
             | have the audience to just publish my own books.
             | 
             | So I'm doing just that! I'm starting with ten short
             | stories, at the advice of someone in the local Melbourne
             | scene that has helped many people publish. Then I'm aiming
             | to write one book containing a series of essays on IT work,
             | and one fantasy/fiction book. I'm a reasonably good judge
             | of popularity, and because neither will be particularly
             | angry, I will probably only sell a few hundred copies. But
             | I'll have a book with my name on it, which is very special
             | to me.
        
         | hipadev23 wrote:
         | Complacency is how this shit happens.
        
         | dangerwill wrote:
         | Quick question: How many years of industry exp do you have? I
         | thought the same way until this year when the burnout got to me
         | too. I thought I was too much of a high achiever to get burnout
         | and yet I'm in the same boat as the author.
         | 
         | Also, once the people who speak up about a problem leave, all
         | you are left with are idiot yes-men in management, old timers
         | doing their job as minimally as possible to not to be noticed
         | by management, and fresh new engineering grads ready to be
         | grist for the mill. When those sorts of people are writing all
         | of the code around you, no matter how good you are, you will be
         | driven insane.
        
       | brianhorakh wrote:
       | Wonderful prose. I am in Melbourne also. I possibly used to work
       | at the same place but I'm not sure.
       | 
       | I resigned due to the night terrors caused by the cyber security
       | issues I saw everywhere. The more I explored and understood the
       | more sleep I lost.
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | Hah, yes, I'm not in cybersecurity but am very close to a few
         | people that are. The incompetence is not evenly distributed and
         | not as bad as it is in data, but some companies are in terrible
         | states, and the stakes are much higher.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I worked with an Aussie who was in the US on H1B because the
         | aerospace industry was even worse than the status quo in
         | Australia. Last I heard he went back. I sincerely hope he
         | switched industry verticals.
        
       | zombiwoof wrote:
       | Data "engineering" is where all the cool kids go with no clue and
       | create insane architectures to justify their incompetence
        
         | hobs wrote:
         | As a data engineer I have seen absolutely bullshit pass for
         | production, but it doesn't seem that different from all the
         | other bullshit I have seen people deploy in my life.
         | 
         | It is one of the few types of jobs I have worked were someone
         | credulously offering adding five more layers to fix an issue
         | with latency is a normal operating procedure though.
        
         | parpfish wrote:
         | data engineer gives data science a run for their money when it
         | comes to ambiguous job expectations.
         | 
         | I've seen it mean anything from "distributed computing expert"
         | to "knows SQL"
        
           | marcosdumay wrote:
           | > to "knows SQL"
           | 
           | There are still ways to go. I've seen it means "spends the
           | days filling excel spreadsheets".
        
           | sgarland wrote:
           | > knows SQL
           | 
           | If by that you mean, "knows the commands to create, fill, and
           | select from a table," then yes. If you mean, "knows how to
           | create a performant schema and queries that will serve them
           | well into the future," then no, absolutely not.
           | 
           | OTOH, IME data folk are much more cheerful and willing to
           | change things than devs when I point out the innumerable ways
           | their DB choices are choking them. Devs more often fall on
           | the side of "we don't have time for that on our roadmap;
           | can't you just fix it?"
        
         | the_af wrote:
         | You can replace "data engineering" with "software engineering"
         | in that sentence and it will still hold true...
        
           | fifilura wrote:
           | Or chef or carpenter or automobile builder or priest or...
        
         | icedchai wrote:
         | I've seen some "data engineering" scripts that were complete
         | messes and beyond crazy. Some examples: Massively over
         | engineered "pipelines" that process a few hundred rows a day,
         | but somehow manage to take forever to run. Developers that
         | didn't know SQL beyond "select * from table", so they do all
         | their summarization in Python. Or, worse, I've seen a Python
         | script calling a shell script calling R calling something else,
         | several more layers deep, when the same result could've all
         | been done in SQL with a few temporary tables.
         | 
         | Oh, then I'm asked to "give this a code review before so-and-so
         | does a deployment tomorrow." Uh, it's a little late to address
         | any of the fundamentals, but there are hard coded paths
         | everywhere...
        
           | bob1029 wrote:
           | I recently got a bit of a shocked reaction when I proposed to
           | directly load daily files into temporary SQL tables and then
           | use merge commands within the database to load the final
           | tables. My use of code is essentially a shim between an SFTP
           | client and SQL Server in this scenario. Maybe ~200 lines to
           | connect, locate the files, run the bulk load operation, and
           | then invoke the merge commands. Most of the fun bits are in
           | the actual merge scripts.
           | 
           | Once your data is safely inside the database (temporary load
           | tables or otherwise), there really isn't a good excuse for
           | pulling it out and playing a bunch of circus tricks on it.
           | Moving and transforming data _within_ the RDBMS is infinitely
           | more reliable than doing it with external tooling. Your ETL
           | code should be entirely about getting the data safely into
           | the RDBMS. It shouldn 't even be responsible for testing
           | new/deleted/modified records. You really want to use SQL for
           | that.
           | 
           | You'll also be able to recruit more help if everything is
           | neatly contained within the SQL tooling. In my scenario,
           | business analysts can look at the merge commands and quickly
           | iterate on the data pipeline if certain customers have weird
           | quirks. They cannot do the same with some elaborate set of
           | codebases, microservices, etc.
           | 
           | One specific thing that really sold me on this path was
           | seeing how CTEs and views can make the T part of ETL
           | 10000000x easier than even the fanciest code helpers like
           | LINQ.
        
             | snidane wrote:
             | The architecture is sound - typically called ELT these
             | days. Dump contents of upstream straight into a database
             | and apply stateless and deterministic operations to achieve
             | the final result tables.
             | 
             | SQL server is where this breaks though. You'll get yelled
             | by DBAs for bad db practices like storing wide text fields
             | without casting them to varchar(32) or varchar(12), primary
             | keys on strings or no indexes at all, and most importantly
             | taking majority of storage on the db host for tbese raw
             | dumps. SQL Server and any traditional database scales by
             | adding machines, so you end up paying compute costs for
             | your storage.
             | 
             | If you use a shared disk system with decoupled compute
             | scaling from storage, then your system is the way to go.
             | Ideally these days dump your files into a file storage like
             | s3 and slap a table abstraction over it with some catalog
             | and now you have 100x less storage costs and about 5-10x
             | increased compute power with things like duckdb. Happy data
             | engineering!
        
               | jamesblonde wrote:
               | You're basically describing the Lakehouse Tables
               | architecture. Store your data as tabular data in
               | Iceberg/Hudi/Delta on S3. Save a bucket on storage. Query
               | with whatever engine you like (Snowflake, Redshift, BQ,
               | DuckDB, etc).
        
               | aoeusnth1 wrote:
               | Yes, this is the vast majority of my data work at Google
               | as well. Spanner + Files on disk (Placer) + distributed
               | query engine (F1) which can read anything and everything
               | (even google sheets) and join it all.
               | 
               | It's amazingly productive and incredibly cheap to
               | operate.
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | Except everyone wants microservices each with its own
             | database.
        
           | tgv wrote:
           | Some of my colleagues use Microsoft PowerBI, and indeed, they
           | upload a few hundred rows of data (and a few hundred columns,
           | which get unpivoted in powerbi to a say 40k rows). When they
           | upload it, the powerbi instance overloads, and people get
           | timeouts and such. That can last up to 20 minutes. I stay
           | away from that as far as I can.
        
       | jitl wrote:
       | I wonder what company they're describing here. It sounds like so
       | many self inflicted problems that that you could undo or set
       | right in a couple of weeks if you had the time and latitude to
       | make changes across the system instead of being confined to a
       | small area of team ownership.
        
         | bartread wrote:
         | I worked somewhere that had a lot of this sort of thing going
         | on once. You cannot overestimate how hard it is to get anything
         | done: politics and organisational dysfunction, not to mention
         | that you probably don't have access to half of what you need to
         | in order to fix any given problem and are even more unlikely to
         | be able to get it, mean there are just huge scads of problems
         | that, on the face of them, look relatively straightforward to
         | solve but which, in practice, are organisationally impossible
         | to solve.
        
           | whstl wrote:
           | Yep. I don't work with data engineering, but from hearing war
           | stories from them, this could perfectly describe the last
           | four companies I worked at. :/
           | 
           |  _> you probably don't have access to half of what you need
           | to in order to fix any given problem and are even more
           | unlikely to be able to get it_
           | 
           | I once sat down with a data engineer to try to fix a specific
           | problem they had and that was 100% accurate. They were left
           | to die by Ops and CISO.
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | A framing/question I like to ask use is: "Look for a root
           | problem that _ought_ to be fixed through a change in policy,
           | politics, or incentives, and the wasteful use of time /money
           | is how the company tries to avoid or defer facing it."
           | 
           | For example, Operations might demand that Engineering
           | develops an increasingly-byzantine approvals process, to stop
           | Sales from over-promising impossible or unprofitable
           | projects.
        
           | deergomoo wrote:
           | > you probably don't have access to half of what you need to
           | in order to fix any given problem
           | 
           | I've found this to be one of my largest day-to-day problems
           | even in a relatively functional organisation. Particularly
           | when it involves something I can't run on my own machine,
           | like an AWS service.
           | 
           | In a previous role I often found myself constructing
           | elaborate hypotheses about what was going on inside systems I
           | couldn't see into. I'd then need to try to verify it with
           | someone on another team, in another timezone, who had the
           | access but not necessarily the development background. Which
           | usually meant getting on a screen share and asking them to
           | click various things I wasn't allowed to. If I was wrong,
           | back to the drawing board and start again.
        
         | knallfrosch wrote:
         | You're operating in the same company that let this happen in
         | the first place.
         | 
         | And -- not to take away from the piece - If noone noticed the
         | logs have been garbage for two years, they can't be that
         | important.
        
           | pavel_lishin wrote:
           | The logs are unimportant until suddenly they're critical.
        
