4 ms·
> Our skillset becomes so uniquely tied to the company we work at that replacing a veteran engineer would take more than a year minimum. The differences between
by SJC_Hacker 3y ago
> Our skillset becomes so uniquely tied to the company we work at that replacing a veteran engineer would take more than a year minimum. The differences between operations at two hospitals is probably minuscule compared to two tech companies.
Companies/managers have gotten alot smarter about this. The strategy is to hire enough and be managed to a degree such that the operation of any single system is never left leave to any single engineer.
So if your company is smart, yes you are replaceable.
- shrimp_emoji 3y agoThere's strategy and there's reality though. They got other people to "operate" the thing, but "operate as well" is sometimes a pipe dream, which erodes the meaning of "replaceable".
- XorNot 3y agoI mean keep in mind, stupid companies also exist (I'd argue they're the norm actually - you can have a company with nothing but smart people, but it's a Chinese room - the company itself can be an idiot). That's the problem with stupidity in general: it doesn't know it's stupid. It's a corollary of "the market can remain irrational longer then you can remain solvent".
- godelski 3y agoReplaceable doesn't mean without friction or decrease of quality.
- matrix87 3y ago> The strategy is to hire enough and be managed to a degree such that the operation of any single system is never left leave to any single engineer. In code the equivalent of this is having some bloated thing that's been touched by one too many shitty people who are only willing to learn just enough to mark their tickets done. That code turns into a ball and chain that no one wants to work on. Turnover becomes normalized One of the reasons why most important stuff happens in open source