Close to Denver. High elevation town at 8200 feet, homesites to 9800 feet elevation.
Adequate internet.
Cheaper than Evergreen, and a bit higher.
High elevation is good for health.
Wildlife (deer, migratory birds, elk, foxes and the occasional Black Bear).
Small town but has what is needed. (Grocery, vet, medical, dentist, car repair, chain saw shop)
Same distance from ski areas as Denver.
Lots of snow in winter, and mild sunny summers.
Don’t know why this is getting downvotes. It’s uncontroversially just fact that open-plan layouts do not save money, not even in the short term and not in high density urban centers. This has been written about so exhaustively for decades that at this point it’s not even worth engaging with people who say “citation needed” or “in 5 seconds of Googling I found this confirmation bias article” because it lends way too much legitimacy to the false idea that it’s even a close call at all or that there is any part of it left open for serious debate.
Open plan office designs are chosen so that executives can treat their office spaces like works of art - lots of signaling and often very little practical value.
They are often built at huge costs (way beyond outfitting the same space with offices or cubicles for the same number of people), often actively paying a lot of money to destroy existing privacy features, and they not only include but are completely oriented around opulent roof decks, party spaces, kitchens, game rooms, massage areas, and on and on.
It’s 100% about infantilizing the workforce and swindling them to accept greater degrees of counter-productive surveillance and total lack of privacy. It is not about cost reduction, flat out.
There's a consistent and strong tendency of companies, owners, and managers to avoid giving their professional-class-wage-earning software developers professional-class perks & (especially) signs of status. I'm not entirely sure why that is, but it does seem to be the case. Like they're all, consciously or not, just determined on some fundamental level not to let that happen.
On the flip side software folks tend not to exactly embody a professional-class aesthetic or attitude, but I think that behavior'd flip around damn fast if elevated social status became more easily available to those who did. But maybe that's not worth having private offices and assistants and deference to our professional judgement, and so on.
[EDIT] relevance being, open plan offices are notable for not just avoiding giving status, but for swinging way the opposite direction. Almost like passive-aggressive compensation for having to pay developers so much. "Well, at least I can seat them like minimum-wage call center employees, since for some reason that's considered fairly normal".
Personally I believe that software development is closer to a blue collar profession than a white collar one. Like blue collar professions we have standard outputs from our jobs -- we fix things and manufacture them, however ephemeral or abstract those things might be. It's more than just the "thinking" that groups together "knowledge work" -- our jobs depend very much on our level of output. There's a certain tediousness about both development and blue collar jobs as well. Our high pay is a simple result of market forces (and might be a historical anomaly in the long run), not of any kind of professional standing. I think this is also part of the reason that we have so few women in our profession (a quick google puts the amount of women plumbers at 1.5%) -- which is to say, whatever is keeping women from becoming plumbers is likely to be a big factor in women becoming programmers. It's easy to think that development is just another office job, but I think there is definitely a case to be made that it is not.
Private offices are a professional class perk. Large bonuses are a professional class perk.
Open plan offices with a deejay booth and free beer are the exact opposite, working class “perks” specifically meant to endow the workplace with an overwhelming infantile culture that ingrains the idea that you are compensated with hedonistic fun times and not with money, status, experience-building projects, or respect.
I've been telling this for years: an equivalent of a software developer in a different industry would be driven around in a company's car, dine on company's card and get fat bonuses every year.The problem is that developers,to most people,are well, the IT people. It doesn't matter if your code saves Netflix gazillion of money,to most people you on the same level as the guy who can connect the printer.Also sometimes almost cynical approach to anything financial or sales related doesn't help it either.
I believe the issue relies mostly on how value is quantified by company managers. It seems to me that any relatively modern practice or methodology aimed to organize and value work, especially in software engineering, is not focused on the added value of the work itself, but increasing middle management visibility - another way to "infantilize" the workforce, if you ask me.
Take a finance guy, for instance. You give him a set of rules and objectives, and there is no need to define what "success" is like, based on the output. Success is his ability to make money.
A software engineer may implement features A, B, and C in the product. She may even increase the performance of the pipeline two fold. But there is no way to objectively quantify the impact of such changes within the current work organization frameworks. These are tools for middle management to quantify a team's output, nothing more. Thus a good software engineer would get a nice bonus at the end of the year, and a compulsory, but meaningless, promotion.
Now, I'm not saying that promoting individualism is the way to go, nothing further from the truth. I understand that there are intrinsic differences between finance and software. Yet I believe that there are very few companies out there with the right tools to evaluate the output of software engineers, and recognize it accordingly.
