My joke solution is everyone tries to get into politics as a profession. You can't automate politics. It will either achieve UBI or create a hell on earth.
I think it is true that the less experienced engineers start in verification however the verification role is actually quite difficult. It is much more than feeding tools and math. You only do that during the execution phase. That can be assigned to newbies.
However the creation of the verification testbench and tests is as extensive as the design. The verification team has to work in parallel with the design team so they have enough time to get things done. If they make a mistake in verification it can still also cost a fortune.
If the testbench and tests are not well designed then you are screwed in a roundabout way because the ability to quickly find the bugs isn't there. The testbench has to work on both the rtl and the back annotated netlist.
Approximately 75% of the person-months and compute resources for most projects is verification work. I have been verification lead on multiple projects and design lead on multiple projects. In either role I always looked to assign verification resources as top priority because the project is screwed without it.
On the original topic: The problem is that most commenters are not in the verification field. They don't know the amount or type of work done in verification or the commercial tools involved. This is done in SystemVerilog to do UVM - Universal Verification Methodology. It is not just Verilog. People here are concerned with ease of design. The bottleneck in the industry is in ease of verification.
You don't teach kids I assume.
I do. I am a judo coach of kids.
I think the point is : It is not really up to the parents to be so critical of their kids. They should be supportive and positive.
It is really up to the coach to provide the technical feedback and it is more beneficial to assess performance at the next practice when the kids are back in a learning mode.
At that point they are mentally ready to practice over their problem areas straight away.
Parents can set their kids back by berating them at the wrong time.
Yeah, it's really not up to the parents to raise their kids.
It's scarry how we get to this point where people write this kind of shit with a straight face.
It's less an issue of parents raising/not raising their kids, than it is knowing what is productive and unproductive pressure.
Mike Matheny - the manager of the St. Louis Cardinals - wrote a letter to parents while he was coaching his son's little league team that touches on this idea. The whole thing is worth reading, but this is primarily his thesis:
"I believe that the biggest role of the parent is to be a silent source of encouragement. I think if you ask most boys what they would want their parents to do during the game; they would say "NOTHING". Once again, this is ALL about the boys. I believe that a little league parent feels that they must participate with loud cheering and "Come on, let's go, you can do it", which just adds more pressure to the kids. I will be putting plenty of pressure on these boys to play the game the right way with class, and respect, and they will put too much pressure on themselves and each other already. You as parents need to be the silent, constant, source of support."
Link to full letter: www.mac-n-seitz.com/teams/mike-matheny-letter.html
I've coached kids martial arts before as well, and while I wouldn't go so far as to say parents shouldn't criticize their kids, I will say that I much prefer the parents that are "supportive in public, critical in private".
It is quite literally my job as a coach to point out a kids mistakes. They handle it really well nearly universally. But the overly critical parents (you can see them coming a long way off) cause so much negative reactions it makes my job harder.
And quite simply, anyone who has coached anything knows that being critical at the time of the event is almost universally detrimental (and not just for kids). Your mind/body is just not ready for coaching at the end of an adrenal dump event.
You need distance to evaluate performance, and the emotional burden of parent/kid relationships makes that more true not less.
When I was younger I could not care less about my parent's feedback about my heavy metal guitar skills - I did not expect them to understand anything about the music I was playing and I'd chalk up any criticism on them not liking the style - but I did care whether they were supportive or not.
Judo teacher is right. Having mom and dad be supportive while the instructor is tough can be the right balance. Most kids can't objectively separate their performance from their parents love and acceptance.
Raising the children is supporting them, and helping them get over the fear of performing publicly (or whatever). It's not their job to be the technical coach of whatever they want to learn.
>Raising the children is supporting them, and helping them get over the fear of performing publicly (or whatever). It's not their job to be the technical coach of whatever they want to learn.
Would you apply the same to, say, mathematics? Or chemistry? Or programming? Do you think the parents should not give their kids feedback on these subjects, and instead leave it to the teacher (aka technical coach)?
Largely, yes. There can be only a very small amount of subjects of which I would know more than a professional anyway. So no, a part of the job of being a parent is to show self-restraint when you feel that impulse to hyper-correct your child on every small mistake they make.
Look at it this way: you're starting a new job. A very stressful one, where you have to learn a bunch of new things, long days, and not just learning one thing - you're learning dozens of subject every day. There are a bunch of others in your cohort who are also learning and you're all compared and graded against each other.
Then you come home at night and you vent to your wife about your day and how this one guy is an ass-kisser and this other colleague is full of himself, with an example of something he said. And then your wife, who maybe took a college course on one of the topics you used as an example, says "yeah honey that sucks. BTW that example you just used, you're wrong, it's actually xyz". What would that accomplish? Would you think "oh thank you, now I didn't learn 50 new things today, but 51! Great!"? No, you'd think she massively missed the point, and is massively missing the point about you, and she would be.
>Look at it this way: you're starting a new job. A very stressful one, where you have to learn a bunch of new things, long days, and not just learning one thing - you're learning dozens of subject every day.
I think that's the problem right there. When I was in school, the day was not long nor was it stressful. I suppose I'm inclined to agree with you that if the above circumstances are true, a parent should not behave that way. However, if those circumstances are true, and my kid seems at least average or above, I'd as a parent do some hard thinking and consider finding another school for him.
One thing I learned in all of my education: You may learn a lot when you are overloaded, but you learn nothing well. Not just at their level, but at university.
I'm good at a bunch of subjects - likely much better than the teacher (math, physics, etc). If school is so stressful that my kid cannot learn these well, and there is no room for help from me, then it's a bad school.
