On Newbies

I feel like I should explain my comment on the IT industry a little more.

My first job after college was in the military, and I've come to appreciate that the military is really great at breaking down large and complex topics into chunks clear enough that anyone can understand.

Yes, you may have 'death by PowerPoint'. Your teachers may not be very engaging, may even read the slides verbatim in the most boring way possible, and some courses are like drinking from a firehose. But quite a bit of what you need to know is broken into a clear lesson plan. And there's a ton of manuals (that most soldiers never bother to read 😂) that you can refer to if you have any questions.

And when I was a shipping supervisor, I had to learn what my people knew (can't manage what you don't understand. Plus helps with the whole 'lead by example' and 'lead from the front' thing.) so yes, I learned how to pick orders and drive a fork truck (Badly. They make it look so easy). And an order picker.

And we had ISO standards and audits and inspections and had to document all the tasks, and training, and make sure our trainers were certified, and a whole bunch of other things. 

So when I say that IT seems terrible at training new people, it's because I have something to compare it to. 

And from what I hear from others outside my company, it's pretty much industry wide. 

I get not wanting to have to spoon feed people who should show some initiative and figure it out (via Google, or the classic RTFM). I guess they're trying to select for people like that? Idk... But there's probably a ton of other people who could be valuable contributors with just a little bit of support.

I'm kind of glad I came into this late in life, and with my previous experience. 

Update

I do still have thoughts on my latest topics, but work was kind of a pain today so I'll probably do it tomorrow.

I... I have a love/hate relationship with coding. I hate the struggle (more on that in a bit), but it is a pretty great feeling when you figure out how to make it work.

That said, there's a reason I applied for the technical engineering position, and not as a developer. 

Some of the industry changes mean those roles may converge a bit (I'll spare you the details).

Anyways. When I first started here, about a year and a half ago, I got tapped for one of the attempts at transitioning to those new roles. 

And it's been an experience. 

Its not so much that coding is hard... It's just that when you're new it's like you hit roadblock after roadblock. 

We use special tools that can help error check as we code, but setting up your environment is a task all by itself. 

See, we all get the basic functions when we install a programming language, but there are a lot of tools that have already been coded to help with more specialized work. 

A university might regularly use specialized math formulas. A company that offers up an app for your phone might use some other functions. If we tried installing all of the possible coding resources we'd be wasting a lot of computer resources on things we never use. 

So you install the particular packages, modules, libraries, etc. Just the ones you need. (there are ways of documentating that and ensuring everything is installed, but a) sometimes you need to install something else first and b) some things get missed. 

Which means that this week I first couldn't even run the code I was interested in. Not in my IDE at least. 

I had to install something else entirely (which was a pain figuring out). 

Then I ran into a different issue, though I resolved that one pretty quickly. 

Only for something else to appear... 

All before I really coded anything. 

I know, I know. Once you get setup it gets easier.

There's a lot more to it, and it's been rather frustrating. Especially since (as my team and boss are all integration engineers) I can't really ask them for help.

But I worked with someone today who definitely knew a lot more, and got a lot closer to where I need to be. (He couldn't help with everything, and was suggesting I just create a local project to test with. It's just that doing that means cutting out all the parts specifical to our code base. Maybe a more experienced programmer could quickly and easily do it. Idk, but the developer who's been the most help was able to point me in the right direction. That one was a fairly easy fix, and I'm pretty much ready for business.

Or rather, finished the day researching how to do what I want, and hopefully Monday I can actually get it done. 

This, btw, reminds me of the training I got sent to about a year ago. We were covering some of the tools for testing your code, and I commented that there was a world of difference between the coding we learned in school and the tools we were using (junit, gradle, maven, ummm... I don't even remember everything tbh).

Like, it's great that I understand for loops and while loops and try/catch statements and functions and all that. But I think it would have been nice to have an entire course on IDEs, and how to set them up. I'm sure I'm only using a fraction of the resources in my current one.

The funny thing about that training though. Most of the other people there were developers, and a) one flat out said they were never taught this stuff in school either. And just had to figure it out. (part of why I think IT does a horrible job at teaching newbies) and b) I somehow seemed to understand more than some?

Like... It's mostly just asking questions from anyone willing to spare a moment, googling the crap out of things, and persisting... 

But everyone else at that training seemed to struggle too, and I seemed to pick up some things better. 

And even though I just spent an entire blog post complaining about this, I probably know more about all of this than the others working on this project (mostly because the developer I go to for help used to be on the team, and wrote most of it, so I've somewhat poorly been filling in for him now that he's not there.)

It kind of makes me think all of us are just faking it. (Exaggeration. Slightly.)

All the talk from infosec Twitter about imposter syndrome might even be endemic to tech. 

I'm not sure how I feel about that. 

And Instead We Get This...