My job is quite interesting in this aspect: I'm a manager,who has to set,monitor,and ultimately award results. Only one direct report is technical and it is quite challenging to quantify his outcomes. I also do development,as part of my role, and it's just so freaking hard to assign values to the work that'd been done. For instance, I did create an orders portal of sorts,which our corporate clients quite like and none of the competitors have anything like that.Our head of sales going from one company to another selling this portal as part of the offering and the execs love it. Sales get revenue, everything is nice and easy. Now what do I get for this portal? Would they have sold if it wasn't there? Did it help to close or was it just icing on the cake? The contribution is clearly there,but how much? 1%, 10%,maybe 0? And that's pretty much the same for most devs. What's the contribution of that logging feature? What's the value of some smart function?
Sometimes measuring someone's effectiveness is as easy as "I sold that, here's the check, that's my effectiveness" but I've also noticed that measurement is often incredibly sloppy in business, and people rarely seem to get called on it. Making a serious effort to eliminate confounders is unusual. I think a lot of folks in non-programming jobs do, to a fairly high degree, just make shit up, pretending that they can measure the effect of various initiatives much better than they can, and for whatever reason this is rarely considered a problem or questioned.
Some of them surely realize they're just slinging barely-if-at-all-justified BS, but I also think lots and lots of people are just terrible at reasoning about that kind of thing and don't realize how meaningless the numbers they're generating are. They're trying, they just suck at it and no-one's bothered to tell them (or seems to care).
Possibly programmers are more sensitive to this than most, and are reluctant to put forward "bullshit" numbers that would, if they did, in fact be accepted as reality by the folks "above" them. Meanwhile someone down the hall's being promoted for numbers that are even more a work of fantasy than those, and may not even be intentionally deceiving anyone.
Note that the sales folks don't sweat over how much of their numbers can be attributed to the people making the thing they're selling. Those numbers are theirs, period. "Did I sell that or did Feature X put it over the top?" fretted no salesperson ever.
>an equivalent of a software developer in a different industry would be driven around in a company's car, dine on company's card and get fat bonuses every year
As a software developer, this statement feel like hubris.
I was a growth engineer for 5+ years and even though i worked closer with marketing and sales optimizing metrics, I was still an "outsider" because I'm so technical. It's a very strange and nuanced social barrier.
I'm a co-founder now (and only developer) at a small company that makes 7 figures and i still feel like a code monkey at times, though in a much better position than most.
It can, truly, be business-socially elevating in many companies (even "tech" ones!), to pretend to know less about technology than you do. The weird thing is it's not even like the "the CEO using bad grammar in curt emails is a power move" kind of deal, because it kicks in way down the org chart. Basically if the interview for your position isn't leetcode there's a good chance betraying you know too much about technology will lose you some status.
[EDIT] It just occurred to me that this is because programming is, so far as social pecking order, perceived as blue-collar.
>It just occurred to me that this is because programming is, so far as social pecking order, perceived as blue-collar.
Because 99.9% of the population have no clue what the job entails. For an average person,the best they could expect to see is the WordPress admin panel with a few lines in html.And for an average Joe, that's what the programming is. Who on earth goes to social gatherings and cracks a joke about how they write code for some controllers that are used in nuclear plants and some shot gone wrong? I never,ever talk or bring up anything technical unless they love that kind of stuff. People don't understand what you talking about and either think you are weird,or they feel so embarrassed by the fact that they have no clue, that they can't wait to get out. For the ones running/owning the companies, especially the large ones,the developers are merely an expensive nuisance that is needed run the business.
I think a lot of that's true of doctors and lawyers, too, but those are the epitome of professional-class jobs.
Maybe the difference is that we produce something that, independently, produces value after we're done. The value's in what the thing we produce keeps doing, not the work per se. Lawyer's gotta lawyer every case. Doctor's gotta treat each illness. Lawyer-AI or Doctor Bot doesn't need the developer anymore (OK maintenance or whatever, but you know what I mean). Closest a lawyer probably comes to that is writing contract templates. I can't think of anything a doctor might do along those lines, really.
In short, we build capital directly, rather than providing a service.
I worked at Google X from 2013-2015. During this time, we transitioned into a shiny tremendously expensively updated building at "The Rails" (a converted shopping mall off San Antonio Rd). You have described it perfectly. All signaling, no substance, tons of useless recreational space, engineers packed in cheek-by-jowl. I used to hide in the EE lab with my laptop so I could think. Couldn't stand sitting at my 5-foot-wide desk where my nice desktop CAD workstation was parked.
Other people would just camp out in (and fight over) one of the hundreds of conference rooms, because there were zero private offices in the entire building. A building that used to contain AN ENTIRE SHOPPING MALL.
Well if you put more people in a smaller space that saves money on rent. If you start using "productivity" or "output" or "net savings" that's effectively economic voodoo in comparison to "the rent is $10k per month vs $20k per month".
This. Isn't a divider useless if the HVAC system is recirculating and pumping virus-laden air everywhere? This has already been shown to cause some outbreaks.