           | moregrist wrote:
           | It all seems easy to fix until you end up in a place where
           | management process (and thus politics) has become more
           | important than outcomes.
           | 
           | The people with experience and knowledge get pushed aside in
           | favor of someone who can talk management-speak and (often)
           | looks the role. Suddenly meetings where Things Get Decided
           | only include managers who don't know what they're doing.
           | 
           | The best is when they make a mess and then get tremendous
           | accolades for half-fixing it.
           | 
           | I've even seen it happen within relatively small startups.
           | It's a sign of rotting culture, but sometimes you have a
           | mortgage to pay and have to get comfortable with the
           | situation until you can find a better gig.
        
           | ludicity wrote:
           | I wrote a piece last year on how they were running a $500K
           | Snowflake bill due to typing one number in wrong, and how I
           | noticed within my first few weeks there by literally
           | eyeballing something and going "queries take milliseconds so
           | you really have to justify everywhere a minute appears in the
           | configuration".
           | 
           | The logs are stupid (sorta) but imagine how many other issues
           | can exist if we uncover something like this every time we
           | open something.
        
         | taberiand wrote:
         | Irreducible complexity and load-bearing bugs. Kludge built upon
         | kludge built upon kludge. An engineer with the go ahead and all
         | the support required would still struggle because the knock on
         | effects of any one change cascade out in unpredictable ways.
         | Not to mention working in an active environment where, although
         | the other engineers support the goals in theory, they still
         | need to deliver business requirements for a fickle management
         | that doesn't truly understand what lurks beneath the facade -
         | they don't have time to do it the right way, and if they try
         | they'll just break both the old system and the new.
        
         | tiew9Vii wrote:
         | Sadly it sounds like most AU corporate companies I've worked
         | at.
        
           | chubs wrote:
           | Why are we so crummy? Is it because our talent finds it
           | generally easy to migrate to the states for better
           | opportunities, because of no language barrier and the
           | 'coalition of the willing' visa (iirc)?
        
             | ykonstant wrote:
             | This must be one reason (not Australian, but have friends
             | there), but more importantly it seems to me the "better
             | opportunities" are _much, much better_. Australia seems to
             | have worker rights that make most of the US look decent by
             | comparison while wages remain far below the latter---and I
             | don 't mean just US hot spots: an Australian friend went
             | from Sydney to Salt Lake City (!) to get a much better job
             | with much higher compensation _and_ better rights
             | /environment. In Utah!
        
               | jpmoral wrote:
               | > Australia seems to have worker rights that make most of
               | the US look decent by comparison
               | 
               | This is the first I've heard anyone say that. Can you
               | elaborate? We've got more leave (separate holiday and
               | sick leave), none of the "at-will" stuff, right to
               | disconnect, less hours, etc.
        
               | BrandonM wrote:
               | US software engineer. I have 24 days of PTO, 15 company
               | holidays, and 9 sick days. 10 weeks for parental leave
               | (16 for moms). $240K salary, $400-600K in annual vesting
               | equity. That's private paper equity, but I've already
               | been able to cash out $700K and buy a house with cash.
               | 
               | Fully remote. I can expense $120/month for phone and
               | internet, and a few lunches each month, too. I can get a
               | new laptop and/or monitor sent to me just by asking.
               | 
               | When I do visit the office, the trip is fully expensed.
               | Free daily lunch. Coffee and drinks and snacks
               | everywhere, free. Private desks in a semi-open office
               | with couches scattered around. Lounges with hundreds of
               | board games, nearly all of which have seen table time
               | during work hours.
               | 
               | Primary projects are tracked in a knowledge-sharing
               | system, but I can mostly work on what I want to. I'm
               | encouraged to merge small fixes and refactors without any
               | ticket-pushing at all. Yelling by managers or anyone
               | would not be tolerated.
               | 
               | "At-will" is more FUD than reality in my experience. Most
               | companies, when firing or laying someone off, give
               | something like 2 weeks of severance for every year of
               | service.
        
               | jimby wrote:
               | I work at more typical software job for an AUS company
               | operating in the US ... AUS workers make less money than
               | the US office but they can rollover PTO indefinitely,
               | right to log off, etc. I think the main reason people
               | come to the US to work from aus is the cost of housing
               | anywhere near the cities is exorbitant and the australian
               | version of the american dream is unbelievably dead.
        
               | ewuhic wrote:
               | How do I get such a job as someone from Europe? Where do
               | I search for such a job? Is it Bay Area only?
        
               | BrandonM wrote:
               | I wish I could suggest something for you. My path was
               | moving to the Bay Area 13 years ago to work for a small
               | startup, helping to grow it, then going remote after a
               | few years. Startup is a B2B with an ethical technical
               | founder, and it had a credible business model from day 1.
        
         | lelandbatey wrote:
         | The typical problem is a culture where if you say
         | 
         | "I would like to make this systemically better by addressing
         | our second order problems that are causing our very visible
         | first order problems"
         | 
         | You will be told that we absolutely do not have time for that.
         | The only actions you're allowed to take are fighting the fires
         | closest to you, not turning off the pumps that spray the
         | gasoline everywhere.
         | 
         | Typically this is only even possible because nothing that
         | you're doing is actually used or scrutinized since if it was,
         | someone would have immediately noticed that nothing works.
         | Usually this is at places running on varying levels of
         | investment dollar three-card-montey.
        
         | 3eb7988a1663 wrote:
         | I inherited a pipeline like this. It is as if everything is a
         | global variable. You cannot "just fix" one thing in isolation,
         | because some spooky action at a distance of which you were
         | unaware relies upon this insane behavior. Each and every hack
         | is the expected input somewhere else in the chain. You have to
         | carefully inspect everything downstream of any kind of minor
         | adjustment because your cleanup is quite likely to break
         | something else.
         | 
         | Immensely frustrating and draining where you can have
         | accomplished ~nothing in a full day of work to fix what should
         | have been a five minute change.
        
           | ludicity wrote:
           | I'm the author. You are exactly correct. Everything was so
           | heavily interwoven that it was impossible to tell what would
           | happen downstream without making an edit and then tracking
           | the changes through dozens of steps through the architecture
           | diagram.
        
             | baq wrote:
             | `The purpose of the system is what it does.'
        
             | jitl wrote:
             | In this situation I'd make a second copy of a bad thing and
             | then try to make the copy good, instead of changing
             | anything in place. But yeah, I totally get the huge
             | upstream fight it must be and I'm not trying to backseat
             | drive... just marveling at how the organizational fuckups &
             | constraints make it hard to fix obvious problems
        
               | ludicity wrote:
               | You're right. I actually did propose this, but the other
               | difficulty is getting stuff put onto the Jira board. My
               | belief, yet to be verified, is that it was possible to
               | deliver everything the executives promised AND perform
               | the refactoring without any drop in service, but this
               | would have required convincing management that a well-run
               | team could 3x productivity. Eventually everyone got tired
               | of talking to people that were just used to bad
               | performance, so they couldn't envision smooth CI/CD and
               | happy workers (as opposed to contented to get paid to
               | hang around workers, which is what happy means in many
               | cases).
        
       | bartread wrote:
       | I'm going to read the rest of this. I'm enjoying it. But,
       | simultaneously, part II has me so triggered - it bears striking
       | resemblance to repeated situations I've encountered where the
       | meaning and content of columns in a relational database were
       | overloaded in varying degrees of heaviness (which is a practice I
       | absolutely detest) - that I need to take a short break.
        
         | XorNot wrote:
         | People do this with system hostnames _a lot_.
         | 
         | And it's almost impossible to get them to stop: the hostname
         | should either be a random UUID or a random name from a
         | pronounceable list depending on scale (or a syllabic UUID
         | thing).
         | 
         | Because every other factor has one answer: you look up the
         | other data you need in your CMDB. If that's too hard, you fix
         | that so it's easy (DNS TXT records can be surprisingly useful
         | here).
        
         | hermitcrab wrote:
         | I manage a database for a small local charity. I have set it up
         | so that only I can add, delete or change the column structure.
         | If someone wants a change, they have to email me and convince
         | me (they are fine about this BTW). I'm sure the database would
         | be an utter disaster zone by now if everyone was allowed to
         | change it.
        
           | klysm wrote:
           | I think database schemas deserve to be protected with one's
           | life as the holy ground of the system. If the schema is
           | fucked, everything else will be fucked too.
        
             | hermitcrab wrote:
             | With a database you can lock down the schema. In reality
             | though, many data system are composed mainly of people
             | emailing in Excel spreadsheets. Good luck enforcing any
             | sort of schema there.
             | 
             | My day job is writing a desktop/file-based ETL system. I
             | have just added in a schema version feature to cover these
             | sort of issues. It was one of the most requested features,
             | because most people aren't able to control the schemas of
             | the data they receive.
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | >>> pretending that any of this is more important than hiring
       | competent people and treating them well. I could build something
       | superior to this with an ancient laptop, an internet connection,
       | and spreadsheets.
       | 
       | Ow
        
       | iamthepieman wrote:
       | I do not use this term to refer to myself. I respect those who do
       | and respect the meaning behind it but am just old enough that it
       | feels alien to me 99% of the time.
       | 
       | But I am SO triggered by this piece. I had that intrusive feeling
       | you sometimes get when driving where you think, "I could just
       | close my eyes and see what happens", "Or that clif is so close
       | and the guardrail doesn't really extend far enough"
       | 
       | Only for my career. Like I should just not show up on Monday. I
       | should get in the car and drive far away and change my name and
       | work at a nice retail joint in a mid-sized town.
       | 
       | I'm going to need to sit and stare into the distance for an hour
       | and 3.
        
         | Electricniko wrote:
         | > There has been a point in my life where I ended every day in
         | the dark, staring at a wall for an hour or two straight, trying
         | to figure out why everything felt awful.
         | 
         | From his post about burnout and mental health. Also worth a
         | read.
         | 
         | https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/on-burnout-mental-health-and...
        
           | SanjayMehta wrote:
           | If on Monday morning you're wishing it was Friday evening,
           | it's time to quit.
        
             | chubs wrote:
             | Many of us have kids to feed! The economy is not bursting
             | with jobs anymore since rates rose post-COVID.
        
               | karel-3d wrote:
               | No need to quit immediately, just apply for jobs on the
               | side.
        
               | Aeolun wrote:
               | And do the same thing elsewhere for less money and with
               | less social capital?
        
               | tpxl wrote:
               | I went from an important cog with low pay but high
               | responsibility to a much higher paying job with no
               | responsibility. You can too with a bit of luck.
        
