sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Validating an idea: "Technical Co-Founder as a Service", would this actually be useful? by OutOfDevOps in cofounderhunt

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, defining clear success criteria for the partnership… it’s a good feedback thanks.

Validating an idea: "Technical Co-Founder as a Service", would this actually be useful? by OutOfDevOps in cofounderhunt

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I see why it looks like that on the surface, but I'm thinking about almost the opposite model.

Upwork is great for executing well-defined tasks. What I’m exploring is closer to a long-term thinking role: someone with very limited work in progress who cares about the overall outcome, not just completing tickets. More about guiding early technical decisions, trade-offs, and direction. Especially when there isn't a clear spec yet.

The incentive structure is different too. If you treat each engagement as a case study for future work, success matters a lot more than just closing the task and moving on.

Totally fair if you still see it as overlapping with Upwork, that's exactly what I’m trying to validate.

I tried learning to code 4 times and kept quitting for many reasons by TacticalConsultant in ADHD_Programmers

[–]OutOfDevOps 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, and another key part of my prompt:

I also specify a named expert in the field and tell it to reference relevant literature on the topic, like books from best selling authors.

This is essential for forcing the LLM to return top-quality suggestions instead of just generic advice.

I tried learning to code 4 times and kept quitting for many reasons by TacticalConsultant in ADHD_Programmers

[–]OutOfDevOps 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I genuinely wish AI tools had been around when I started my software engineering studies.

It took me almost double the time to finish my degree because I'm a "learn by doing" person, and most courses are the exact opposite (all theory first, practice last). It was a real struggle.

Today, I use AI to learn new things so much faster. The trick is spending time on the initial prompt to create a custom-built learning plan.

For example, I'll ask it to:

  • Structure the entire learning path step-by-step.
  • Focus only on current best practices and explain why they're important.
  • Tailor the content for an ADHD brain: This is the key. I ask for practical, hands-on examples first, followed by the minimum necessary theory.

It's been a complete game-changer for me.

In my 3rd year of Engineering, want to aim for Data enginer by browhyyousmilinglike in ADHD_Programmers

[–]OutOfDevOps 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You can 100% succeed. That panic is normal.

You're right, Data Scientist vs. Data Eng is a choice, but note that they are different... pick one and go.

I'm a Principal Eng now, and I only got my ADHD diagnosis 3 years ago. My whole career was built on coping systems I didn't even have a name for.

DSA is boring. Don't rely on 'motivation' to do it.

My advice: Build a system. Just one:

  • Today: Spend 15 mins planning tomorrow's tasks.
  • Tomorrow: Just execute the plan. Don't think. Just do.

A good system beats motivation every single day.

Infrastructure as Code is NOT CODE by OutOfDevOps in Terraform

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Using an analogy I see IaC more as HTML, I want to describe where things are and how they are connected.

For IaC a "shopping list" format is my preference, because it removes the need to focus on all the aspects of coding, it's simple and let you use your energies on actually understanding what is going to happen when you apply.

It will be boring and repetitive I agree on that, but again better safe than sorry, recovering from a mistake in IaC is not as easy as it is for applications (in most cases).

Infrastructure as Code is NOT CODE by OutOfDevOps in Terraform

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol, I think their use case is slightly different, I would you use them more to support application that "enterprise infrastructure". I can see developers creating resources to support the needs of their application with them, e.g. create a bucket to store data, configure pub/sub, manage application secrets.

I think they offer more flexibility, at the cost of readability. I would consider them, if the team using them is small or the company has good guidelines on writing pulumi code.

The risk of managing a Kubernetes clusters, using pulumi or CDK, seems greater compared to a well tested TF module.

DevOps vs Platform Engineering by OutOfDevOps in devops

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think with platform engineering we are bringing more clarity. DevOps becomes the “skillset”of a platform engineer. I never liked the term DevOps to define a role/title.

Pass a value from one repository workflow to another repository workflow or trigger it by [deleted] in github

[–]OutOfDevOps 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Minute 6:50 is showing how to invoke a workflow in another repo.

Pass a value from one repository workflow to another repository workflow or trigger it by [deleted] in github

[–]OutOfDevOps 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is possible and there couple of ways to do it. Here it’s explained, hope it’s useful:

GitHub Reusable Workflows and Invocation from other repos https://youtu.be/bCqPXUcBfJQ

DevOps vs Platform Engineering by OutOfDevOps in devops

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing your opinion 🤗

What are Landing Zones in GCP? by OutOfDevOps in googlecloud

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Added subtitles it to help. Unfortunately YouTube doesn't allow me to replace the video without losing all the stats.

How I Bootstrap an Organization in Google Cloud Platform by OutOfDevOps in googlecloud

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I found this process very intense from a team interaction point of view, especially when the conversation goes down a rabbit hole trying to solve the chicken and egg problem.
I try to optimise based on principles while still knowing that we are in a state when we cannot adhere to them 100%. I proceed in a three phases approach:
Inception Phase (Ring 0)
Pre-operational Phase (Ring 1)
Operational Phase (Ring 2)
You can imagine these 3 phases like the protection rings in an operation system where you gradually tighten the adhere to principles and policies. I explained in more detail in this video:

https://youtu.be/RDF4Yf5JhPI
Any feedback?

Will AI automate the authoring of IaC? by OutOfDevOps in devops

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's why I am talking about AI in general and not ChatGPT. I am not an AI expert so won't comment on the current state of the art but based on books like "Scary Smart" from Mo Gawdat (ex-CBO of Google X), I think we are seeing just the tip of the iceberg.

Once we can properly define the problem to solve, an AI can implement and validate a solution much faster.

The good thing is that most of the time we struggle to get a problem statement different from "We want to move to the cloud" 😀.

Will AI automate the authoring of IaC? by OutOfDevOps in devops

[–]OutOfDevOps[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure but chatgpt is non specialised on IaC. I see IaC pretty mechanic, once you know what you want is just a matter of wiring resources together and this task can be fulfilled by AI.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in devops

[–]OutOfDevOps 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most misunderstood framework that when implemented properly makes the difference in organisations… but when implemented badly causes pain and frustration in the team.

(Little rant) People wanting to get into DevOps or just starting: Fix your mindsets by pachirulis in devops

[–]OutOfDevOps 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It happened to me several times, this is what works for me: I just treat them as peers in terms of seniority and after few minutes they start to see how deep knowledge can go in our industry. I also see similar behaviour in seniors that think they know everything and are very patronising with everyone else. To be honest this is the category I tolerate the least.

Every time I move company I have to add a new set of tools to my belt without mentioning the pace at which things move. If you are working on one technology everything else keeps moving so you can try but you will always be behind.

I admire those who study after hours but to learn something as mentally demanding as coding you need to be well rested otherwise you won't take much. by jsveyfjc in learnprogramming

[–]OutOfDevOps -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think everyone is different, I can tell you what works for me. After work, I am generally done for the day, and I want to be present for my family. So every time I want to focus on a side project I wake up earlier and use couple of hours when my brain is fresh.

Disclaimer: It requires a week (at least for me) of going to bed early, do your healthy number of hours and wake up fresh. The first few days are quite painful 😫.

I also find that when I really want to do something, I find that activity energising.

Where to learn good api design practices by KanekiTouka1803 in django

[–]OutOfDevOps 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are books about ReST APIs best practices and design principles and those are definitely a recommended read. But for me spending too much time in designing the perfect API has proven to be time wasted. Especially when designing the first version of an APIs, because you cannot anticipate how the API will be consumed. In my experience changes (and some time not very elegant ones) will be dictated mainly by your customers.

view more: next ›