3 ms·
I understand understaffed although I think that's when siloes should be broken down so technically apt people across the company can reduce the workload (like b
by 1123581321 3y ago
I understand understaffed although I think that's when siloes should be broken down so technically apt people across the company can reduce the workload (like by advising on a list of safe software that shouldn't be questioned.)
I don't appreciate the deterrent culture because it's hard to get to point A to point B without some exploration if the company isn't used to trying to improve how work is done, or improve its thinking. The opportunity cost of preventing bright people from exploring is enormous. I understand, though, that compliance and uniformity are high priorities in some industries. (My experience with this kind of IT comes from aerospace and finance.)
- vladvasiliu 3y agoOh, I absolutely agree with this. But I think many companies have a hard time with this. The issue being that, of course, this exploration may end up badly. See all the supply chain issues which have made it to the HN front page. So some guardrails should absolutely be in place. I don't know how practical that would be, but I keep thinking we (IT people and adjacent) should possibly have two computers. An "untrusted" one, on which we'd be free to tinker, test new things, etc. No issue with nuking it if anything goes wrong. No access to "important" data or networks. And another, "trusted" one, from which you'd do your admin work, deploy to prod, etc.
- 1123581321 3y agoI would love to see the two computer approach be more widespread. I think "one computer per desk" is a major mental hangup. Computers cost a fraction of what they used to compared to salaries and we still insist on a 1:1 ratio.