I don't understand all this techincal jargon
Note: While I think the above is a reasonable interpretation, I'm not about to take legal responsibility for it since I'm not a lawyer, if you need serious advice get a professional opinion through appropriate channels.
"Author seems bitter.  A person who frequently talks in cliches while never or rarely offering any substantive is a problem; a person who knows his/her stuff and uses cliches as an efficient way to get their point across is not.    Purposely trying to avoid common vernacular will do more to make a person sound like they're trying to compensate for a lack of understanding.  The only way this article makes sense is if it's just the author venting, otherwise it serves to get supposed halfwits who talk in cliches to find a new way to ""fake it until they make it""." I've only got the equivalent of an associates (I think). It's a three year program at the Technologist level. It was not an easy program. We lost 1/3 of the remaining class each year it seemed. I think the money is due to the multidisciplinary nature of the work. Chemistry, electronics, mechanics, physics, programming, networking, all at a reasonable level on a daily basis. Plus there is an insane amount of responsibility right out of the gate and some people don't handle that well. I went to school for something I was interested in.  Also, if you looked at what pay rates some people I went to school with took jobs at, you would stick with what works for you just like me.  I have no desire to start at $60000 or something.  IT certifications can matter in some cases, and I have my share of them, but they again represent a synthetic benchmark.  Lots of people are good test takers and can't do things in the real world.  A recent project of one of my companies was to install a wired network for 12 users that would allow each user basically unrestricted internet access in a site with a connection with a single external IP address.  It was required that the clients not be able to communicate with each other.  If you saw the idiotic solution and ridiculous configuration using (that didn't work) using mac address filtering and detection and whatever that a CCNA who used to work for me tried, you would go crazy.  Why not just have individual VLANs individually PATed to the external internet interface with no routing between them, and then broken out at the main switch?  The config to do that is very very simple and works perfectly.  I think it took me 5 minutes to pull out of my ear.  To me, experience and prior work trump all. "I speak from personal experience. Even now, as I type this, I've had very sleep so, I'm on the edge a little, but you don't see me blogging about how ridiculous it is for me to stay up to learn something new, and I'm in my thirties where I've had to do this several year already.  That being said, I don't enjoy the long hours, but I do enjoy the problem-solving process, which can be time consuming. I tend to lose track of time when I'm immersed in learning or figuring a problem. Given the fact that tech is ever evolving, no one should ever be surprised to find out that there are long hours involved. It's not busy work. It's part of the learning process. If I figure it out, then it goes on my blog on how I resolved the issue instead of bitching how some VC (that was smart enough to become one) is going to benefit from my time. I'm paid for the work. That is the path I chose to be in.  With that in mind, I've worked for seven well known tech firm (most startups) so far. One was my own shop, which I ran for nearly six years. Nowhere did I hear anyone glorify the long hours. If I stayed after hours, I was asked if the work could be delayed, or if I can do it from home. Most managers want their direct reports to be happy, happy equals productivity. I haven't seen what you've  observed in the tech firms that I have worked for, but I suspect you might have had a difference experience. In my experience, the work-life balance was always preached in the interest of keeping people happy, despite work-life balance being nothing more than a term coined to get managers out of a sticky situation with HR-related  events. Any how, I digress.  Amy has applied some deep rationale to her blog post because she felt robbed of her time and possibly her youth. Sadly, her reputation with prospective employers might be influenced by her choice of words in the interest of ""fucking glory.""   I suppose in the arrogance of youth that's a way of saying fuck glory. There is a part of me that think this will work to her advantage at some point..." "Lol master in computer science. I'm an idiot. K bro. I'm just calling it like it is.  The problem with finance guys is they look at rich guys and accept their word as law. I don't care if this guy is a ""VP"" or whatever, I care if he has the technical chops to understand the technology. I'm willing to bet money he hasn't read a single paper on the technology, including the original Bitcoin paper, which by the way explicitly says do not speculate on cryptocurrencies (fun fact). I agree it's overvalued, but it's because traders with no idea of the real value of the tech are speculating.  