Also, c’mon, their criticism of this decision in the sentence just before it heavily implies that.
That's literally not how that works, and you even agree in the paragraph above this one. Why are you even arguing about this?
As for twitch's working conditions, it's a company ran by amazon, with management by amazon, so it has a lot of the same problems. From what I understand, the hours are shit, everything is a metric that's impossible to meet, you're constantly at risk of being laid off, a lot of the management are jackasses, and it's very much a bunch of little fiefdoms trying to flex their position and abuse any amount of power they can.
Like, I can sum it up as simply as "Know how terrible twitch mods are? Imagine working for one."
Not quite as bad as the conditions working in an amazon warehouse, sure, but still not something anyone should have to put up with. Regular inhuman working conditions with a focus on gaslighting and abuse, as opposed to an amazon warehouse's egregiously inhuman working conditions which are focused more on physical abuse.
They're talking about the working conditions in general, which are indeed deplorable. They're not saying this specific act is proof of it, or even an example of it.
Rust the community makes me hate rust, never want anything to do with it, and actively advise people not to use Rust. Your community is so, so important to a programming language, because that's who makes your documentation, your libraries, fills out the discords, IRC, and mailing lists. As a developer, any time you're doing anything but rote boilerplate zombie work, you're interacting with the community. And Rust has a small, but extremely vocal, section of their community that are just absolute shitheads.
Maybe in 5-10 years when the techbros stop riding its' dick and go do something else will Rust recover its reputation, but for now? Absolutely no.
Because it's cheaper than actually implementing working anti heat instead of just stealing control of your computer and leaving gaping vulnerabilities on it.
After all, why would they care? It's not their computer.
This man can't take care of his own damn hygiene, I think that's actually incredibly relevant to someone that wants to take care of an entire goddamn major country.
The problem here is "reasonable court." One party in the US has spent decades stacking the courts with unreasonable judges who will agree to anything a corporation hands them.
Because the entire design of it is to mathematically prevent you from having the option to hack or block the ads. THe way to get around it is to... not use chrome.
So, as a manager (by technicality, I'm more of an engineering lead in truth) I see both sides of this. It IS better when everyone can just... Go constructively contribute. I love it. I get to focus on my own work. It is absolutely the way to go.
Unfortunately sometimes hiring doesn't go perfectly.
And there are certain people where you have to micromanage them, because otherwise they're just go to git commit absolute fucking shit, and it's better to cut that off earlier via micromanagement, then allow it to pollute the repo.
So if your boss is pulling this, I see three options:
They're just a micromanager, which sucks.
They think you're a fuckup, and they are actually the fuckup.
They think you are the fuckup, and you are actually the fuckup.
Easy way to tell- is literally everyone on the team getting treated like this? It's #1.
Are several people that you think are morons treated like this? Are there several people who don't get treated like this, even the people who don't stand out as 'rockstar coders'? You're the fuckup.
Is everyone except the manager's special rockstar- even the highly qualified, solid workers- being treated like this? Then the manager is the fuckup.
Dude, he was 35 when the Dreamcast came out in North America. Hardly a "fellow kids" situation.