[20] charmS@slow track #Macq mgrs#silent majority

another critique of the slow track.

My Macq managers Kevin A and Stephen Keith are fairly successful old-timers. Such an individual would hold a job for 5-10 years, grow in know-how, effectiveness (influence,,,). Once a few years they move up the rank. In their eyes, a job hopper or contractor like me is hopelessly left on the slow track — rolling stone gathers no moss.

I would indeed have felt that way if I had not gained the advantages of burn rate + passive incomes. No less instrumental are my hidden advantages like

  • relatively carefree hands-on dev job, in my comfort zone
  • frugal wife
  • SG citizenship
  • stable property in HDB
  • modest goal of an average college for my kids
  • See also G5 personal advantages: Revealed over15Y

A common cognitive/perception mistake is missing the silent majority of old timers who don’t climb up. See also …

read/write volatile var=enter/exit sync block

As explained in 3rd effect@volatile introduced@java5

  • writing a volatile variable is like exiting a synchronized block, flushing all temporary writes to main memory;
  • reading a volatile variable is like entering a synchronized block, reloading all cached shared mutables from main memory.

http://tutorials.jenkov.com/java-concurrency/volatile.html has more details.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9169232/java-volatile-and-side-effects also addresses “other writes“.

denigrate%%intellectual strength #ChengShi

I have a real self-esteem problem as I tend to belittle my theoretical and low-level technical strength. CHENG, Shi was the first to point out “你就是比别人强”.

  • eg: my grasp of middle-school physics was #1 strongest across my entire school (a top Beijing middle school) but I often told myself that math was more valuable and more important
  • eg: my core-java and c++ knowledge (QQ++) is stronger than most candidates (largely due to absorbency++) but i often say that project GTD is more relevant. Actually, to a technical expert, knowledge is more important than GTD.
  • eg: I gave my dad an illustration — medical professor vs GP. The Professor has more knowledge but GP is more productive at treating “common” cases. Who is a more trusted expert?
  • How about pure algo? I’m rated “A-” stronger than most, but pure algo has far lower practical value than low-level or theoretical knowledge. Well, this skill is highly sought-after by many world-leading employers.
    • Q: Do you dismiss pure algo expertise as worthless?
  • How about quant expertise? Most of the math has limited and questionable practical value, though the quants are smart individuals.

Nowadays I routinely trivialize my academic strength/trec relative to my sister’s professional success. To be fair, I should say my success was more admirable if measured against an objective standard.

Q: do you feel any IQ-measured intelligence is overvalued?

Q: do you feel anything intellectual (including everything theoretical) is overvalued?

Q: do you feel entire engineering education is too theoretical and overvalued? This system has evolved for a century in all successful nations.

The merit-based immigration process focus on expertise. Teaching positions require expertise. When laymen know you are a professional they expect you to have expertise. What kind of knowledge? Not GTD but published body of jargon and “bookish” knowledge based on verifiable facts.