Stack Exchange
log in

Rob Grant

 Discussion on answer by Steve: My man…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Rob Grant
Jul 7, 2023 19:03
@computercarguy "it's pretty draconian to think going to a doctor, even on short notice, is unacceptable" - it only requires spending a very small amount of time on comprehension to know that this is not what is being said. If a staff member is not giving as much notice as possible, and it's having a real effect on the workplace (being expected to be in customer meetings means their absence creates a lack), then that is a problem that should be addressed.
 

 Discussion on question by overall : B…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Nov 2, 2020 09:43
I can sympathise - a former employer did a performance review with me and cited expectations around how I should have been holding large internal meetings and roadshows selling what I was doing, when I was full time hands on developing and architecting, and the expectation had never been communicated verbally or in written form. I left.
 

 Discussion on answer by Dan Pichelman…

Imported from a comment discussion on space.stackexchange.com/...
Robert Grant
Oct 23, 2020 13:27
@Fattie don't forget the huge issue that the dog is not moon-shaped. Its ratio of major to minor axis compared to the moon's is off at least a couple of orders of magnitude.
 

 Discussion on answer by DevSolar: Was…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
Robert Grant
Oct 11, 2020 18:05
But smoking certainly does not help with tongue / throat cancer either. ;-) from the cancer's perspective it helps a lot.
 

 Discussion on answer by ASDFQWERTY: H…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Jul 22, 2020 15:41
It's like unions are a way to keep companies from being terrible employers, but if they weren't terrible employers to begin with, we wouldn't need unions. that is one of the two causes of conflict with employees :-)
 

 Discussion on question by Alec A: Why…

Imported from a comment discussion on scifi.stackexchange.com/...
Robert Grant
May 17, 2019 15:03
@AndresF. sure, we can explain anything. But I wouldn't say that a) we can apply "gods" to things that can be killed with something half the opposing army's weapons are made of, nor that b) "gods" in any other pantheon are relevant here .
Robert Grant
May 17, 2019 15:03
@AndresF. he should totally be confident in his army, given everyone it kills is also in his army. But to stop being a perfect strategist who can be roasted by a dragon to just being another grunt to kill, for no reason (it's not as though he wanted something from Bran, other than to kill him), is not great. Sure, we can explain anything. But it's tortuous.
Robert Grant
May 17, 2019 15:03
@AndresF. "mortals can kill gods" which is why the scene is so silly - why would he walk into the midst of it all to kill a guy personally, amongst an army brandishing weapons made of what can kill him?
 

 Discussion on question by Joshua: Why…

Imported from a comment discussion on english.stackexchange.co...
Robert Grant
Jan 20, 2019 19:19
@ab2 pretty sure it is still that. It just isn't "divisible vs indivisible".
 

 Discussion on answer by FooBar: Do de…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Dec 4, 2018 05:19
@GrumpyCrouton you addressed that to the wrong person.
 

 Discussion on answer by user1666620: …

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Jul 6, 2018 23:29
@MSalters at that point (or before) you can move to management, or do open source/a code camp on the side. It's not "if I don't write in this exact language I'm ruined!"
 

 Discussion on question by IAmBob: How…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
May 31, 2018 20:55
I wouldn't tell people that Javascript is like C# if you want a C# job or a Javascript job. And writing markup for 15 years is not really a plus for programming jobs. The only thing that might be relevant is the programming experience, and you haven't told us what that is, so we can't tell what's an appropriate response. (Pro tip: talking about syntax and looking up things online as though they're the key programming skills will throw a negative light on your application. Those are very, very basic things.)
2
 

 Discussion on question by durantjm198…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Apr 21, 2018 01:39
If you're a contractor then they are your customer, not your employer. If you can't do the work they're specifying, do what you'd do if they asked you to build a car: just say no.
 

 Discussion between Robert Grant and C…

Imported from a comment discussion on softwareengineering.stac...
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:57
And I know you've said it's impossible to keep the message if P and R are both down, but what about the suggested solution (on message publish to write the message to disk as a new file, and have an async process monitor the folder being written to and publish the message (and then remove the file). I.e. a store and forward pattern.) doesn't work ?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:50
What's unclear about "Message producer P tries to send a message -> Rabbit R is down -> P restarts."?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:49
I'm happy to edit the question if I knew what to clarify
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:46
Honestly no idea what you're missing from the question
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:38
Yeah I know that it loses it - that's the context. I'm really asking for gotchas on the proposed solution and or whether there are standard ways of solving this problem in a robust way.
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:28
And if it's not clear from "What happens to the message?", I don't want to lose the message.
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:27
Or as per the question: "The problem: what if RabbitMQ is unavailable to receive a message publish (e.g. network down; RabbitMQ down) and then the publishing system dies/restarts? "
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:26
20 mins ago, by Robert Grant
Message producer P tries to send a message -> Rabbit R is down -> P restarts. What happens to the message?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:26
The situation is still the following:
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:26
Doesn't make any of what clear? I'm responding to what you're saying
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:24
Well yeah, then I may as well get rid of the producer if there's a magical producer upstream that never goes down :)
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:23
Or more on-topic: why do you think the option proposed in the question doesn't solve this?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:23
So why can't the producer be smart enough to do the same? What in your mind makes one capable of that and not the other?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:20
What do you mean by upstream? The producer?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:19
I'm not saying it's dead, just that it's restarting, or needing to be restarted
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:13
"The only way to guarantee transmision would be a to resort to a TCP like relationship upstream where you resend until receiving an ack." - how would this work if the producer restarted? Where would it get the message from?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:09
^ that's the context
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:06
Message producer P tries to send a message -> Rabbit R is down -> P restarts. What happens to the message?
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:06
That's one possibility.
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 23:05
I'm not worried about delays - I haven't mentioned delays, rights to restart queues, or not being able to talk to something because it's not local.
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 22:59
This isn't anything to do with having the rights to restart a message queue. It's "what happens if the MQ goes down, and then the message producer goes down". Ideally when they restart, messages should have not been lost. In old-school ESB land, there'd probably be a box to tick to locally queue messages on the ESB. With, say, Pika, messages are held purely in memory and can be lost. A backup queue is a possibility (we've got a cluster of 3 rabbits), but that feels a bit like adding another hull onto the Titanic, rather than addressing the problem itself.
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 22:59
@CandiedOrange as far as I can tell, by that logic I don't need a local message queue, because I can talk to any message queue. The point I was trying to make was that there's no in-process queue functionality, so given normal container practice the "local" queue would have to be another container, just as likely to be restarted as the "main" queue would be, and thus no more resilient. The idea of putting a "local" install in seems to be more appropriate to VM/real machine thinking, where multiple systems can run together, with no fear of one node going down or a network split.
Robert Grant
Apr 3, 2018 22:59
@CandiedOrange I don't think the container world means that.
 