               | Aeolun wrote:
               | No, I mean, I'm there, but it's anything but fulfilling
               | xD it's just that anything else would feel like a
               | downgrade.
        
             | sph wrote:
             | The frightening thing about serious work-related burnout is
             | that three years after quitting, on Monday mornings you
             | still wish it was Friday evening.
             | 
             | Any day now I'll be ready for the grind again. Any day now.
        
               | ludicity wrote:
               | It took me about six months off to start feeling normal,
               | and I think I got out much earlier than most people do.
               | And if you read that post, I still clearly let it get
               | pretty bad before I left.
        
             | feoren wrote:
             | What about if on Friday morning you're wishing it was
             | Monday? Like, two Mondays ago? So you weren't quite as late
             | on everything?
        
               | whstl wrote:
               | As someone who managed to stay productive during a
               | burnout despite constant bullying by a yelling CTO: it
               | doesn't really help if you deliver on time.
        
             | andrepd wrote:
             | Yep, in theory yes, but shame that the bills won't pay
             | themselves
        
               | _proofs wrote:
               | i don't buy that any situation is so hopeless, you're
               | powerless to improve it. at least in the context of this
               | field and its line(s) of work.
               | 
               | sounds a lot more like learned hopelessness making it
               | harder to respond to stress with radical change because
               | of (normal and human) fears of the unknown.
               | 
               | at some point though responsibility for the
               | circumstances, the feelings, the stress -- the good, bad,
               | and ugly or easy, hard, and nearly impossible -- has to
               | be taken.
               | 
               | there's only one life to live. we owe it to ourselves and
               | others to do more than -- to try not to -- just "roll
               | over and play dead", so to speak.
               | 
               | humans have survived a lot and have adapted to just as
               | much if not more.
               | 
               | if i ever allowed myself to even stay at any of my former
               | jobs coming up in my life when i was paycheck to paycheck
               | because of not making rent or just being flatout broke
               | and homeless, i would have not progressed my career, or
               | life, in any meaningful way, and just fed the negative
               | feedback loop influencing what feels like a miserable
               | existence (even privileged as it were).
               | 
               | can't hold myself hostage. and also, i can't hold those
               | around me hostage as consequence of my non-action,
               | either.
        
         | bryancoxwell wrote:
         | > I had that intrusive feeling you sometimes get when driving
         | where you think, "I could just close my eyes and see what
         | happens", "Or that clif is so close and the guardrail doesn't
         | really extend far enough"
         | 
         | L'appel du vide
        
           | albert_e wrote:
           | Does the mention of such concepts or acknowledging it is real
           | ... put some lisetners (if they are work certain professions)
           | under an obligation to refer the person to a mental health
           | assessment?
           | 
           | Example: a blog post like this one, with the author's real
           | name, that acknowleges it front and center: https://ebb-and-
           | flow.blog/2023/07/23/another-scan-lappel-du-...
        
         | josephg wrote:
         | Seriously, quit then. It's not worth it. You get one life. How
         | many hours on this earth do you want to spend suicidally
         | depressed? If you have a really high pain tolerance, maybe you
         | can do that for years. How lucky would that be?
         | 
         | There's a polish restaurant near where I live that makes
         | amazing food. The owner is always out and about, chatting with
         | customers and making sly jokes. Turns out he used to be an
         | oracle sql consultant of some sort, and he turned it all in to
         | run his restaurant. You can tell he's thriving. I think he's
         | got the right idea.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | Survivorship bias. In an ideal world yes but in reality
           | there's bills to be paid and tech (generally) pays really
           | well.
           | 
           | Not saying you shouldn't quit, just that it's not so simple.
        
             | josephg wrote:
             | I hear you. But also, ... if you're literally feeling
             | suicidal because of work, in a sense it really is that
             | simple. You aren't doing anyone any favours - not your
             | coworkers, your family or yourself - by living like that.
        
               | hackable_sand wrote:
               | This is the answer.
               | 
               | Money is money, but money comes and goes.
               | 
               | The work you put into finding a healthy source of income
               | is worth every minute.
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | There's literally a 90% chance your restaurant won't
             | survive its first year.
        
               | josephg wrote:
               | Then do something else! Literally billions of people are
               | employed every day doing things that aren't software
               | engineering. Pick anything.
        
         | isoprophlex wrote:
         | Change something for the better. You are the one who cares the
         | most, you are the one best suited to take control over your
         | life.
         | 
         | You deserve to feel good. Life is too short to be a cog in a
         | broken machine.
        
         | strken wrote:
         | It's an almost exact copy of my last few months, right down to
         | the 10am start.
         | 
         | Except that all our other senior engineers got laid off and
         | there's nobody to pair with, I don't give two fucks about
         | bullying because at this point the entire company knows I'll
         | quit on the spot if they try, and our problems are mostly that
         | the remaining team cannot understand the terrifying eldritch
         | decision making process that led to fun little patterns like
         | "wrap every API call in a try/catch and then ignore the
         | errors".
         | 
         | I am seriously considering doing a TAFE course and becoming an
         | electrician.
        
           | Buttons840 wrote:
           | They took inspiration from the error steamroller:
           | https://github.com/ajalt/fuckitpy
        
       | jauntywundrkind wrote:
       | The observability world still regards itself as a system for
       | monitoring, but reading (and sometimes seeing) how these systems
       | just go so bad continues to drive a conviction that perhaps their
       | strategies and tools should become bigger. That they should
       | converge with business pipines.
       | 
       | We shouldn't just have wide events/big spans emitted... We should
       | have those spans drive the pipeline. Rather than observability
       | being a passive monitoring system, if we write code that reacts
       | to events we are capturing, then we shuffle towards event
       | sourcing.
       | 
       | Given how badly coupled together with shoestring glue & good
       | wishes so many systems are, how opaque these pain zones are, it
       | feels like the centralization upon existing industry standard
       | protocols to capture events (which imo include traces) is a clear
       | win.
       | 
       | (Obvious downside, these systems become mission critical,
       | business process & monitoring both.)
        
         | halfcat wrote:
         | What's this look like in practice? Is this something like
         | business process modeling and workflow engines, or something
         | else?
        
         | edejong wrote:
         | Totally agree. Observability is just another dataset and should
         | be modeled, managed and governed as other datasets. Data
         | quality controls should be equal or of higher standard than
         | regular data sets.
         | 
         | Monitoring, dashboarding and alerting should leverage other BI-
         | class tooling.
        
       | halfcat wrote:
       | What's the solution to wrangling these data projects?
       | 
       | The author's experience is not far off from my own.
       | 
       | 1. Any solution in place can only be understood by the person who
       | created it
       | 
       | 2. _"No, we can't change that because then we'd have to validate
       | everything from scratch again"_
       | 
       | And therefore, as the author says:
       | 
       | > _"we 'll continue with the work instead of fixing the critical
       | production error"_
       | 
       | I'm honestly not sure how to address it either. With traditional
       | software dev we'd write tests, incorporate those into CI/CD, and
       | start to course correct. We can use sample data to validate the
       | code does what we think it does and that we didn't break it.
       | 
       | But in these data projects, it's not only the code that's
       | changing, but the data is also a moving target. You can write a
       | test with sample data, but tomorrow your data might change
       | because someone in sales added a custom field to the CRM, or IT
       | upgraded the accounting software and all of the unique IDs
       | changed, or someone upgraded their Excel version, or whatever.
       | 
       | And your code that works on the sample data needs to handle all
       | of this, which obviously it can't. You can try to validate the
       | data somehow, check the schema, check if the number of rows
       | hasn't doubled or halved, and so forth, and then stop it from
       | importing until you look into it, but also you can't stop inbound
       | data because an exec has a meeting in a few hours and expects
       | their report to be updated.
       | 
       | I heard something about "data contracts" that's supposed to
       | address this, but it sounds like the next in a long line of buzz
       | words intended to get management to buy another data product.
       | 
       | Has anyone worked in this kind of project that went well?
        
         | 3np wrote:
         | "We should add a single-source-of truth validation microservice
         | that we put in front of all insertions, putting failing
         | messages on a separate queue"
         | 
         | And on it goes.
        
           | Liquix wrote:
           | https://xkcd.com/927/
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | Author here, and also executive director at Hermit Tech now
         | where we do things like this. Your approach has the core of how
         | I'd go about it. The contract stuff is legit, though you don't
         | need to buy a product for it.
         | 
         | The thing that is hard at big organizations isn't that
         | executives need the data for meetings. The issue right now is
         | that many organizations are already 3-4 years into building
         | their analytics platforms, and Chief Data Officers worldwide
         | are trying to prevent their role from disappearing. They're
         | already very much "Mom, we have CTO at home" in many companies,
         | as evidenced by the fact they're usually reporting to the CTO
         | or CFO.
         | 
         | So at this stage, they've already told the business that the
         | platform is "ready", and they are onboarding data sources. With
         | no way to measure data quality, the only thing visible at the
         | organization level is number of data sources onboarded. The
         | fastest way to onboard data sources is to have good CI/CD and a
         | solid developer environment, but this would probably result in
         | slowdown for 1 - 2 months even if you had executive backing to
         | bulldoze all objections from the IT department.
         | 
         | That's the sort of thing I can commit my team to as a business
         | owner, but most executives don't have the nerve to slow
         | delivery down and aren't losing money out of their pocket due
         | to the inefficiency - I get to talk with a lot of them due to
         | the blog's success these days, and many of them really are just
         | employees with more status, with the same incentives. And to
         | make it worse, the loss of nerve is actually understandable,
         | because the type of team that would build something this bad
         | will also waste those two months then still deliver slowly! But
         | most people aren't thinking in terms this complex, and yes, I
         | know it isn't that complex.
         | 
         | I'm expecting to pick up some work in this area at larger orgs
         | in a few years when these leaders rotate out and new leaders
         | rotate in and go "what the hell IS this?", but for now we're
         | mostly aimed at helping smaller places do it right from day
         | one.
        
           | ewuhic wrote:
           | Do you have a post describing the "right [way] from day one"?
           | Spill your secret sauce.
        
