Re: Blindly downloading code
A repository is a good thing but it must be actively curated.
If it's just left as some sort of free-for-all lucky dip it's going to go wrong.
42396 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
What's lacking here, and needed for any large software undertaking, is someone, call them product manager, architect or maintainer, to take an overview. It might be necessary to meet some proposals with an outright "No". Otherwise it might be "That sounds like a good idea but integrate it with the rest to make it look as if it was designed in from the start".
To a large extend what a commercial organisation does with its data is between its management, shareholders and customers. As long as I'm not one of their shareholders or customers it's their problem how leaky their systems although they really should be doing due diligence.
When it comes to my government, however, I can't help but be concerned because it's my taxes paying for it and it's inevitable that at some point one of them might be handling my data. I'd hope, therefore, that they do their due diligence in which case they should be taking note of factors such as this: https://www.computerweekly.com/news/366632040/Microsoft-hides-key-data-flow-information-in-plain-sight which more or less confirms that Brad Smith admitted in France. They can't provide data sovereignty.
It will very likely not take many of the sort of suits against the police that the CW article talks about to start CEOs asking their IT departments if that's a risk for them. What are they going to say? "Well, everyone else is doing it" isn't going to be adequate.
"A company in Iowa or Vermont or small town Texas able to recruit nationally can get access to a lot of talent who would never consider them otherwise."
It probably works the other way round as well - companies elsewhere prepared to recruit nationally will be able to get access to talent that prefers to live in such places.
As I've said before, my daughter's employers are virtually 100% remote working where remote really means anywhere. She joined it after her previous job, which she'd taken just before Covid went RTO*. There's no chance that could possibly be an office based job - the UK office, if it really exists, must be little more than an accommodation address. By being able to pick specialist from anywhere in the world they're in a position to outcompete those who restrict themselves to local staff.
To pick up on Machdiamond's point above, although she only lives a mile or so away if there's a need to go over there during the working week for something it's carefully scheduled.
*I don't know why she took it. Her previous one was work from home because it meant frequently visiting sites over 100 miles from the HQ so it suited both sides.
I think the original point was that it was discovered that many jobs could be WFH.
A great many of those jobs were originally clustered in urban centres so large that housing the workers was spread over many hundreds of square miles. The commuting from such large areas sucked up unreasonably large percentages of people's lives and had a carbon footprint that really shouldn't have been acceptable. Now we know that it was largely unnecessary those calling for RTO should be asked some searching questions to which woolly answers such as "company culture" and "team cohesiveness" are unacceptable. They should be asked would they still require it if they had to pay commuting time and a carbon tax - asked in the form of being required to pay those things.
The situation should never have been allowed to have existed in the first place. Now it's time to dismantle it.
"My currently employer fully supports WFH but at the same time ensures that at least once a quarter the team are in the office for a day at the same time."
Do they pay for the long distance/international travel and overnight accomodation? If not they're not taking full advantage of remote working. Can they fit everyone into the office? If so they're not tull advantage of remote working.
Your post is most informative. Informative about your management abilities. It tells us, for instance, that most of the staff you were employing weren't up to scratch anyway (at least in your judgement) - so why employ them? It tells us that you didn't have any idea what the developer you thought was good was actually producing.
I very much doubt you'll be better managing staff in the office than remotely but look on the bright side - your own managers probably haven't noticed.
It just goes to show that although taking down the infrastructure is temporarily it's not substitute for taking down the people responsible. The solution to that would be to offer rewards for information leading to the prosecution of offenders. Information might include "So-and-So is asleep in room whatever of some hotel something in somewhere with an extradition treaty even if the last thing they remember is walking into a Moscow bar." Apart from delivering results it would leave then wondering how far they can trust those around them.