Essentially...
"“We have tested SARS-CoV-2 isolated from a patient and found that camostat mesilate blocks entry of the virus into lung cells,” says Markus Hoffmann, the lead author of the study. Camostat mesilate is a drug approved in Japan for use in pancreatic inflammation. “Our results suggest that camostat mesilate might also protect against COVID-19,” says Markus Hoffmann. “This should be investigated in clinical trials.”
Even better would be for Microsoft to contribute to Wine, or to perhaps develop a proprietary Windows-source-code-derived alternative that they could sell.
It's highly unlikely that Microsoft would take either approach, but they'd be better options than putting Windows in a VM.
In Java, I created thread local resource pools including strings which eliminate garbage collection in sensitive routines. Of course it’s much faster in java to perform pooled string comparison with ==. Likewise I always use the indexed version of a for loop to avoid the iterator otherwise allocated.
GC in java is great for non-priority code which is most of the application.
Story time : from my boss his son is specialized in factory logistics for production lines. He helps plan to build streets transportation plans how much when where how etc.
He looked into jobs in us and Japan / China.
When he looked at the US it was basically : planning canceled, canceled, stopped, pushed back for later etc etc. So he moved now to China.
So, from a data point of one. It does not look so great...
Plus tariffs are voluntary taxes drawing from funds from importers. The economy will slow down as it adjusts to re-industrialization with higher prices paid out as wages to USA workers.
I disagree. Tariffs are the culprit here, rate hikes were needed and long announced. Really, the 2018Q4 expenditure, mostly unfunded due to the tax changes, hit at the same time as the full Fed rate impact landed.
Fiscal hamfist refuses to acknowledge the monetary hand.
Tariffs are paid by the consumers of imported goods, not by the importers themselves. Costs are simply passed down as higher prices. The idea that an importer would absorb the tariffs doesn’t hold water.
No, the cost of a tax on trade is always split. The way it is split is determined by elasticity of demand and elasticity of supply. In this particular case, Chinese suppliers have been paying about 83% of the tariff.
If I recall correctly from an economics class yay days ago, it doesn't matter if the seller pays the tax or the buyer -- the effective cost is shared (fewer buyers too).
Incorrect. There was a recent study done on tariffs effects. The study found negligible effects on consumer good prices. Turns out most tariff costs were eaten by manufacturers in China. (The importers forced them to eat the costs) Which prompted them to either shut down or move overseas
That can only ork in the short term though. If they go bust prices will go up for consumers due to constrained supply. If they move abroad to avoid the tariffs, we’ll presumably the reason they didn’t already do that was higher manufacturing costs abroad, so again increased costs for consumers, even if less than the tariffs.
You can put it off for a while, but not indefinitely. After all the justification given for the tariffs was to make less efficient local production more viable. Higher consumer prices are an explicit part of that calculation.
That assumes that manufacturers can reduce their margins without going out of business. That will not generally be true in a competitive market, however, since economic profit (which includes opportunity costs) tends toward zero.
I recall seeing it, but I can't seem to track it down at the moment. It was a study done by Europeans, concluding that China was eating about 83% of the tariff cost. The remaining 17% hits the US consumers.
Of course, that 17% can sort of be returned to the American consumers via reduced taxes or increased federal spending. The jobs are nice too.
Steel tariffs (for example) are great for US steel producing jobs but terrible for US steel consuming jobs (auto makers, etc). From a jobs perspective (ignoring any retaliation) it would make more sense to have tariffs on consumer goods instead of intermediate goods, but that's more politically difficult since obviously consumers are going to notice tariffs on consumer goods more.
I'm very skeptical that even without retaliation, tariffs on China will lead to much USA manufacturing jobs (as opposed to automated US manufacturing, or manufacturing shifting from China to Vietnam, Thailand etc.
Of course certain industries will be big winners or losers though.
Apparently not because of what is said above about caches being unencrypted.
Past Intel architecture allows two threads to share a physical core in such a way as the cached data of the first thread may be probed with a timing attack to reveal confidential data.
Every Bay Area visit I go back to (a) Shalimar in the Tenderloin and (b) Nini's Cafe in San Mateo near Burlingame. Former has lost some of its buzz but latter going strong still and hasn't changed much in 30 years and I saw many mid peninsula startup folks there through the years.
Close to Denver. High elevation town at 8200 feet, homesites to 9800 feet elevation. Adequate internet. Cheaper than Evergreen, and a bit higher. High elevation is good for health. Wildlife (deer, migratory birds, elk, foxes and the occasional Black Bear). Small town but has what is needed. (Grocery, vet, medical, dentist, car repair, chain saw shop) Same distance from ski areas as Denver. Lots of snow in winter, and mild sunny summers.