I'd actually probably recommend checking out at least NSubstitute before committing to Moq, it's the newest one out there and it might be one of those situations where it sands the rough edges off Moq. Their website says this:

Ya this is amazing. Like, learning new stuff is by far the most fun and rewarding part of this career. It's also kind of important and so common as to be ubiquitous.

So 9-9 is bad? How stupid is this system?

Or is it vector maths?

For me learning new stuff is mega-rewarding but also painful sometimes. I have to lean into it.

I always think of it as when you're a little kid, you just pick up finger paints and start doing stuff. But when you're an adult, you sit there fretting about how much you can't draw a dog. Also that whole marshmallow tower thing that kids are supposedly better at than most adults - because they just start building.

(Btw, some site, I think it's medium - if you highlight text and hit paste with a URL, just turns it into a link. That is awesome and it pisses me off that every editor doesn't do it.)

I get in these ruts where I just want to play with the tools I already know and build cool stuff. For whatever reason that feels like fun, whereas that head-scratching frustrating of learning new stuff feels not-so-fun.

My first programming job was for a statistical consulting firm that supported the tobacco and auto industry (they might have had other clients but that's all I ever saw). Basically our boss was tasked with explaining complicated statistics to a jury, on our client's side of course - in order to shave a $billion here or there off a major lawsuit. Job satisfaction was low, but the best part was I was working with some people who were literally the best in the world at what they do.

My major takeaways were:

1) There is no magic bullet to success, it's just being detail oriented, smart, and diligent.

2) The top analyst, who I think was literally a genius - never hesitated to learn new stuff. This guy was a multi-millionaire with a PhD doing high-level statistics, but if he had to learn some low level Unix commands and scripting to get something done, he dove into it. That made an impression on me.

Fortunately now I am doing nothing but learning new stuff. So my tolerance is really high and it's not that painful at all. But eventually I'll settle into actually building an app, and learning new stuff will feel painful again. Just gotta push back against it.

The fact that one of these is a 2 and we don't know which it is tilts me.

Also who gave you this score? Was it self-administered?

Exceptionally.

123
456
789

obv. 2-6 is fine. 3 never happens. 5 is bad. anything else: super bad.

I gave myself a 6. Boss gave me a 2. Same thing IMO.


FML.

Ya I changed to enum. This required changing 7 other files. There is a movement at my company to submit small and focused PR.

It starts from the top?

I'm in a blind rage right now.

Wait, what? Enigma is the best thing you can be?

JFC what the hell is going on?

When you read about a Falling Down, shooting spree situation in LA tomorrow - blame Grue.

TIL being a "trusted professional" is super bad

The numbers are just labels, it's not as if "1" is best.

But the fact that they're not vector coordinates is just clown shoes.

Oh nm. I wasn't looking that the axes. I guess 3 is best.

Still very mad that either 1 or 9 isn't best.

I give the maker of this system a (checks notes ... thinks ...) 7.

Also lol that 10 is like borderline ******ed with 0 performance or something.

I give the designer of this system a 10! Great effort.

Btw I got connector and stimulator as my top 2 when we did this personality assessment at my company. Still pretty pumped about it.

I think 5 would be the most depressing number to get.

These sound like good qualities for a sex worker so, uh, thumbs up

You are correct that additional stock grants could snowball into a lot of comp per year, but
- recruiter wasn't able to tell me if I can reliably expect subsequent grants to be as large as my initial grant, and
- not sure I want to be in a position where I have to stay several years in order to fully realize that benefit. Maybe with something like a $50k signing bonus to offset the current pain (relative to ILPS) I'd feel in year 1.

At least from the video I watched - it's pretty standard to get "refresher" grants as your original 4 year grants expire. Otherwise they'd lose all their good engineers.

Refresher grants as deployed at some large companies (including DBAM) are given yearly, so that your stock-based compensation increases yearly through year 4. But I think the subsequent grants (except maybe in year 5 after your first large grant runs out?) are likely not as large as your initial one, so it's not like getting an initial RSU grant of 200k means you're making 200k/yr from stock alone by year 4.

But having no first-hand experience from such a company, this is more what I've cobbled together from research.

Did you see that video from the Google guy who basically made it sound like you're making $500k+ a year by year 7 or so? Someone posted it here I think.

It appears you are correct, the initial grant is a lot higher than the refresher grants.
https://www.quora.com/As-a-Google-em...-2015-and-2014

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10759990
Seems like the refreshers are lower, but will still probably jump above your total comp right now. Obviously you should negotiate some more.

That guy is kind of a clown. I have no doubt it's possible to really kill it at one of these DBAMs, but I doubt his experience is typical.