I am a Full-Stack Software Engineer with practical experience developing backend systems and web applications. My stack includes AWS, FastAPI, Python, Postgres, TypeScript, React, and Tailwind.
I have enjoyed a varied career, spanning environments from an organic farm to a tiny start-up to a Fortune 500 bank to an open-source civic journalism project.
Looking forward to finding a back-end/full-stack role that will leverage my Python + FastAPI background while deepening my knowledge in other areas, particularly TypeScript, Django, and scientific Python.
What has worked for my (mostly) remote team is a mix of different tools for different communication needs:
- Daily standups on Zoom. Each person's standup should be short and to the point. Don't be afraid to tell people they're getting into the weeds. If more open-ended discussion needs to happen, interested parties should either 1) stick around after standup or 2) schedule a new meeting to discuss in greater depth 3) start a Slack thread to discuss.
- Weekly code syncs to go more in-depth as a team, make sure we're rowing in roughly the same direction, and knock out decisions in minutes that would take days on Slack. This is especially valuable when building new products or refactoring.
- Weekly office hours held by senior+ level engineers to give more junior engineers an opening to ask questions.
- Weekly architecture meetings to formally discuss sweeping technical changes that impact multiple teams in a meaningful way, e.g. migrating to a language
For me it has been less about "email bad" or "Slack good" and more about asking questions - "What is the right medium for this type of conversation and our culture as a team?" or "What is the right tool for the job?". It's also an answer that evolves as the team/company grows; you have to reassess every few months and make adjustments.
There's also a question of culture and setting expectations that might be at play here.
- For the people answering questions, are they passionate about teaching? Do they feel incentivized/recognized for being active in answering questions? Do they have the bandwidth to help others?
- Are those asking the questions asking good questions? Are they respecting the time and attention of those trying to help them?
Great question! We do use huddles sometimes, especially when a Slack thread starts to get too deep. They're wonderful for pairing on problems. I'm sure we could migrate to huddles for standups if we really wanted to, there's just more momentum in Zoom meetings.
But I will say that Zoom integrates nicely with Google Calendar, offers video, and like you said has a higher limit.
We're also experimenting with doing standup three days a week so we can have less time spent in meetings each week.
I haven't been in a position to proscribe process, I'm just a consumer. We have tried leaving messages in Slack but that process always ends in a matter of days from disinterest.
YMMV but I think it all boils down to incentives, institutional maturity, and leadership. Here's what I look for:
1) What industry it is. A banking or security company typically has strong incentives toward building secure, stable systems.
2) Maturity. Experienced organizations may still have the impulse to hack things together, but at least have had a chance to internalize the value of security, testing, and realistic ship dates, and to hire sufficient staff to actually look after those things.
3) Who leads the organization. Nontechnical cofounders can be indispensable in their own way, but technical cofounders are more well equipped to appreciate why good software takes time and should be built robustly and securely, and balance other voices in the organization that may not have the benefit of that same background.
Business risk can come from a failure to innovate in some situations and a failure to provide stability in others. I've been at both extremes of this. It sounds like you're at one now. I prefer to be somewhere in the middle - pushing myself, learning, but not burning out.
Fortunately my current company fits this criteria. Anecdotally:
1) Tests are included in the scope of tickets
2) We have institutional memory of what happens when you build too quickly
3) Leadership is rich with experience in security and engineering
I always thought spending more than $500 for a chair was for suckers. Then I did some house sitting for a friend. They had a Herman Miller Aeron Chair.
At the time I was doing my CS final project and was putting in consecutive 12 hour days. I had chronic back issues, and had never been able to pull that kind of project off without at least some back pain! I was sold on this chair.
Once I graduated and got a real job, I upgraded to an Aeron and never looked back. That being said, I got a significant discount by shopping used on eBay. There are people who go to offices, buy the whole lot of used chairs, then refurbish and sell them. Paid about $650 for it, and I feel good knowing there are replacement parts available if something wears out in the future.
I threw out the headrest and the lumbar thing, though. Didn't find those comfortable.
