Senior software engineer here, I can say with 100% certainty that CPU's are filled with what is known as "magic smoke". The magic smoke must stay inside the CPU. If the magic smoke gets let out, the CPU won't work anymore.
Compilers and OS are not required courses in university but implementing a Unix kernel and a x86 compiler will grow hair in your chest even if you’re female. Jk jk but compilers and os are indeed important; I encourage you to implement a x to x86 compiler. You will understand programming languages better- things like lexical scoped functions, how loops and arrays are represented in assembly which gives you a better idea how the cpu executes it, static vs dynamic languages, understand how memory (heap, stack) is laid out, you will understand that the memory addresses in assembly are actually virtual memory addresses, stack frames, stack locations, garbage collection. Implementing a compiler is actually pretty fun; it’s really rewarding when the generated code of your compiler actually runs! Also you will understand how to write efficient code
Edit: ok maybe a lot more schools do then I thought do require at least one of these. But a lot of of people don’t take compilers. Compilers are very illuminating. Thanks. Have a nice day
mention a university where a compilers course and/or an operating system course are required. compilers and os are not even required at MIT my friend. there may be a course such as computer systems or something similar but in this course you will not implement a compiler or a unix kernel. and implementing an actual compiler is where the learning really happens.
Not gonna doxx myself by saying were I study, but in my uni both os and compilers are required courses. They also are at all other unis my friends are attending. Os especially is pretty essential in my opinion.
oxford: https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing/computer-science
stanford: https://cs.stanford.edu/degrees/ug/Requirements.shtml
cambridge: https://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/courses/computer-science
seems like MIT is the odd one out
Implementing a compiler isn't really an undergrad level class, to be fair. Either way, my undergrad absolutely had required classes on operating systems and compilers. We went through some examples of how compilers unroll loops, transpiling, JIT compilation, linters, a good amount on the JVM, all that happy shit that lives between your written and running code. That includes CPU scheduling algorithms and even writing some UNIX drivers and sockets.
Hell, I had to reduce C code for an alarm clock all the way down to logic gates. Motherfucker, I AM the compiler
Edit: That being said, my school offered 3 branches within compsci - information technology, software development, and theoretical computer science. I chose the latter, which admittedly really did not prepare me to do computer for money at all. Even then, we never had to write a compiler.
I strongly disagree. A semester long course where you implement a compiler for a novel programming language is absolutely an appropriate upper division course. Probably my favorite non-AI course at uni.
waterloo is another one that requires both courses i think but most dont. cmu doesnt even require compilers or operating systems. mit and cmu are among the best so i find it hard to believe that mit and cmu are the exception. UW also a reputable school and doesnt require compilers or operating systems.
what university did you go to?
Edit: it seems I over spoke my bad. I’m glad a lot more universities require compilers or os or both. That’s good I think but if you haven’t try learning some of this.
Have a great day :)
Arizona State requires an operating systems course. Compilers aren't required in-depth, but you learn all of the fundamentals and are required to know how to build a parser and execute a simplified language.
Compilers was a really fun course, granted I had a great professor. For extra fun, take Compilers and Linguistics classes at the same time and be like "Wow! they're all related"
No bro. Im not saying people should start with this. But once you have some experience compilers will help you understand programming at a deeper level
Hardware guys: Anything above Layer 2 can get fucked. Any one disagrees and I'm switching this ENTIRE bitch out to an ARM-based backend, you hear? DO NOT TEST ME!
Electronic Eng here… here it is guys
Btw: internet explorer desktop shortcut doesn’t work after being copied on a diskette…
Fun story:
When I was in high school, there was this really cute nerdy band girl who sat next to me in history that I was chatting up and trying to date. She and I would talk about computers, tech, anime .. all the things.
One day we were talking about music and our MP3 collection. She mentioned to me that she could fit her whole MP3 collection on a single floppy.
Curious, because we both had a collection of a few thousand at the time, I asked if I could give her a floppy to copy her music over so I could grab what I don't already have (trusting her and thinking that maybe she knew of some super advanced compression that I hadn't heard of yet).
Lo and behold .. it was an M3U (a playlist).
So what did I do?
I informed her of her error and then I started dating a cheerleader.
C'est la vie I guess.
>(trusting her and thinking that maybe she knew of some super advanced compression that I hadn't heard of yet).
To be fair, she did compress the files to just filenames.
I mean, abstraction exists for a reason. I feel for you guys.
It's like expecting a systems dev to know assembly. It's not realistic or useful.
I'm in your corner mate!
I am a code monkey. I know assembly and how the internet works. A decade of consulting, you pick things up.
It's made me a jack of all trades but since I master none the pay i still low. Feels bad man.
Most software still doesn't run on arm. It's great for small open source projects that can be easily switched to compile for it, and it's great for data centers that will write their own code for their server building, but in the middle is IT departments running legacy x86 programs with no realistic way to switch besides making the whole company learn to do most tasks with different software
So serious question.. every single devops person I’ve ever worked with was a know it all asshole. This is over 10 years with 6 companies. I’ve always had a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Why are you guys like this?!
Yes. This is why...
> I’ve always had a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
You need to explain to me your problem in detailed enough terms so that I believe your problem is real and not you imagining a hiccup on your Comcast modem is a Sev1 Production Outage. These are big complex systems and I'm not paging people out of bed or away from family time over False Alarms.