             | ludicity wrote:
             | The boring answer is that it's context dependent, but
             | fundamentally "do data engineering the same way you do
             | high-performance software engineering". Have tests that run
             | fast, where fast means "a few seconds when you start" and
             | "refactor as you go so the tests keep taking a tolerable
             | amount of time". I think Kent Beck suggested 10 minutes in
             | Extreme Programming Explained.
             | 
             | We're gradually forming our own, complex opinions in this.
             | In the consulting context, this is essentially our product.
             | A fascinating realization moving from software to marketing
             | is that a sales pitch or marketing strategy can be built in
             | a way that isn't entirely dissimilar to code, and that it
             | has second-order effects. They aren't the same because...
             | they aren't the same, but there's an artistry combined with
             | principles to doing it "right".
             | 
             | And then as a consultant there's additional complexity, as
             | each team is different. Some are high-performing and need a
             | bit of an external jolt. Others need the help the most, but
             | are in politicized environments so they're almost
             | inaccessible until a new executive comes in who can admit
             | there are problems (or indeed, even see that there are
             | problems).
             | 
             | Joe Reis has some great stuff in Fundamentals of Data
             | Engineering, which includes advice on early objectives when
             | rolling out a new practice.
             | 
             | Disclaimer: Joe has hosted me on his podcast, and we are in
             | the mutual-marketing whirlpool together. But I've been
             | recommending his book long before I met him.
        
               | ewuhic wrote:
               | Amazing answer, thank you, straight on point with
               | tangible outcome.
               | 
               | Wish I had a LinkedIn and were an Executive, so I could
               | connect with you.
        
       | pxc wrote:
       | This blog post rescheduled all my appointments, tucked me in,
       | sang me a lullaby, then woke me up with coffee and breakfast late
       | the next morning. I am healed.
       | 
       | For real, a fun and refreshing read (if also a little haunting).
        
       | marcosdumay wrote:
       | The link about Scrum has a link to this:
       | 
       | https://agile2.net/
       | 
       | Can someone, please, tell me this is a joke. Because I can't be
       | certain, but it doesn't look like one.
        
         | SSLy wrote:
         | This is the real agile2 https://scaledagileframework.com/
        
           | marcosdumay wrote:
           | Oh, this is much worse satire. It didn't even put the effort
           | to add details into The One Big Diagram.
           | 
           | (But yeah, this one I know is for real. The other one that
           | feels like a joke, but looks real is harder to decide.)
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | Author here. To the best of my knowledge, it is real. Sadly.
        
         | bobnamob wrote:
         | Jeez, that's almost as bad as the semantic versioning spec
         | being semantically versioned
        
       | Muromec wrote:
       | Great piece of writing from someone who truly cares about craft
       | and suffers from the feeling that this craft is not what they are
       | paid for.
       | 
       | Add: for people who sharer the feeling -- you can work in a place
       | where velocity isn't all, managers are not assholes and you can
       | dedicate yourself to craft.
        
       | baazaa wrote:
       | People always say this guy just has had bad luck with his
       | employers but I live in Melbourne and work in data and reckon the
       | whole industry is a scam.
       | 
       | Like why didn't anyone catch the issue with the logs? Because it
       | doesn't matter, every data team is a cost-centre that
       | unscrupulous managers use to launch their careers by saying
       | they're big on AI. So nothing works, no-one cares it doesn't
       | work, most the data engineers are incapable of coding fizzbuzz
       | but it doesn't matter.
       | 
       | People always wonder why banks etc. use old mainframes. There's
       | like a 0% success rate for new data projects. And that 0%
       | includes projects which had launch parties etc. but no-one ever
       | used the data or noticed how broken it was. I don't think a lot
       | of orgs which use data as core-infra could modernize, the
       | industry is just so broken at this point I don't think we can do
       | what we did 30 years ago.
        
         | le-mark wrote:
         | This jives with my experience at a financial services company.
         | I once sat next to the "big data team" and the company 5 year
         | plan was all about delivering analytics and ai to customers
         | using their data the company housed.
         | 
         | The team consisted of one guy (who had a business degree) and a
         | lot of empty cubes they were trying to fill. A year later the
         | company had been acquired and the big data initiative had
         | evaporated.
        
         | RangerScience wrote:
         | I have felt exactly this on regular full stack teams many, many
         | times, so it's also not just limited to data teams.
         | 
         | IMO a major factor here is that software engineering is both
         | opaque and esoteric - at least with physical engineering,
         | there's something people can look at and think they understand.
        
           | baazaa wrote:
           | My theory is that data is worse again because at least if
           | you're making a website you're expected to end up with a
           | website. The process is opaque and esoteric, but the end-
           | product is somewhat tangible.
           | 
           | A lot of data projects are moving and transforming data no-
           | one cares about. They can fail completely silently, a manager
           | can lie and say 'we've successfully built the data platform
           | which is going to enable AI analytics' and it'll be like a
           | misconfigured S3 or something. No-one's checking the end-
           | product or even understands what it's meant to be.
        
             | RangerScience wrote:
             | Excellent point... and one I should know. I spent about 6mo
             | as a data eng (only one at the startup) and long after,
             | found out no one ever had a clue what I was talking about
             | in standup. (To be fair, I was self-teaching, and no-one
             | else knew anything so)
        
         | tiew9Vii wrote:
         | Reluctantly worked on AU data projects for maybe the past
         | decade. I don't classify myself as a data engineer, in fact I
         | hate data engineering or data related work which is glorified
         | ETL and SQL most of the time. They are the worst, broken
         | projects I've done, not software engineering in the software
         | engineering sense. I don't think I've worked on a good one yet
         | despite the potential to be really interesting projects. I
         | prefer general software projects doing a bit of everything as a
         | generalist, data pays the bills though in AU.
         | 
         | Not seen/heard of this person before but reading this specific
         | blog post it all sounds very familiar, it's depressing.
         | 
         | The "CTO" getting on stage taking a bunch of credit and
         | everything being a mess or incomplete or lies is very familiar.
         | Maybe not CTO but higher management. It's all smoke, mirrors,
         | optics, self promoting, it works as these people end up making
         | their way up the ladder when the lonely dev trying to do better
         | work is just a dispensable cog in the wheel.
        
           | 6510 wrote:
           | > Not seen/heard of this person before but reading this
           | specific blog post it all sounds very familiar, it's
           | depressing.
           | 
           | Someone once told me he, as a form of therapy, rewrote the
           | company he worked at in a few weekends. He never mentioned it
           | to his coworkers, it was strictly a therapeutic effort. They
           | apparently spend years "fixing" things without making any
           | progress.
        
             | intelVISA wrote:
             | Most apps are trivial for a decent dev to reproduce, I'd
             | wager the root problem is rarely the codebase: the org is
             | rotting. Years of 'fixes' with no progress is like blaming
             | the water for sinking a ship.
             | 
             | Success attracts deadweight who (un)intentionally sandbag
             | efforts to reverse this downward trend for their own self-
             | preservation. I don't blame them, doubt there's a fix when
             | the system requires most people work bullshit jobs instead
             | of collecting UBI.
        
               | whstl wrote:
               | Bingo. The #1 thing I learned in consulting is that you
               | can't build good software if the processes and structures
               | are wrong in the first place. Ditto with off-the-shelf
               | software.
               | 
               | Something that takes a week in company 1 can take a year
               | in company 2 purely because of organizational issues.
               | 
               | Rotting organizations will produce rotting software.
        
         | lelandbatey wrote:
         | I have seen data work well, but it only worked well in a
         | situation where we had management focusing on two very tangible
         | things that even the CEO could verify (since the CEO did know
         | the product). Those tangible things were:
         | 
         | 1. Accurate, auditable billing down to per-chargable
         | entity/event
         | 
         | 2. Dashboards for each customer that reflect THE SAME numbers
         | as we generate in #1, so customers could see relevant info
         | quicker than just waiting for the bill from #1
         | 
         | The only reason those things were valued and made a focus
         | though was because a HUGE customer threatened to completely
         | drop our company because that customer did an audit and noticed
         | that we had overcharged them 3% because we were actually
         | billing them on estimated numbers. That led to our CEO being
         | personally yelled at by a _much_ larger CEO, and our CEO (to
         | his credit) didn 't blame us (we'd raised the alarms that the
         | bills were estimates and not auditable) but did say "this can
         | never happen again, I trust you, do whatever needs to happen to
         | make sure this never happens again."
         | 
         | And once we had #1 solid and tight, we were able to leverage
         | that solid auditable data to generate solid dashboard numbers
         | that _always_ squared with what showed on the bill.
        
           | RHSman2 wrote:
           | A CEO worth working for
        
         | denimnerd42 wrote:
         | I lead a team on a large data project at an enormous bank,
         | hundreds of devs on the project across 3 continents. My team
         | took care of the integration and automation of the sdlc
         | process. We moved from several generations of ETL applications
         | (9 applications) netezza/teradata/mainframes/hive map reduce
         | all to spark. The project was a huge cost savings and great
         | success. Massive risk reduction by getting these systems all
         | under 1 roof. We found a lot of issues with the original data.
         | We automated the lineage generation, data quality, data
         | integrity, etc. We developed a frame work that made everything
         | batteries included. Transformations were done as linear set of
         | SQL steps or a DAG of sql steps if required. You could do more
         | complicated things in reusable plugins if needed. We had a rock
         | solid old school scheduler application also. We had thousands
         | of these jobs. We had an automated data comparison tool that
         | cataloged old data and ran the original code vs the new code on
         | the same set of data. I don't think it's impossible to pull off
         | but it was a hard project for sure. Grew my career a ton.
        
           | RHSman2 wrote:
           | What was the main reason for your success?
        
             | jonathanlydall wrote:
             | Not the person you're replying to, but I would expect that
             | a near universal answer to this across all kinds of
             | projects (not just software) is effective collaboration and
             | communication between stakeholders and teams.
             | 
             | Despite no shortage of technical talent on large projects
             | they can still often fail, and it's because building a
             | technically impressive thing doesn't matter if it doesn't
             | do what business needs.
             | 
             | So it's about making sure you're building the "right" thing
             | that delivers on business's actual needs, and the only way
             | to find out what those are is through constant and ongoing
             | good communication between technical and business people.
        
               | ozim wrote:
               | Downside is lots of work business is doing is running
               | around with wheelbarrows and they actively sabotage it
               | when someone wants to build a conveyor belt.
        