Everyone is speculating on crypto, but historically disruptive tech is far undervalued. Think Microsoft when the iPhone was coming out. People were literally saying Apps are stupid and will never take off. At the end of the day I have money in it and we'll see where it goes." Thank you. Added to my list. This is very very helpful. I knew about the blockchain and the currency. Unfortunately, I'm not a pedant about differentiating between them with capitalising the first letter. I do not, however, understand Ethereum very well at all. So will read up. &gt;The application will still function until December 15. After that date, users won’t be able to sign in and all data will be deleted, automatically but only people and users with an aim.com email address can access it.  This sentence doesn't make any sense to me; am I crazy? Serious question - I don't work in finance, but I always hear how the big finance firms only hire the best and brightest and if they don't know anything, they'll pick it up quickly. How is it possible that those who work in derivatives find it that difficult to explain them. resistite's definition of derivatives is essentially what is taught to any beginner, so I don't quite understand how anyone with a finance background would find it difficult to explain (at least at a very general level). I know bitcoin. I don't understand ethereum except that the smart contracts bit is an abstraction of the blockchain concept to expand it beyond a mere ledger to a crypto-enhanced trust system that could be the escrow of the financial world.  I still need to read more about it and understand how ICOs are done. I had those sources open already. Some 10 tabs that I still haven't gotten to read in 4 months. Oh well, some incentive to get to it this weekend I guess. Who wrote this?  Just because some people -- and aparantly the author -- don't know the meaning of some of these doesn't mean they are useless phrases.  But to close the loop on this… = Always the more theoretical Business Development/Strategy guys who say this, so they can sound thorough?  Not.  Try: put a process in place to make certain that the things we just decided to do actually get done, either by assigning a third party to or using an automated system to regularly check for failure to progress, and deliver that information to someone that can do something about it.  This is low-hanging fruit = Get this done quickly?  How about, this can be done quickly and brings disproportionate and important immediate benefits, so we should do it first. "It's not hard, but it requires effort, and understanding what one is looking at. The social networks aimed at geeks failed or are not exposed to failure (Google+ would be the poster boy) so I assume this network would appeal at general users.    The assumption that the general user  1. detects what's happening 2. understands "" "" 3. cares about "" ""  doesn't hold water. The pool of users with the three characteristics is small, and their attention span is also limited because it's not their own work and they want to be users." "I like stuff like this for perspective but I found the article lacking in mechanics as to how to unlearn, how to apply it, etc. I may have missed it though. This reminds me of my CEO challenging everyone at every level to ""innovate"". Need more of the ""how"" behind these kinds of objectives. It's great to shed preconceptions, think outside the box, etc but that's been managerial buzz speak for years, and yet we still find ourselves within the box. Focusing on how to get out of it seems like a worthy cause." &gt;1. A big project to automate the entry of 2 invoices per month from a supplier. Is would take an employee less than 10 minutes a month to enter those 2 invoices manually into the system.   I am curious. Can't they apply the same solution for other suppliers? &gt;The heat from the data center cannot be harnessed aside of providing some of this heating, or to help with the heating of domestic water. Overall, exceptionally little of it is useful.  I'm admittedly dense, I'm still not clear on why this is. I don't want to be needlessly critical, but I think that you're being downvoted because of how unwieldy that source is. The writer struggles to communicate ideas and concepts clearly - his structures are needlessly verbose, to the extent that arriving at his conclusion in even a single sentence is like slogging through a certain legendary molasses flood.  I've dealt with technical language before (graduate economics-type stuff), and there are definitively good and bad ways of addressing dry, technical materials. If your material isn't interesting, then it should at least be clear. That blog post is neither (which is moderately surprising [or maybe it isn't?] considering his seniority at Microsoft).