There is a big and vocal group one who does not believe in the idea of solving the tech debt for couple reasons

1. Solving tech debt is not going to get you promotions and visibility as the article right said there is no visible difference

2. Its going to accrue continuously

3. There is no dedicated role that owns the tech debt so its not really anyones explicit responsibility as a part of job

I think this is probably a bigger root cause and is going to show up in different ways in future. The mere act of adding new products to an existing architecture/system is bound to create knowledge silos around operations and tech debt. There is a good reason why big companies keep smart people on their payroll to just change couple of lines after a week of debate.

Its a risky PR move to have this line on the top of article. To be more realistic the cost of dev effort should be included as well

"Brahminical Hindus" is new concept I heard for the first time. From an academic perspective, I would more than likely challenge the word "hindu" being used as a religion name. Most religions are more defined/codified. At the end of the day its all a tool to manage power/people, boundaries or groups can be created with almost any data point. Your comment/observation just happens to define/declare one new type of boundary

"Brahminical Hindus" is typical of a phrase concocted by poorly informed western professors like Dr. Audrey Truschke, PhD, to sell books.

A slightly different take, its probably more of people failure, the lack of required expertise, skillset, motivation and coordination. People have motivations to do the job to make a living, success of any long term project is rarely the driving factor for most people working on it. People would know ahead of time when a project is going towards the direction of failure, its just how the things are structured. From systems perspective, an unknown system/requirement would be a good example where you build iteratively, a known set of requirements should give good enough idea about the feasibility and rough timelines even if its complex.

To confirm, data/info leaks happened on the server/application side. How does a solution like Bitwarden on the client side helps with this situation?

As per my understanding the only possible threat it saves against is someone trying to brute force for your password against the application. And may be ease the cognitive burden of remembering different passwords.

Somewhere down the line I have a feeling that there is a human in the loop somewhere in between who's expert at reviewing these kind of bills. How the expert or their knowledge was added to the flow is the engineering art in here

On the same page here, read it multiple times to see if I can convince my mind, this is bit off in terms of reading the code as its being executed. There are high chances of people making mistakes over the time with such patterns. As usual there is always a trade off involved, readability is the one taking hit here.

From what little I have seen, this kind of role is tightly coupled and dependent on the their Manager. The manager has to you like as a person and some how believe that all these activities are adding value.

> From what little I have seen, this kind of role is tightly coupled and dependent on the their Manager.

As you go up the chart you have more independence and are less tightly coupled to your manager. By the time you get to principal you should be largely independent. At the same time, you have much more responsibility.

That's just a practical problem. As your manager becomes more senior (director/VP) their scope also increases. They just cannot "manage" you the way someone would manage a more junior IC. Also at the principal level you aren't just bringing value to your manager, but to other parts of the org as well.

In other words, I can't ask my manager "what should I do today?". I cannot even imagine what his reaction would be if I asked that question.

> The manager has to you like as a person and some how believe that all these activities are adding value.

For what it's worth my manager is a great person. But he wouldn't for a moment believe anyone when they say they add value.

It's up to me to find ways to document and express my value. Figuring out how to do this is part of becoming a principal. So I keep notes, I record wins, I make sure that I do things that bring me visibility, that I present new ideas, I contribute to larger roadmaps at the org level, I make sure that other scientists can say good things about me, I help fix problems that other orgs have so that they report I was useful, etc.

Unfortunately 24hr-for-a-week seems to be default everywhere nowdays, its just not practical for serious type businesses. It just an indicator of how important is the UPTIME for a company.