               | moregrist wrote:
               | The flip side of this is that the stakeholder has to
               | actually care enough to invest in collaboration and have
               | enough bandwidth to be able to follow through.
               | 
               | The kind of communication that lets cross-functional
               | projects be effective is time consuming, and competent
               | people tend to be overworked, no matter what part of the
               | business they're in.
        
               | RHSman2 wrote:
               | I was fishing for that answer. Glad to hear this is the
               | universal answer (not well implemented)
        
             | jorvi wrote:
             | Specifically for the financial sector and especially banks
             | and government tax departments, they're on a clock.
             | 
             | As time moves on, there are less COBOL engineers. Hell,
             | sometimes their systems have been written in a bespoke
             | language. There is less and less understanding of why
             | something is set up the way it is due to lack of
             | documentation. Updates / changes to the code sometimes have
             | to wait for 2-3 years because the system isn't flexible
             | enough (literally, not as in "this change will take 2-3 dev
             | years"). Even code that old contains bugs, but due to the
             | age of the code they're inscrutable.
             | 
             | However, whichever new system gets tooled up has to be
             | 99.999% flawless, or it could cause serious damage to the
             | bank and even its regional market.
             | 
             | When there is that kind of pressure, dev teams are no
             | longer considered a cost sink, money flows, and the world
             | is possible.
        
           | d0gsg0w00f wrote:
           | I think the difference is that technical and business
           | leadership at a bank understand that data is lifeblood. Bad
           | data will get you on the front page of WSJ and a phone call
           | from a regulator in Luxembourg.
           | 
           | For a lot of smaller Internet companies, data is just a
           | fluffer. The real business is in image and which VC bbq you
           | get invited to.
        
           | neeleshs wrote:
           | This story is more an exception than norm.
           | 
           | I know startups that hired data engineers, deployed
           | warehouses,DBT, a BI tool and churned hundreds of reports,
           | and in one case their DBT project has hundreds of files. No
           | one in that company knew why any of it was used.
           | 
           | All said and done the business users wanted three reports.
           | 
           | More often than not data teams are self-serving than anything
           | else.
        
         | bob1029 wrote:
         | > I don't think a lot of orgs which use data as core-infra
         | could modernize
         | 
         | I argue this is a happy conclusion, not a problem to be solved.
         | 
         | What would "modern" bring to a bank except even more pain &
         | suffering? Database technology invented in the 80-90s is more
         | than sufficient for tracking information at the scale that 99%
         | of financial institutions operate at today.
         | 
         | Virtually every core conversion project I've ever heard of has
         | been a failure or is currently a burning wreck on its way to
         | the bottom.
         | 
         | The only new bank projects that touch data and seem to succeed
         | are LOB apps with highly curated experiences that are tightly
         | integrated with the actual front/back office business. Having
         | buy-in from staff regarding your UX is way more important than
         | spinning out a 20 page AWS architecture diagram. The CTO can
         | only take you so far through the vendor approval process at a
         | bank. Retail operations (i.e. the people who are responsible
         | for the brick & mortar branches) typically have substantially
         | more pull in these organizations.
        
           | makeitdouble wrote:
           | > What would "modern" bring to a bank except even more pain &
           | suffering?
           | 
           | In the most simple term, a future.
           | 
           | Except if your bank is literally too big to fail, at some
           | point you have to either move on from 80s technology or at
           | least bring in an adaptation layer, because your profit
           | center have also moved on or you're facing harder
           | competition.
           | 
           | A typical example is banks getting merged: there will be a
           | fight to see which system stays and which one disappears. If
           | you froze your technology 4 decades ago it won't be your
           | stack winning. [0]
           | 
           | Another is the evolution legal frameworks: EU countries
           | passed laws requiring interoperable APIs to perform standard
           | banking operations. Being a customer of a decent bank or a
           | fossilized one made a huge difference and the market grew a
           | lot more competitive. People would start hedging their bets
           | when legacy banks looked too far behind.
           | 
           | [0] The most interesting and recent example of this is Mizuho
           | bank just miserably failing at that task to the point the
           | gov. intervened and anyone not married to them probably moved
           | out.
           | 
           | https://www.mizuhogroup.com/news/2021/06/20210615_2release_e.
           | ..
        
             | iamacyborg wrote:
             | > If you froze your technology 4 decades ago it won't be
             | your stack winning.
             | 
             | I'm unclear whether this is bad for the business or just
             | bad for folks hoping to keep their jobs.
        
             | lmm wrote:
             | Mizuho is doing great, they're probably the least awful of
             | the big Japanese banks. Everywhere is like this, and "old"
             | technology doesn't seem to make the places that use it
             | appreciably worse.
        
             | lmz wrote:
             | Another system migration example (TSB, 2018) from the UK:
             | https://www.tsb.co.uk/news-releases/slaughter-and-may.html
        
             | bob1029 wrote:
             | > A typical example is banks getting merged: there will be
             | a fight to see which system stays and which one disappears.
             | If you froze your technology 4 decades ago it won't be your
             | stack winning. [0]
             | 
             | In my experience (small/mid-size US banks), the institution
             | with more assets or branches usually wins. It rarely has
             | anything to do with technology. If a 6 region, 200 branch
             | monster comes in and wants to buy some 4 branch relic in
             | the West Texas desert, it doesn't matter if the smaller
             | institution has achieved AGI and an intergalactic core
             | platform. They're almost inevitably gonna be merging their
             | records into some old boring IBM system.
        
               | shakna wrote:
               | The landscape is a little different over in Australia.
               | Most of the Big Four are closing as many branches as they
               | can. Branches are no longer a mover or shaker, because
               | most Australians never touch cash anymore. [0] Most
               | transactions are digital.
               | 
               | Almost as many people pay with card as with phone.
               | 
               | Faster record systems, faster transfers, actually do win
               | people over here.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun
               | /cash-u...
        
               | finnh wrote:
               | I welcome the day when the US stops devoting enormous
               | amounts of useful real estate to bank branches. They are
               | a sad simulacrum of actual street life, taking up tons of
               | space to advertise a bank and contributing to high rents
               | that preclude less-profitable small businesses. One step
               | up from billboards.
        
             | pletnes wrote:
             | I tossed out my credit card because the UX was bad. At this
             | point most of the CC services are utilities or commodities.
             | Just get another at a bank with better apps and website.
        
               | xelamonster wrote:
               | Yup, I'm moving to a new ptimary checking account
               | currently because I'm sick of my local credit union that
               | is apparently so incompetent they can't handle sending
               | email alerts correctly. Also, any bank or credit card
               | that won't support Plaid seems not even worth considering
               | at this point.
        
               | mixmastamyk wrote:
               | Had to look up what plaid was. Think I'd prefer Fednow
               | support and/or Aus/NZ style modern banking, that's future
               | proof. I see no reason for a third-party to be involved.
        
           | 8n4vidtmkvmk wrote:
           | Yes, please, fix the UX. That was my biggest gripe, working
           | as an FSR at the bank.
           | 
           | One particular thing was we had to convert transit #s into
           | branch numbers regularly. We did this by looking at a sheet
           | of paper of course. Eventually I got fed up and wrote a web
           | app so you could just punch in the numbers and have it
           | instantly convert. I checked and people are still using it 10
           | years after I quit, which means nothing has changed and
           | they're still using the same god awful software.
           | 
           | They did move some data at some point. I know this because
           | they screwed that up too and partially merged my mom's and my
           | bank accounts, which is a pretty bad error. Would be worse if
           | it was some rando. Speaking of... That's exactly what AT&T
           | did.
        
           | chaxor wrote:
           | >What would "modern" bring to a bank except even more pain &
           | suffering?
           | 
           | It probably depends on what "modern" means here. If updating
           | from tons of COBOL to {Julia, Python, Rust, or some other
           | well known language} with an update to an SQLite backend (or
           | perhaps postgres is acceptable for very specific scenarios),
           | that is likely a good choice due to being able to fix old
           | cruft and add maintainability for the future. If it's a
           | switch to some nosql database backend with everything
           | switched to some cypher-based lang or anything that touches
           | javascript in any way, it's probably a mistake.
        
             | ericjmorey wrote:
             | Why SQLite? Why Julia? These seem like poor options for
             | banks.
        
               | neverartful wrote:
               | In the case of SQLite, I'd say incredibly poor (to the
               | extent that the person who made the decision should be
               | fired).
        
           | __turbobrew__ wrote:
           | I would like a bank which supports U2F.
        
         | atoav wrote:
         | The problem is that most orgs seem to do the wrong thing,
         | because the incentives of the higher ups don't align with ehat
         | is good for the org.
         | 
         | E.g. if you are a bank ideally you'd like all your processes
         | automated and streamlined with extremly transparent data flows
         | etc -- and you want as many of the banks employees to be
         | proficient in these systems and constantly work on improving
         | the systems within an controlled environment.
         | 
         | In practise this is not the kind of thing that allows single
         | managers to come across like heroes -- so it doesn't happen
         | that way and you get island solutions with duct-taped
         | connections between.
        
           | ludicity wrote:
           | I also get to spend a lot of time with executives thanks to
           | the blog's success, and part of it isn't just incentives,
           | it's pure confusion. People have no idea what they're buying.
           | 
           | I also get invitations to "sponsor events" now, since people
           | see "director" on LinkedIn and think I have way more money
           | than I do. Their business model seems to be flattering
           | executives by inviting them to events where they can network
           | with other rich people, then ask me for "sponsorship" money
           | so that I can go into the room and brainwash them with my
           | marketing material. I might even try it at some point to see
           | if that's an accurate read.
        
             | disgruntledphd2 wrote:
             | If you want to make your consultancy a success, you
             | probably should attend some of these and see if they help
             | you get business.
        
               | ludicity wrote:
               | We're bootstrapped so we unfortunately can't fling money
               | at sponsorships. Or rather, we can, but it would cut into
               | our runway quite a bit, and we have more promising
               | avenues to pursue. If we acquire bad clients, the type
               | that would let themselves be brainwashed and who status-
               | seek by attending these events, that's just going to be
               | as dumb as a regular job but without the luxuries
               | afforded to employees.
        