All the great things people could do to make the world better, and instead we've got wealthy and powerful people using their money like this.

You have to wonder what kind of people can lie and spread hate and somehow think they're doing anything worthwhile or good. 

Exercising Free Will

Some drivers seem to believe that so long as they obey all the traffic laws, they should be fine. 

The problem is that they aren't really paying attention to the drivers around them. 

The light turns green, so they go. And even though they do have the right away, they may not have noticed that someone else tried running the red light... and they crash.

That's part of why defensive driving focuses on being aware of the drivers around you, and thinking about what you'll do if someone is about to hit you. (Or so my understanding is. I've never actually taken a course). 

Maybe there's room on the shoulder to swerve right if someone hits a patch of ice and starts veering all over the place. Or maybe there isn't any room, and you need to hit the brakes (or speed up).

All of it requires paying attention to what's going on around you, and deciding how to act. (And yes, sometimes those actions will break the laws of traffic... but if you're avoiding an accident and aren't making things worse by putting other people in danger, is it a problem?)

That's kind of what I meant when I said that people don't exercise free will. I was referring to the almost mindless way that people follow the path laid before them. Where you grew up, everyone goes to college. Or nobody does. 'Everyone' becomes a doctor or a lawyer, or housewife, or mechanic.

It's not that any of those are wrong. It's that I think people should think about their options and consciously choose them, rather than doing what naturally comes next. 

I suppose that's what some of the wisdom traditions talk about when they want us to be mindful. That we should learn to be present, and learn to develop that awareness so that we're doing so at every part of the day. 

I don't know, again... I haven't had any formal schooling on that. (It does sound like a tall order, though. You can spend a lifetime learning to be in the moment and mindful all the time.)

I said yesterday that there were things we could do no matter where we are in life. 

If we choose to. How much of an impact will vary, and it's not just about resources and access...

We all know that front line leaders have the most impact on the people who work for them. A platoon leader or platoon sergeant has a very strong impact on their team.

What's interesting, though, is that although people higher up in the chain of command have a wider reach (a battalion commander or CEO naturally influences far more people), it can get diffused as it filters down. Your immediate boss generally influences you on a day to day basis far more than your CEO (and are often the biggest reason someone quits.)

Which isn't to say that a CEO doesn't have a profound influence. It's just that it comes more from who they choose as their direct reports and what guidance they give. (People always talk about how you need to look two levels up if you want to be promoted. See what your boss and your boss's boss need, and meet that need. But you also have to look two levels down, I think. Otherwise all you see is that someone achieved your goal... and you may not know how they did it. Maybe they did it by forcing everyone to work like crazy. Maybe they're relying on a really good subordinate. How do you know?)

People in staff positions also have influence, for good or bad. Even if the CEO is the person making the decision, how you frame the decision has a huge influence on what course of action they decide.

A good staff officer does their due diligence, of course, and presents a solid analysis of the options available. But... it's not too hard for them to decide that a particular option isn't even worth researching, or to decide that the answers they found couldn't be right and to rework the analysis. (And maybe they're right, and caught an error. And maybe they're wrong, and made the data fit their biases.)

It's interesting how a staff manages their boss. You can tell they're trying to do so when you hear stories about them fighting to make sure the boss seems (or doesn't see) a particular report or story. 

I suppose that's one way gatekeeping happens, but... it's not as simple as saying 'gatekeeping is bad'. After all, you're dealing with people who don't have near enough time in the day for a thorough analysis of all the issues. They need people to help filter out the critical bits. (The real complaint ought to be 'bad gatekeeping', rather than gatekeeping at all.)

I kind of had some other thoughts, but this is good enough for today.

Disturbing

I hadn't realized that Evangelical home schooling, in addition to being wrong in general, flat out undermined our country.

In other news, I want to follow up on yesterday's post, partly because I ended it on a somewhat hopeless note. 

There are things we can do to make a difference, at whatever place in life we find ourselves. 

Not sure I'll get to it today though. We'll see. 

Not Black/White

I really like how this example illustrates the complexities in life. 

On Jewish Space Lasers (Eventually)

The thing about moving a lot is that you realize just how much you create a new routine, and it defines you.

The things you do in that first week or month can easily become your routine. The coffee shop you regularly visit, for example. (someone said moving is the best time to quit smoking, and it makes sense to me. You're changing all your routines and habits anyway, so it's easier to just not add that one.)

And although I think we have an inner self that doesn't easily change with our environs (and helping us become more fully that self is kind of the goal in life), it's true that we are deeply shaped by our routines and the people around us.

That's part of why I had an idle thought, back in my lieutenant days. An idea that could never really be tried.

See, there are good organizations and bad. Good organizations that make good decisions, that people love working for, that come up with great ideas or products and make them reality. And that bring out the best in their people. Promote talent, develop skills, etc. To use what's now a cliché, they have good synergy. The whole is greater than the sum of their parts. 

