I used to work for a chief exec like that. They’d see something on someone’s screen and demand changes, destroying months of carefully planned work with a single comment.
In the end, we’d build in ‘breakpoints’ - things that we knew they’d pick up on and want to change so they felt like they’d had some input without damaging anything important. This worked very well.
I’ve been exploring this problem for a while, and have been building something which I think might help solve it.
I’m currently building a browser-based static site generator that produces clean, simple code. But it does more than that.
Alongside the generated HTML, sites also publish their public configuration and source files, meaning they can be viewed in more than just a browser, for example in a CLI or accessibility device.
The client interface is also more than a CMS - you’ll be able to follow other sites, subscribing to updates, and build a network rather like a webring. The idea is to provide human-powered discovery and community tools. The reach may be less than if algorithmic, but it’s designed for genuine connection, not virality.
As the client is smart but sites are simple, sites can be hosted on anything, from the cheapest shared host up.
I’d be happy to talk further if that’s interesting in any way.
In terms of levels of current support, you would be hard-pressed to find anything better for accessibility than simple, well-formed HTML. It's better even than plain text.
I think it started out like that - the previous generation knew it was bullshit bud did whatever got them votes / viewers / attention or whatever, long term consequences be damned. Younger generations grew up in it, never exposed to anything else and think it’s all true. Much scarier.
I'm aware of this, but in my experience it's pretty bad. It doesn't even cover all European languages, never mind the rest of the world. For the languages it does support, it's always a lottery whether it works with that specific site or not. I've tried using it a few times, but it's not even remotely close to what Chrome does.
After years of working in public companies, where nothing mattered beyond the next quarterly results, I’m lucky to be working for a company that’s both a B Corp and an Employee Owned Trust. Instead of exiting to a buyout or IPO the founder basically sold the company to itself.
Makes a huge difference when a company can just remain comfortably profitable and doesn’t have to chase double digit growth.
I’m building a browser-based static site generator and CMS.
I love SSGs as they’re simple and fast and the sites they make can be hosted anywhere with little maintenance. But, after helping a non-technical friend get up and running with one, the UX is rubbish.
So I’m building a combined CMS and SSG called Sparktype, designed for writing and publishing. Users can create pages or collections, write and export the generated site. At the moment it exports to zip, but I’m working on connecting to Netlify or GitHub for automatic deployment.
My goal is to build something that allows people to create a publication with the ease and polish of say, Medium or Substack, but which is completely portable and will work on almost any hosting.
It’s very early MVP - the editor works, but the default site theme is rough around the edges and there are a bunch of bugs. I’m currently working on getting it good enough so that I can create its own marketing and documentation site with it.
I hadn't put this together, but "The Great Mouse Detective" is a riff on Sherlock Holmes, but that didn't enter the public domain until much later. Would it have been better if it used the character and not just the general vibe?
Yeah - I am also unsure about long term prospects of this type of roles.
But for someone who is on a career break or someone looking to break into the IT / AI space this could offer a way to get exposure and hands on experience that opens some doors.
I love the greenhouse, it’s one of my favourite places in London. Walking around it, exploring the different levels and observing the plants covering the concrete and ductwork makes me feel like I’m in some kind of retro-futuristic space arcology.
Such a contrast to the Sky Garden in the City which has all the charm of an airport departure lounge.
Disagree. 9-5 working is fine, and probably more efficient long term than permanent crunches.
Organisations fail when the ‘business’ people take over. People who let short term money-thinking make the decisions, instead good taste, vision or judgement.
Think Intel when they turned down making the iPhone chips because they didn’t think it’d be profitable enough, or Google’s head of advertising (same guy who killed yahoo search) degrading search results to improve ad revenue.
Apple have been remarkably immune to it post-Jobs, but it’s clear that’s on the way out with the recent revelations about in-app purchases.
Nah I’ve been on both sides of the fence. 9-5ers may reliably accomplish tasks through superior discipline, but they don’t do the heroics that really move individual teams forward.
Relying on "heroics" often indicates a process problem. This thread is kind of giving me a "Grindset / HustlePorn" vibe. With good decision making, focus, and discipline, 9-5 employees absolutely can make great things. And history is littered with the burnt-out husks of "hero" engineers working 120 hour weeks only to have their company fail and get sold for pennies on the dollar.
Once the MBAs take over there is less incentive provided to staff to innovate and disrupt internal products and services.
The innovators in the company are likely correlated with doing more than 9-5. These people get frustrated that their ideas no longer get traction and leave the company.
Eventually what's left are the people happy to just deliver what their told without much extra thought. These people are probably more likely to just clock in the hours. Any remaining innovators now have another reason to become even more frustrated and leave.
Confirmation bias. We only hear about the heroics that worked. Plenty of heroes end up in unmarked graves. Teams move forward through trust, clear goals and good processes. Individuals may want to be heroic once those elements are in place but it’s not going to work without.
Companies die when the sort of managers take over who see their job as to manage, taking pride in not knowing about the product or customers, instead of caring deeply about delivering a good product. The company may continue for years afterwards, but it’s a zombie, decaying from the inside.
In the end, we’d build in ‘breakpoints’ - things that we knew they’d pick up on and want to change so they felt like they’d had some input without damaging anything important. This worked very well.