             | rocqua wrote:
             | As matt levine likrs to say. High level finance is mostly
             | about seating charts.
             | 
             | In other words, it's about status, not money.
        
             | stackskipton wrote:
             | >I also get to spend a lot of time with executives thanks
             | to the blog's success, and part of it isn't just
             | incentives, it's pure confusion. People have no idea what
             | they're buying.
             | 
             | So, 43 years later and Putt's law is alive and well.
        
               | cratermoon wrote:
               | Putt's Law: "Technology is dominated by two types of
               | people, those who understand what they do not manage and
               | those who manage what they do not understand." From the
               | book _Putt 's Law and the Successful Technocrat_,
               | published in 1981. An updated edition, subtitled _How to
               | Win in the Information Age_ , was published by Wiley-IEEE
               | Press in 2006
               | 
               | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putt%27s_Law_and_the_Succe
               | ssfu...>
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | Author here. I now know some places in Melbourne that have a
         | good success rate on projects. Some of them are so small as to
         | be invisible and rarely hire. One uses two specific independent
         | recruiters or internal referrals. As far as I know, they are
         | extremely profitable because the competition is a joke.
         | 
         | For many organizations, the success rate is indeed 0%. A Group
         | of Eight university (our top 8 universities nationwide), for
         | example, sent me a job description a few months ago where they
         | misspelled the word engineer, and left change tracking on in
         | the Word document. This allowed me to walk through the profiles
         | of the people running their data projects, and it was super
         | obvious that many of the people involved aren't going to do a
         | good job. They could have saved millions by having a random HN
         | person eyeball the CVs of their chosen leadership team.
        
           | svilen_dobrev wrote:
           | hey. Congratulations on your decision.
           | 
           | i think it all goes deeper in overall culture/attitude there.
           | 
           | i was in Melbourne in 2012.. with idea to relocate wholesale,
           | 2nd time. Worked 2 months at some "startup", that fired me
           | when i finished the task given.. Seems it was cheaper to hire
           | "permanent" then fire, rather than take someone on 2 months
           | contract. So that's one red light on the dashboard.. There
           | were other redlights from overall "society", feeling
           | something-is-wrong but i did ignore them for quite a while -
           | people have become evil, etc..
           | 
           | Then i started going around places and mailing my cv here or
           | there (with 22y of experience making software, by that
           | time),.. ibm, ernst&young, you-name-it.. to no avail, and
           | more red-lights flashed on me.. And one day visited some kind
           | of meetup, organised/held in some wellknown company.
           | Seemingly it was kind-of "hiring" event or so, we grouped in
           | teams of 3-4-5 people, with half from company, and other half
           | outsiders.. and went solving some problems of theirs. Or that
           | was the "label". Any solution that any of outsiders
           | suggested, was shot down, with somewhat vague reasons, that
           | at the end started to sound like "if we solve this there'll
           | be no job tomorrow". And Smile :) Lots of smiles. Empty ones.
           | 
           | That was one of the Last red lights on my dashboard. Whether
           | it was a financial balloon pressing everyone so they only
           | smiled and did _nothing_ , in order to pay the mortgage, or
           | something else, i don't know. Next day i watched
           | Sacrifice/1986/Offret by Tarkovsky, and.. bought a ticket
           | out. Discontinued my oz dream. For good.
           | 
           | quoting meself, from 2007-8: "with time, places change
           | people. Other way happens noticeably only while coming in -
           | or switching on."
           | 
           | have fun
        
         | nyarlathotep_ wrote:
         | >> I live in Melbourne and work in data and reckon the whole
         | industry is a scam.
         | 
         | You needn't live in Australia to reach that conclusion.
        
         | chubs wrote:
         | Do you think perhaps the problem is rooted in people being
         | dishonest, and honest people are driven mad by it all and self-
         | select out? The dead-sea effect?
        
           | ludicity wrote:
           | It's so many things. Dishonesty, lack of technical
           | competence, political pressure, hype, organization structure,
           | and incentives.
           | 
           | If I had to summarize though, it's that the median
           | performance in any field will be at much lower levels than
           | outsiders expect, and some fields with hazier results have
           | this level set very, very, very low, especially when they're
           | hyped up. But also that the market is actually at least a
           | little bit efficient, but over long time scales. I think
           | there's a 50%+ chance that the role of Chief Data Officer
           | begins to die off, but also that it'll be replaced by
           | something silly.
        
         | DeathArrow wrote:
         | >Because it doesn't matter, every data team is a cost-centre
         | that unscrupulous managers use to launch their careers by
         | saying they're big on AI.
         | 
         | If you have lots of data flowing and have full teams "working"
         | 24/7 on it, does it really matter if that data is junk and that
         | is not processed in a meaningful way? You can still ask AI to
         | generate some nice looking charts with big numbers to show to
         | investors. Investors like nice charts and big numbers. Or so,
         | some businesses people think.
         | 
         | But in all reality the investors will ask questions like: how
         | will this solve problems for customers, how do you intend to
         | sell this to customers, how much does it cost, how will this
         | generate me money. Unless those investors plan an early exit by
         | finding other, more gullible investors than them, kind of like
         | knowingly investing early in a Ponzi scheme.
        
         | CalRobert wrote:
         | Ten years ago data engineering was another discipline in
         | software engineering, like backend or frontend. Somewhere along
         | the line the term was co-opted by "I can maybe barely string
         | together some untested airflow pipelines" and it means
         | something much different now.
        
         | akdor1154 wrote:
         | Agree.. I can tell you at least one Melbourne-based Flybuys
         | retailer calculates your points with an unholy daily-scheduled
         | stored procedure in Snowflake SQL, because.. big business
         | dysfunction reasons lead to the data team being assigned to do
         | it, and the data team didn't actually have any software
         | engineer roles in it.
         | 
         | At least it has tests.
        
           | jpmoral wrote:
           | Do you mean the points earned in-store that are then sent to
           | Flybuys to add to your total? Or, god forbid, do they do
           | their own total?
        
             | akdor1154 wrote:
             | The former, in-store and online (which is beginning to
             | touch on those business dysfunction reasons).
        
         | photonthug wrote:
         | > it doesn't matter, every data team is a cost-centre that
         | unscrupulous managers use to launch their careers by saying
         | they're big on AI. So nothing works, no-one cares it doesn't
         | work
         | 
         | Yes. Lots of times the most important asset for these companies
         | is actually contractual obligations in terms of exclusive
         | access to data or customers. It doesn't matter if the product
         | works, you'll have to buy the company to build a different one
         | that does. But the (broken or nonsensical) product pushes up
         | the value of mergers and acquisitions. If leadership completely
         | makes shit up then they might go to jail, so, they burn X
         | million on "work" and cloud spend as part of an elaborate
         | argument that it should sell for 10X.
         | 
         | > the industry is just so broken at this point I don't think we
         | can do what we did 30 years ago.
         | 
         | Well no, it's never been easier to do high quality engineering,
         | but mbas are in charge. They don't think like philosophers or
         | scientists and don't traffic in common sense.
         | 
         | For anyone questioning their life / career choices because of
         | this, it's not about you. An individual working in an
         | environment like this can still be a craftsman of integrity if
         | they focus on small problems and solve them well, but you need
         | to be able to get satisfaction from that, not from some overall
         | mission (which again, is probably fake). If you're most
         | motivated to work directly on architecture, unification, etc,
         | and want to change lots of things then you will probably be
         | miserable.
         | 
         | But if you're feeling shitty about the whole thing, it might
         | help to realize that the actual nuts and bolts of
         | adtech/martech data pipelines are much the same as the ones for
         | cancer research or particle physics or climate science, so one
         | can at least try and get transferable skills if circumstances
         | are currently holding you hostage. Data isn't a bullshit job.
         | Leadership and management that just want to play games is the
         | problem.
        
       | djoldman wrote:
       | This kind of thing is pretty typical.
       | 
       | The older the company is, the more likely one finds this morass.
       | 
       | It won't change absent powerful technical leadership.
        
       | holden_nelson wrote:
       | I went down the rabbit hole of this blog after reading this post.
       | This person's blog is amazing. I particularly appreciated this
       | piece: https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/quitting-my-job-for-the-
       | way-...
        
         | sph wrote:
         | _" and still you will lay upon your death bed thinking that you
         | may fend off the Reaper if you could but Estimate how long
         | dying will take!"_
         | 
         | What would I give to be able to compose sentences like this
         | one.
        
       | snidane wrote:
       | Looks like the classic mistake of every data team. Every single
       | office person works with data in one way or another. Having a
       | team called 'data' just opens a blanch check for anyone in the
       | organization to dump every issue and every piece of garbage to
       | this team as long as they can identify it as data.
       | 
       | That's why you build data platforms and name your team
       | accordingly. This is much easier position to defend, where you
       | and your team have a mandate to build tools for other to be
       | efficient with data.
       | 
       | If upstream provides funky logs or jsons where you expect
       | strings, that's for your downstream to worry about. They need the
       | data and they need to chase down the right people in the org to
       | resolve that. Your responsibility should be only to provide a
       | unified access to that external data and ideally some governance
       | around the access like logging and lineage.
       | 
       | Tldr; Open your 'data' mandate too wide and vague and you won't
       | survive as a team. Build data platforms instead.
        
       | _jonas wrote:
       | I'm excited for LLM applications that can setup,
       | monitor/validate, and optimize data pipelines at scale. Seems
       | possible soon given that SQL and most data records aren't
       | intended to be human-friendly
        
         | FridgeSeal wrote:
         | Once again. Because clearly this needs to be said loudly and
         | repeatedly.
         | 
         | That is a _technical solution_ to a fundamentally _social_
         | problem.
        
         | sph wrote:
         | Ah, the hubris of youth.
        
         | spencerchubb wrote:
         | When LLMs can do the following, they might be able to fix data
         | hell:
         | 
         | - Negotiate with different teams to figure out what a field
         | means
         | 
         | - Be told that a field should be converted from one format to
         | another, but oh wait it's causing errors somewhere downstream
         | because it was told the wrong instructions
         | 
         | - People come to you with some issue about the code you
         | maintain, and you dig enough to realize the root cause is
         | another team's code
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | - explain how they came up with "12" as the answer.
        