Look I'm not saying parents can't ever teach their children anything. What I'm saying is that parents need to know their place and role, and they can do much more good by being emotionally supportive and in general creating an environment in which children can and want to learn, than by being yet another instructor who's trying to cram ever more things into the child's head (much of which will be different from what their school or team coach is teaching them anyway).
This is absolutely correct. I learnt this fast with 1st/2nd grade homework - I do more harm than good by actively participating. Sure I know what 32-29=3 but I do not know how that is being taught in the classroom and if I start sticking my oar in it goes sideways quickly. It's far more constructive to be supportive in exactly the way you mention.
A parent telling their child they had a shitty performance is not supportive or positive.
A negative attitude coming from the parent can really upset the child and they won't learn anything from it.
As a coach I can't tell a parent what to say to their kid at home after they have a poor performance but I usually advise them to try cheer their kid up not cut them down.
It is my role as coach to provide the objective criticism not the parent's. It matters where the criticism comes from.
This is a part of the problem with the original article. Parents are too emotionally involved to teach their kids. They think their kid is special and then they constantly compare them against other kids and then they put the parental pressure on to the child. It isn't helping.
Professional management means tracking your issues in a way that your superiors can assess your performance. They don't need a bitchfest.
Use an issue tracker.
Each issue needs a one line professional description not a soap opera script. You need to assess the impact of the problem and assign a priority to it. You list who is involved in the issue. You create actions for yourself or others and then record the outcomes.
It is your job to find solutions. If there were never any problems and everything ran smoothly, you would be redundant. A lot of management are redundant because they can't solve any issues!
The maturity of management is what makes a company last a few decades rather than a few years. They have to operate professionally, following formal processes to hopefully make objective decisions.
The OP sounds devoid of objectivity and professionalism. If you want to emote you can write in your personal journal. When you go to a management meeting they don't want to see you cry about stuff. They need visibility of the issues and actions.
I don't particularly like the post, but I believe the point is to communicate the emotional tenor of the challenges and the fact that they all have nuances. While in real life what you're suggesting might be part of the solution, for many management challenges it is the essential emotions of the people involved which are the problems. Take the "bad employee" issue that he has, it's not a ticketing problem, it's dealing with a situation where he has "non-tech" constraints.
Nuances? Who cares?
All that company superiors see is that Ben worked 2 Saturdays already and he is booked for yet another this month and Mary worked zero Saturdays.
What is the explanation? "Rest of team despise Mary" does not cut it.
What sort of upgrade plan that was done 3 months in advance has zero contingencies? How do you know who could become unavailable for some reason?
Then he blames the employee for asking for leave. If you can't handle 1 person being unavailable, you are a bad manager. What if they got sick? You don't cancel.
Bad Management say they make plans all the time. Make proper plans that can adapt to risks. This is real management.
SysAdmin is crucial most tech companies. It is like the engine room. The manager has to be solid as a rock dependable. I don't care about their emotions or their staff. The customer's emotions is the priority if anything.
Lots of stuff: Issue tracker, action tracker, scheduler, budgeting tools.
Processes like:
establishing formal communication methods with others in the company - document your plans and decide who needs to read them. Review each item of work completed via a report.
Monitoring the performances of yourself and others objectively. Peer review is crap.
Risk management methods. You have to risk assess as part of planning. Then you monitor whether the risk has eventuated throughout execution of plan.
Quality control processes. Your work must improve stuff. What is the measure of improvement?
Easy. "Kids, it's time you started paying me rent. Got no money? No problem. I got a lot of chores: cleaning the house, dishwashing, laundry, cooking, etc. Mummy and Daddy are off to catch some Pokemon or whatever."
Nope, totally wrong. The service you deliver to your children will far outweigh that rendered by them, at least in their youth. Inverse for renter / landlord.
All landlords reap far less than they sow. They are rentiers, they do not create wealth rather they exploit our regressive property laws to extract labour.
How many transmissions do you rebuild in the average year? If this is to change the oil, just use a couple of small ramps like a normal person. I once changed the oil on my old Integra by driving one tire up on a regular red brick. b^)
When I was a kid, the biggest barrier to working on my car was I had no money for proper tools, and was always making do. Having good tools makes things much more fun, and I get better results, too. A lift falls into that category, it makes working under the car fun rather than a painful bitch. It's especially bad as I get older and I am not able to move my head back and forth to get what I'm looking at in focus :-) And I am tired of setting my hair on fire with the lamp (fortunately, that at least isn't a problem anymore as my hair has decamped for the fjords).
Getting the car up on jack stands takes about 10 minutes, off is another 10 minutes. It just takes away from the fun, whereas a lift is boom! it's up.
So it doesn't really matter how much I'd use it, a used one isn't that expensive and I am willing to spend the bucks on it.
A piece of advice - never ever support your car on brick. It can crush unexpectedly and then the car falls on you, you die. I once used cinder blocks to hold the car up (making do), and they suddenly turned to dust and the car fell, fortunately before I got under it.
Now I use two sets of jackstands (the extra set as backup), and I give the car good shoves before getting under it.
Kids sports. It's a stress reliever and teaches them discipline, respect for rules, and social skills with other kids.
I actually coach kids from ages 6 - 12 in Judo but team sports can be good also. It's rewarding to see kids mature mentally through training in sports. I have had some real problem kids improve their behaviour over time.
Once they get to about 6, they are mentally ready to learn an organized sport and the challenge is good for them.
https://sproutpeople.org/growing-green-lentil-sprouts/