And then there are toxic organizations, where people dread going to work. Where every decision just seems to make things worse, where the talented get alienated and pushed out and the ones who remain tend to be cynics or locked in because they're afraid of losing benefits. Where the worst people get promoted, and everyone fights to get credit for the good things and avoid blame for the bad. (Clear lines of responsibility are pretty important for holding people accountable, which is probably why organizations like this prefer to fudge who is responsible for what. Makes it easier to avoid blame if everyone - and therefore no one - was involved.) 

My question was... If you slowly transferred all the people on the toxic organization over to the good one... Slowly enough that each individual grows accustomed to the new organization's way of doing things... 

Could you eventually have the exact same people in the good org as had been in the bad? And would the good organization still be high performing? 

I mean, yes. We each bring something unique to the table, and every gain and loss changes an organization. But the history and traditions of a place imbue it with its own character. And if you did the transition slowly enough, how much of that organizational character affect the collection of individuals? 

Command climate is a thing, and not just some buzz words used by the people in charge. Shaping that, deliberately creating it.. That's part of what good leaders do. (That's what they're doing when they say "there are no stupid questions.") 

For all that we can consciously choose to do so, though... Most people aren't really aware of that ability and don't really use it. 

Like, I do believe we have free will. I just think the vast majority of people don't really use it. 

Which is part of why I consider so many things systemically. 

For example... Some time ago I read an article discussing how Wall Street recruits top notch graduates. It was interesting, because the article said most of these kids didn't really want a career on Wall Street. Like a lot of us at that age, many wanted to go out and do great things. Change the world. 

But they got recruited into these (high paying) positions, and then found it hard to leave. Kind of like the 'golden shackles' I've heard ex-military talk about with regards to working in combat zones as a contractor. It pays well, you get a lifestyle that fits your income, but it's hard to make that kind of money anywhere else. 

So you keep doing it. Not so much because it's your passion, but how else can you live in the style you're accustomed to? 

The people who make more money don't generally think of themselves as that wealthy (or so I hear). 

I'm guessing that some of that is because when you're in those circles you also know many people who have far more, and there's a vast difference between a 1%er making around $400,000/yr and a Jeff Bezos making millions. 

The rest of it is the golden shackles. It feels like every couple of years some 1%er writes a (horribly hilarious) article about how they're really not making that much money. Honest! Except they always include details that show how out of touch they are. They'll say - but I spend X amount sending my kids to <horribly expensive private school>. Except for most of us there's absolutely no chance we'd be able to send our kids there. So you choose to spend that money, and you do so expecting it to pay off down the road... As your kid also gets into the colleges we won't, and builds connections with other wealthy individuals that we can't. 

Or they'll talk about how they have to pay for maid service. As if the vast majority of us have maid service! If I've pulled a, long week at work and don't have the energy to clean, I'm sorry... But the house stays dirty. Don't come over unannounced. 

Or they'll talk about how expensive the cost of living is (which is often true. Especially in Silicon Valley or NYC). Except you know what the median salary in New York is? Around $70K. 

That means half of New Yorkers are living off less than that. Cost of living is definitely a factor, but not so much that you can't find somewhere decent for less. (though how much of that is again about networking, connections, and the like? Gotta keep up with the Joneses). 

So the thing of it is that to people like me even the 1%ers have fantastic opportunities I could only wish to have. (There are a lot of things I'd love to do or buy, but yeah.. Let's pay off a few things first. And hope no new disaster happens like my dog getting sick again. The nice new laptop can wait, and maybe some day I'll visit all the BRICS nations, but who knows when that'd happen. And if I didn't have to worry about finances for a while there's other things I would love to try, but whatever. I can't honestly complain, especially when I'm able to work from home during a pandemic.)

Anyways, the article about Wall Street, and those comments about the 1%ers, are all because they highlight the problem. 

Its not that there's some greedy and villainous elite that is trying to turn us all into slaves with no hope of ever making enough money to feel financially secure. (though there do seem to be some who are greedy. And there are bad people across all classes, though the ones with wealth have the ability to do a lot more damage.) 

Really, an evil cabal (whether it's a Jewish company with a space laser, or lizard people, or whatever horrible anti-semitic conspiracy theory these people think of next) would be a lot easier to deal with than the real problem. 

Which is that there's a lot of people shaped by their environment, who just like most of us don't realize how much that is true, and who are also cogs in the machine. 

Just cogs that get paid more, and actually have a better chance of changing that machine if they decided it's worth doing. (Hence a great deal of frustration. They could change the world for the better. They've got the resources and access. And yet... the rich still get richer, the poor get poorer, global climate change is a thing, and over 400,000 Americans have died in a pandemic.)