         | hermitcrab wrote:
         | And now we have two problems...
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | Ten problems. Regex is for wusses who fear danger. LLMs are
           | where real men turn.
        
         | sourcepluck wrote:
         | Either this is a joke comment, or you haven't seen
         | https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/i-will-fucking-piledrive-you...
        
       | codethief wrote:
       | Largely unrelated, but "data hell" reminds me of this classic
       | from Silicon Valley: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YPgkSH2050k
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | "I don't want to live in a world where other people make the
         | world a better place better than we do."
         | 
         | Mike Judge did such a great job of making that character into
         | Dollar Store Steve Jobs.
        
       | lucidguppy wrote:
       | > because we don't have any tests,...
       | 
       | Right there ^^^
        
       | lucidguppy wrote:
       | > I could build something superior to this with an ancient
       | laptop, an internet connection, and spreadsheets. It would take
       | me a month tops.
       | 
       | ^^^ Then do it... and then strangler fig the original.
        
         | ahoka wrote:
         | You can't as it will immediately draw out the leeches who will
         | hurl "best practices", strategic partnerships with scam
         | software vendors and compliance check ticking bullshit at you
         | until you back off.
        
           | ludicity wrote:
           | Author here. This is essentially the case for many clients,
           | especially governemnt. But we're bootstrapped, so we can
           | afford to consult and use what we've learned to build tooling
           | that only targets a small handful of sane clients.
           | 
           | I've sought advice from various people on this, some who are
           | famous-ish or quiet sales powerhouses in the US. My question
           | was "What are executives buying when they hire consultants?",
           | and the answer is consistently "Comfort". No one is actually
           | comforted by Deloitte, KPMG, whoever.
           | 
           | The moment I had confidence in an ethical consulting practice
           | is the moment someone said "I don't even know where I would
           | hire good consultants". This was someone with 30 years or
           | something absurd of industry experience, including mentoring
           | people that went on to become staff engineers. After
           | processing that, I realized I don't know where to hire a
           | consultancy that isn't going to bait-and-switch me with
           | mediocre talent. They obviously exist, but they probably can
           | only support something like 1 to 10 clients each.
           | 
           | Even Thoughtworks, a place that I used to hear mentioned
           | positively, was flagged by the CTO of a >$1B company over
           | lunch last week as "shifting to bait-and-switch" tactics.
           | 
           | tl;dr Pretty sure you can absolutely do better and make a
           | living off that, but you have to think very carefully, do
           | research, read a bunch of sales/marketing books, have great
           | communication skills and at least adequate engineering
           | skills. I still don't know if I have some of those, but if I
           | fail it'll be a skill issue, not because the problem is not
           | tractable.
        
       | erulabs wrote:
       | As a regular old "platform engineer" I fight to ignore "data
       | platform" tasks. There's no target to hit, it's just moving sand
       | around a sand box.
       | 
       | If you want an answer to a specific question, we can spin up a
       | read replica and a Metabase and write a query in an afternoon,
       | cool. I'll get you a chart, we'll move on. If you want "a data
       | analytics platform to enable blah blah blah" I'm out, I can't do
       | it. My eyes won't focus, my hands stop moving.
       | 
       | Developers sometimes tell me stuff like "Kubernetes is too
       | complex", "jeez React is a pain". I send those quotes to my
       | friends stuck writing 195 step DAGs to transform log files from
       | s3 into s3 so they can eventually land in s3 - ah yes but they're
       | parquet somewhere in between, and that matters for some reason.
       | We laugh together, but I can see it hurts them more than I
       | intended.
       | 
       | Life is too short to faff about doing nothing. Go join a company
       | with less than 100 engineers and learn to be happy again. Let the
       | enterprises burn, we'll all be better for it.
       | 
       | Anyways this was a fantastic piece, I hope this person writes
       | their book after all.
        
         | spencerchubb wrote:
         | > my friends stuck writing 195 step DAGs to transform log files
         | from s3 into s3 so they can eventually land in s3
         | 
         | sounds similar to what I do! on my team, it does actually serve
         | a purpose, it's just hard to see the forest from the trees
         | sometimes
        
         | hermitcrab wrote:
         | >Go join a company with less than 100 engineers and learn to be
         | happy again. Let the enterprises burn, we'll all be better for
         | it.
         | 
         | But but then I won't be able to lease a new panzerwankmobile
         | every 2 year to impress people I don't like!
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | In police dramas there's always the judge who refuses to sign a
         | warrant and accuses the cops of going on a "fishing
         | expedition".
         | 
         | That's half of Big Data to me. Maybe more. No idea what we're
         | looking for but we will tell you after the checks clear.
        
       | LAC-Tech wrote:
       | This has such strong Australian vibes.
       | 
       | AU dev scene is not great. Really heavy with POs, and PMs and
       | CTO's without the background.
        
       | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
       | I've worked for like a dozen companies full-time. Most people
       | don't know what they're doing. I always thought 'impostor
       | syndrome' was a projection of general insecurity. But I've
       | started to think it's actually the subconscious saying _" I'm not
       | sure what's right or wrong, please consult an expert."_
       | 
       | I have a fantasy of quitting my job to write books on the
       | [modern] theory and practice of information systems engineering.
       | Not 'how to write software', that's been done; I mean all the
       | forms of engineering around software/information systems. In my
       | dream, I write the books, everyone reads them, and starts doing
       | their jobs right.
       | 
       | But then I remember, I, a person arrogant enough to believe he
       | knows how to do things right, still can't get shit done right.
       | Maybe if I were a one-man company, I could 'do everything right',
       | and feel good about the result. But I depend on an entire company
       | of people to do the right thing, in the right way, at the right
       | time. That's hard even with the best people. No company is made
       | up of the best people. It's always a mix of the best, worst, and
       | in-between.
       | 
       | Strangely, a company can put out a decent product, despite the
       | company being a tire fire. This is some comfort when you get
       | older. You realize that everything being shit is okay, as long as
       | the bills are paid. I have PTSD from when the thing that paid the
       | bills was on fire, every week, for years. Lately at every job I
       | have, I internally panic and scream at how horrible everything
       | is. Because I'm haunted by what _might_ happen. But it 's not
       | happening yet. So I muffle the screams, smile and nod along with
       | the stand-up-meeting-cum-status-update.
       | 
       | The sad thing is, I forget that it's okay that the stand-up is
       | shit. I forget that I'm still getting a fat paycheck just to sit
       | in meetings that could have been an e-mail. I forget that,
       | despite the company bleeding cloud costs [no savings plans, RIs,
       | serverless, right-sizing, etc], we seem to be making a profit.
       | Despite the terrible designs, bad process, ineffective
       | leadership, absentee management, lack of security, and all the
       | rest, the bottom line is fine. The shit is fine. Currently, and
       | probably for the unforeseeable future.
       | 
       | I get craftsmanship. I'm a crappy woodworker. I enjoy making
       | things well, and getting better at it. But our jobs are not fine
       | woodworking. Our jobs are construction. We are banging rusted
       | nails into shitty, twisted, racked, cupped, knotty-ass studs. If
       | we're _lucky_. Yeah, this building is going to be shit. But
       | somebody 's still going to pay for it. And there'll be another
       | job after. If we really wanted fine woodworking, we never would
       | have taken this job, and we know it. We'd be struggling to sell a
       | cabinet that took us two 80+ hour weeks, too tired to appreciate
       | its beauty, too defeated by flaws only we notice.
       | 
       | So let's stop beating ourselves up. Let's stop beating each other
       | up. We don't, can't, won't, find meaning in this monument to
       | mediocrity. No comfort from the pain zone. No pride to take home.
       | But we are paying the bills, with more left over than most have.
       | No broken backs and long hours. No lack of health care, no abuse
       | from customers or the public. Not even that big a worry about job
       | security. We are the lucky ones. We are blessed with a golden
       | shovel. So let's do like those blue collar laborers we often
       | idolize, and get to this annoying, bloody awful work that we are
       | blessed with.
        
         | torginus wrote:
         | I just wonder what would happen to society if everyone worked
         | like software engineers do.
         | 
         | For example, what would happen if carpenters just eyeballed
         | every measurement, and just shrugged their shoulders when the
         | walls didn't line up. If they found out the way the wiring was
         | planned will not actually end connecting where they thought it
         | would and just shrugged and did it anyway.
         | 
         | What if they had hour long meetings about how to drive in
         | screws and their workdays consisted of putting up a beam, and
         | then going home because they think they've done enough for the
         | day.
         | 
         | If all of society was ran like that, it wouldn't be running for
         | long.
        
         | icedchai wrote:
         | 100% this. It's still sad to experience this though, day after
         | day. I've seen fundamental things done so badly, no time to fix
         | them, we're given no choice but to continue "construction" on
         | top of a smoking garbage pile. Nobody wants to hear "start
         | over."
        
         | hermitcrab wrote:
         | That seems a rather defeatest attitude. I was fed up with
         | working for other people 20 years ago. I started my own 1-man
         | software company and write software how I think it should be
         | written. The software isn't perfect, but I'm proud of it. I'm
         | not rich, but I do fine financially. It isn't a viable path for
         | everyone, but it is something to consider if you hate your job.
        
           | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
           | I am defeated. I think a lot of us are. It's wonderful that
           | you have your own company, but I don't have the grit and
           | self-discipline for it, and I'm still trying to scrape up
           | enough for retirement. A younger me might've liked to try
           | your path, if I'd heard more of those success stories growing
           | up.
        
             | hermitcrab wrote:
             | I'm sorry to hear that. It's definitely not for everyone.
        
           | ludicity wrote:
           | I'm the author. This is the track we're on. We also named our
           | company "Hermit" so there's something extremely serendipitous
           | about this comment, hah.
           | 
           | I definitely think it isn't viable for many people, but I've
           | also met people who could totally do it that are scared
           | because they're around a lot of people with ability/financial
           | constraints that they simply don't have.
        
             | hermitcrab wrote:
             | Best of luck. One word of advice: marketing. ;0)
        
         | int_19h wrote:
         | The other aspect of this is that it's easier to be the cog when
         | you're tasked merely with implementing shitty decisions. You
         | can just disregard the rationale and focus on the list of
         | things you're told to do.
         | 
         | But as you (hopefully) progress in your career, the expectation
         | is that you are increasingly the one _making and justifying_
         | those lists, which is much more soul crushing and harder to
         | "background" and pretend that it doesn't matter.
        