 Discussion on answer by Geoffrey Bren…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
Robert Grant
Feb 7, 2018 15:13
@ToddWilcox "publically blasting" is not relevant as it really doesn't describe the answer's wording. And I don't see evidence that this is a contractor-customer relationship involving a project manager, so I don't think that's relevant either.
Robert Grant
Feb 7, 2018 15:13
@ToddWilcox the problem is that remaining silent can be interpreted by all concerned as a tacit admission of culpability, and - worse - unapologetic culpability. This answer balances an impossible situation well, in my opinion.
 

 Discussion on answer by Lilienthal: C…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Dec 19, 2017 15:40
@KonradRudolph if you mean using his power as a citizen, then technically that's true, but it's highly disingenuous.
Robert Grant
Dec 19, 2017 15:40
@MSalters he didn't; it came out because he (law-abidingly) declared that he had donated money to a cause that angered progressives. Nothing to do with imposition or power at all, just normal politics in the US, as you probably know.
 

 Discussion on question by ledwinder96…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Nov 21, 2017 20:57
@paul Defence sets out to defend people. It's about defending from foreign invaders. Now, you could argue - correctly - that not all of the military is defensive, and that "Defence" is a euphemism, but it isn't only a euphemism, and a country's defence is one of its most fundamental building blocks.
 

 Discussion on answer by user168715: H…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Nov 3, 2017 22:04
As a guy who leads senior developers I've still been asked to book meetings and rooms by more senior people (who knew my job) before. I just did it a few times and then politely said I'm not doing it any more.
 

 Discussion on question by Nofel: Deal…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Sep 12, 2017 14:43
I would add however that if senior people are gossipy and encourage that sort of culture then it can be a place to move on from. I wouldn't say this isolated incident gets you anywhere close to that, though.
Robert Grant
Sep 12, 2017 14:43
@ゼーロ that's a bad idea unless it's really necessary (e.g. mental illness) - as per the description it doesn't sound like bullying at all, and escalating to HR will just make people feel (correctly) that the OP isn't a normal member of the team who can be joked around with.
 

 Discussion on answer by kukushkin: St…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
Robert Grant
Sep 12, 2017 09:12
@TBear I have a young son who I love very much, and what you're saying is nuts. "Points" 1 and 2 are absolutely crazy. Point 3 doesn't preclude someone from taking the child outside for a bit. Point 4 is obviously laughable.
 

 Discussion on answer by MetaEd: Donal…

Imported from a comment discussion on english.stackexchange.co...
Robert Grant
Jul 9, 2017 17:05
@vsz a clever measure of bias in a publication's interviews might be how much of the interviewee's grammar they correct before publishing :)
 

 Discussion on question by aparente001…

Imported from a comment discussion on english.stackexchange.co...
Robert Grant
Mar 10, 2017 22:21
"Separates the people who can do it from the people who can't." Almost too easy.
 

 Discussion on answer by Kilisi: Talki…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Robert Grant
Mar 7, 2017 03:21
@Emrakul don't be sorry. Just don't use the same word that's used for FGM, rape and brutal beatings. And additionally, being "reflective" - a vague word indeed - of something does not necessarily carry the weight of that thing. Also, nothing about this answer mentioned the colleague "enjoying" a brief flicker of the eyes, nor did it (or the OP) mention anything approaching "sexual attention" that would warrant the word misogyny. It is not a small concept; do not treat it as such.
Robert Grant
Mar 7, 2017 03:21
@Emrakul I get what you're saying, but don't water down the extremeness of misogyny, which this most certainly isn't.
 

 Discussion on answer by Lightness Rac…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
Robert Grant
Jan 16, 2017 02:11
@GregMartin this doesn't appear to be singling out women to be treated more harshly than men. Rather, it's an example of a culture - typified by comments such as yours - that throws that valuable, important accusation when true around so freely that it 1) devalues it and 2) serves to give women more freedom than men, which is also not equality.
2