Usually, the more competition there is in a market segment, the lesser the margin becomes.
Let's say your customer often "complement" your offer A with B from another company. If the other company faces fierce competition on the market for B, its margin will be low. So, you may be able to capture a little bit more of the customer's money: he wants to spend x on both stuff, the less it spends on B, the more it can spend on A.
> If you’re a strong writer and you can consume information in written formats really well
Most comments here are focused on the "write well" part, which is important, no doubt.
But let's not forget the "read well" part. When people cannot read more than a paragraph without losing focus, or are confused by the used of precise technical terms (like stacks and queues, lists and sets...), the idea that you want to communicate will at best not pass, at worst been reshaped to something else.
You need incentives for the maintainer helping others to learn. AND you also need incentives for the others to start learning.
I am living right now this situation where I am the maintainer of a large chunk of code, I would like to have at least a second pair of eyes looking on what I do, but the others are all busy with their own tasks and no one learn from the others.
It seems really interesting at first glance, but having worked with high-speed cameras, filming a mosquito at 30m at 2000fps will only be practical in a bright sunny day. Some clouds or at night and you will need kW's of light just for tracking the mosquito. So the emphasis on power budget for the laser seems pointless to me.
When Schumacher moved to Ferrari, Ferrari was not at all the best car, far from it. But the relentless work he did there improved the car far faster than the other team could. HE made the car better. It was an era with no (or few?) limitations to testing and Schumacher was known for testing a lot more than other drivers.
"Master/slave is debatable, because it isn't actually discriminatory"
As a white man, I cannot tell if some black people are offended by that, but I hope not.
I had never thought about racism when discussing technical matters using this terminology... until a few weeks ago.
What surprises me it that some people think that changing technical terms will change the lives of victims of racism.
This debate made me think again about a quote from some engineers from the erlang/OTP team:
"We were working on the R1 release of OTP when a group of us left the office and took the commuter train into Stockholm. We were talking about the ease of killing children, children dying, and us not having to worry about it, as supervisors would trap exits and restart them
...
we failed notice the expression of horror on the faces of the old ladies sitting next to us
"
Should we now rename child/parent relationship too, to please old ladies?
There is no encapsulation like in OOP (data level), but there is another kind of encapsulation (process level): a process is the only one accessing/modifying its own state.
And this is very liberating when you need to think about what is going on, what could go wrong...
I once "solved" a tricky issue with a random bug in an FPGA processing data from DDR. The issue was hardware "malfunction": DDR can flip some bits if accessed in some ways.
No one on the team did know about that, no one believed my fix could work (a one line for a bug we investigated on and off for months). It did. I had read a computer security article about how row hammer can be used to gain privilege or something and made the connection.
During my yearly evaluation, I mentionned it as the most impact that year. I was nearly laughed at. This bug precluded the product from functioning more than a few minutes, and we targeted at least several hours without any glitch. No one noticed that without me in the team, the product was dead for a few more month at least.
That's like the computer security equivalent of some rare disease that's only happened to a couple dozen people. Sure, one can win cheap virtue points by insisting it's something we need to take seriously and yes it is easy to guard against but it shouldn't be a realistic part of pretty much anyone's threat model. Given the choice of a pad of paper in a locked drawer (i.e. analog password manager) and sticky not obviously the sticky note is inferior but both are superior to having something that is trivially easy to compromise without having physical access to the workplace.
I think the human error was made possible because of AI: the AI can search millions of records. The police / detective cannot and will only search a very small set, limiting the search by other means.
The probability of finding an innocent with a similar enough face so that the witness can be fouled is much higher with AI.
Let's say your customer often "complement" your offer A with B from another company. If the other company faces fierce competition on the market for B, its margin will be low. So, you may be able to capture a little bit more of the customer's money: he wants to spend x on both stuff, the less it spends on B, the more it can spend on A.