       | tofflos wrote:
       | > Like why didn't anyone catch the issue with the logs?
       | 
       | I see questions like these a lot and every time I feel that
       | people immensely underestimate the effort required for curating
       | data. In my experience data can only ever be as good as what it's
       | being used for and in this story the logs haven't been used for
       | this purpose before so they're not going to be any good.
       | 
       | It's some sort of data variation on the second law of
       | thermodynamics - entropy is winning. Going in with the
       | expectation that things should be better will only lead to
       | frustration.
        
         | epgui wrote:
         | This is not a data curation issue though, it's a basic o11y
         | issue.
        
           | andrewflnr wrote:
           | > o11y
           | 
           | Seems to be "observability", for anyone else seeing that for
           | the first time.
        
             | downrightmike wrote:
             | It pops up every 8 months or so for me
        
       | t420mom wrote:
       | I feel like there's a whole new generation of tech workers that
       | need to read _Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance_
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | Author here. This is one of my favourite books of all time. In
         | fact, my two favourite books are ZAMM and The Black Swan, both
         | of which I hated on my first read when I was 19.
         | 
         | I recently re-read it for the third time while on holiday and
         | was taking notes on pages worth including in a book review. I
         | ended up with about 1/3rd of all pages logged and decided no
         | review was better than just telling people to read the book,
         | but I might write a blog post on gumption traps.
        
       | nathancspencer wrote:
       | _of course, we 're serverless, because how can you hurt yourself
       | without a cutting-edge?_
       | 
       | Brilliant
        
       | zbyforgotp wrote:
       | Bullshit jobs once again. I don't know. These companies are
       | complex systems.
       | 
       | He is writing as if the engineers all knew how to fix the
       | systems, but were just powerless to do that. But I've also seen
       | projects lead by engineers that only added to the overall
       | complexity.
       | 
       | There is a paradox in this - the people who seem the most
       | confident about fixing the systems usually only make things
       | worse. Chesterton fences and stuff.
       | 
       | This article triggers me because everybody who reads it will
       | always believe that they would fix the mess if only they got the
       | power, but in practice when they get power they would only add
       | new complexity to the whole mess.
        
         | xena wrote:
         | People generally do have some idea how to fix complicated
         | systems have have endemic problems. The reason they don't is
         | that the company considers the capitalism going up faster NOW
         | to be way more important than it going up faster in the future.
        
       | mrlonglong wrote:
       | This makes me very glad I now write software that drives
       | hardware.
        
       | paulsutter wrote:
       | Understanding that IT projects are difficult gives us more
       | empathy. Gartner says that 80% of corporate IT projects are
       | considered failures. McKinsey says that 17% of large projects
       | fail so badly that the companies existence is threatened.
       | Standish group says only 10% of projects succeed.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | All large successful projects start as small successful
         | projects.
        
       | sethammons wrote:
       | > Like why didn't anyone catch the issue with the logs?
       | 
       | Because there were no automated tests. If the company needs
       | something to work, that thing needs a, preferably automated,
       | test.
        
       | pards wrote:
       | > The word enterprise means that we do this in a way that makes
       | people say "Dear God, why would anyone ever design it that way?"
       | 
       | Thank you for this phrase; I'll quote it at every opportunity.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I'm working on an SDLC app that will end up with inspirational
         | sayings as interstitials once I run out of bigger
         | features/desperately want to procrastinate.
         | 
         | I'll stick heavy hitters from Goldratt, Fowler, Feynman et al
         | in there, but there's going to be a "dark humor" and "snarky"
         | category and this will definitely go into one of them, along
         | with some Ambrose Bierce.
        
       | tokinonagare wrote:
       | > At two of the four businesses I've worked at, the most highly-
       | performing engineers have resorted to something that I think of
       | as Pain Zone navigation. It's the practice of never working
       | unless pair programming [...] The fear and dread comes from a
       | culture where people feel bad that they can't work quickly enough
       | in the terrible codebase
       | 
       | Exactly why I burned-out at work, worked at most 2 hours per day
       | on a good day and finally was ejected from the project after a PM
       | that graduated last year from school noticed and went after my
       | head. Author is a wizard for describing the situation this well.
       | 
       | It's been 3 days I've been free from the tyranny of Jira and
       | project managers, and I worked more on my personal projets than I
       | did in a week at my former workplace.
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | > The word enterprise means that we do this in a way that makes
       | people say "Dear God, why would anyone ever design it that way?"
       | 
       | I feel this comment in my bones.
        
       | kayo_20211030 wrote:
       | Good Grief! Prolix?
       | 
       | > coated in grass which rends those who tread upon it like a
       | legion of upraised spears,
       | 
       | and there's more. Get to the point, whatever it is.
        
         | dcminter wrote:
         | Some of us enjoy the journey.
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | This is the "I saved my company half a million dollars in about
       | five minutes" person who got in trouble for saving them half a
       | million dollars.
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | You are the only person in months that has called me anything
         | other than "the AI rant guy" and I just wanted to say I
         | appreciate you. <3
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | I am an AI agnostic so even if I remembered that was you too,
           | I'd only say it to our tribe.
           | 
           | I came into the industry exactly as a previous AI Trough of
           | Disillusionment was in full swing so I've been vaccinated.
        
           | sampo wrote:
           | The "AI rant": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40725329
        
       | sourcepluck wrote:
       | I had read and very much enjoyed the "AI silence or you'll be
       | Piledriven into next week" post, without clicking on anything
       | else on the author's blog. It was click link, read whole thing,
       | love it, send it to one or two people, move on.
       | 
       | Very happy to see this here, realise it's the same person and
       | that this is "a thing", and then to rollick in the author's
       | backlog. A joy! Raucous real-life laughter has exploded from me
       | on numerous occasions along with most articles. I think I've read
       | 5 in a row there, and my brain is buzzing happily.
       | 
       | Thank you to the author for having the courage to write about
       | real experiences. A breath of fresh air. I look forward to future
       | books and articles, and reading more previous work, and cross my
       | proverbial fingers hoping they can keep it real in the face of
       | what will presumably be an avalanche of grifters looking to leech
       | off the attention.
        
         | refulgentis wrote:
         | for fellow readers: https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/i-will-
         | fucking-piledrive-you...
        
           | sourcepluck wrote:
           | And, adjacent, in my opinion, readings like this piece,
           | entitled "Hallucinating sense in the era of infinity-
           | content":
           | 
           | https://www.documentjournal.com/2024/05/technical-images-
           | fil...
        
             | refulgentis wrote:
             | This is really, really, fucking good, thank you.
        
           | hermitcrab wrote:
           | I did suggest this excellent link to a well known data
           | science newletter, but they said it was a bit too profane for
           | their readership!
        
       | jacobyoder wrote:
       | "Suffice it to say that while people are sincerely trying their
       | best, our leaders are not even remotely equipped to handle the
       | volume of people just outright lying to them about IT."
       | 
       | I've tried to come up with some heuristic to determine whether or
       | not a team is competent, good, or doomed. I've been exposed to
       | all over the last... 8-10 years, and one of the key things I've
       | noticed is the ratio of competent/skilled developers to the
       | unskilled ones is a big ... indicator(?). Predictor?
       | 
       | Colleague of mine has been working with a team - dev team has
       | ranged from 5-8 people over the last few years. Few people seem
       | to have any grasp of programming at all. Only two people - my
       | colleague and one other - have ever taken projects from ideas to
       | delivery, or even taken features from requests to successful
       | rollout of already functioning software.
       | 
       | The arguments that people get in to there - days or weeks of
       | people 'researching' whether or not OAUTH 'really' requires
       | 'refresh tokens' or whether it's really supposed to be a JWT.
       | Management has some notion of 'every voice is legitimate and
       | should be heard - we don't support bullying' and so on.
       | 
       | If you have a team of 10, and 1 or 2 people are simply bad at
       | having the ability to think somewhat abstractly, you can survive.
       | 
       | If that number hits, say, 4-5... the team will struggle. A lot.
       | You can keep things going, but it will be slow. And everything
       | becomes a battle.
       | 
       | If that number becomes 7 or 8, and you only really have 1-2
       | developers who are actually competent developers... things will
       | continue to spiral downward.
       | 
       | On the other side - I worked with a team of about 8-10 people on
       | a 6 month contract. The larger org had another 40 or so folks,
       | handling other projects, and support. Onboarding was _great_ - I
       | pushed production code in the first week. Everyone on the team
       | was competent, including the juniors. I had more development
       | experience, but they had more company experience, and it was
       | really a relatively enjoyable engagement overall.
       | 
       | It was refreshing to be able to ask anyone on the team questions,
       | and either get a workable answer, or an "I'm not sure, let's
       | check with XYZ" to get working answers. The "oh, yeah, it's ABC"
       | when ABC is clearly not the answer stuff never happened. People
       | committing code and pushing to production _without ever having
       | run the code at all_ - I 've experienced that - didn't happen -
       | that's happening to my colleague.
       | 
       | The problem with a plurality of tech-incompetent folks in a tech
       | group is that they honestly can not determine that they aren't
       | competent. The only examples of competence are in the minority,
       | and tend to not be trusted (even though that minority is the only
       | portion that turns out working/functional code).
       | 
       | Leaving ends up being the only option in those cases. My
       | colleague is only at his place part time, and has hung around
       | because they've gone through some restructuring where new folks
       | were brought in, and... you hope that things might get better in
       | a few months, then realize they don't.
        
       | javajosh wrote:
       | Tempting to write a response piece, "Get me into data hell, I
       | need the money."
        
         | ludicity wrote:
         | In Australia, data jobs have a high floor but a low-ish ceiling
         | at most places. Salaries start at around A$100K if you know how
         | to interview, but 30 years of diligent practice only nets you
         | around A$200K, and this would be considered an extreme success.
         | 
         | If you're already good, just have coffee with executives/leads
         | at places that take engineering seriously and you'll earn well,
         | but there's no need to enter data hell as an employee at the
         | typical company.
        
       | ramshanker wrote:
       | Acting against your own better Judgement, I have to take that
       | fight/ urge every few days. ;)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-03 23:00 UTC)