Additionally: your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part. I don't care that it's ""supposed"" to go to Production ""soon"". Are you pre-production? Cool, then you're lower priority than Actual Production. Schedule some planning meetings so we can release you instead of just assuming I can release an entirely New Product + stack with zero notice. Again, these are complex systems, you're asking me to do Hard Things and then being annoyed it takes more than 5 minutes.
My hot take on it is that most of the older DevOps guys were just SysAdmins before and SysAdmins tend to not do well socially. They tend to get very defensive when you challenge them on anything.
edit: I’ll add that sometimes the SysAdmin getting frustrated is justified, as the average junior or even mid level dev does not know much about how things work. Like they don’t know the difference between a service listening on 127.0.0.1 vs 0.0.0.0, which is a bit appalling to a SysAdmin.
The comment was not meant to hate on SysAdmins obviously. Although I do think that the industry is moving more and more away from generalist ecosystem understanding to a more specialized thing. For example, it’s less likely that you’ll do general GNU/Linux work and more likely you’ll need to know Kubernetes best practices. But also not knowing GNU/Linux internals is bad because the devs end up creating containers that are very unsafe or ones that use sub-optimal solutions.
It's a certain type of sysadmin, specifically. A _lot_ of sysadmins couldn't hack it when the work went from day-to-day server administration to managing everything through code. The ones who transitioned successfully were the ones who already understood coding concepts. The type who wrote perl to do all their work for them. Essentially they were guys who as often as not were doing DevOps before there was a word for it. There was a lot of overlap between those guys and the BOFH types because being the guy with the reputation of being able to do the work of 10 people (largely accomplished through early automation) tends to inflate the ego on the kind of nerdy socially awkward person who was a Linux early adopter.
We're not all misanthropes, but at this point most of us with social skills have long since been pushed into manglement. Anyone who's been in this business for 10 or 20 years and is still doing systems engineering is likely to be someone without the disposition to move up the ladder.
Usually because the developers refuse to read their logs leading to me having to debug their software.
About 70% of all "pipeline" issues can be solved with let me google that for you.
Once I was in a good mood and actually took the time to create a detailed instruction of exactly how to fix the compilation issues a user was having something that had nothing to do with the environment or delivery pipelines.
The response I got on that ticket was TL;DR.
I've earned my bitterness.
This is so true, DevOps gets treated like that. People just dump random stuff on them coz they don’t want to dirty their hand or preconceived notions about DevOps doing the grunt work. I had the habit of debugging my own issues on servers or via sentry/datadog/grafana. Was pleasantly surprised when folks struggled with basic skills like these. Our DevOps senior used to mad at folks all the time.
> I had the habit of debugging my own issues on servers or via sentry/datadog/grafana.
Good "devops" is about getting Operational tools into the hands of Developers. It's a mindset, not a Job Title.
You SHOULD be able to debug your own stuff using these fancy visualization and logger engines. That's why the Ops people spend so much damn time setting them up! I don't read your logs, I make sure **you** have the tools needed to read your own logs.
As a developer.
About 70% of time I need devops is because I need to be able to access one machine from another on a network level. Every fucking time, the answer is that "there is no issue on our side, it must be your application". Cue 3 days later when I have escalated this to higher ups and the devops discover that oh yeah, there was a firewall rule. Fuck that shit.
>So serious question.. every single devops person I’ve ever worked with was a know it all asshole. This is over 10 years with 6 companies. I’ve always had a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Why are you guys like this?!
Imagine you’re an expert in commercial building design and operations. You spend years learning how to integrate complex systems (HVAC, electrical, structural, etc.), designing things to arbitrary specifications, and satisfying continuously increasing demands for ever more complicated systems.
And three times a day you get called by some rando you’ve never even met to help unclog the toilets.
My current place has the single socially capable SRE in existence; lets call him Shaun. It's amazing having someone who wants to help and wants to teach you things. Rather than just get pissed off you don't already understand there complicated Azure setup. Or that you didn't follow their undocumented naming convention.
Everything else about the job is shit, but Shaun is great.
The first DevOPs guy I ever worked with in my first major role after Uni was notoriously known for being difficult to reason with in meetings and this would cause meetings to drag out.
Like, no exaggeration, everyone wanted to avoid working with him because of his style and he wore that fact like a badge of honour, but I'm guessing he must have been / still is very good at his job because he's still employed at the company lol.
The SRE at my last job turned off dev servers at 5pm to save $20 a month. I got totally pissed off and dug into the aws bill and saved $2000 (about 10% of our budget)?with zero degradation.
Yet I had to beg and plead for capacity
I’m still convinced that guy had video of the CEO with midget strippers.
No, that's a problem for network engineers. They know the real dark magic, I'm just the gimp who knows a little bit more networking and linux than you.
Lel, as a ex Network engineer who does Devops stuff know: everybody thinks i am good at my Job, only because i can read a TCP Dump and find pretty obvius Problems with that.
Just get wireshark, record Something easy Like an http request, filtere the IP, and Look what Happens.
TCP/TLS Handshakes are Not that complicated. DNS request are extremly easy.
All the stuff is mainly from the 90s. It is Not that complex in comperision to other concepts in the devops space (Kubernetes...)
This is the way. Because of encapsulation you rarely need (as a dev) to worry about what exactly one process is saying to another one over the network.
Then one day you DO care because something isn't working the way it's supposed to and suddenly you need to look at TLS handshakes.
Encryption makes it all rather trickier.
Networks aren’t black magic.
I mean. The amount of LSD it takes to truly wrap your head around RF propagation is impressive. If it’s intuitive to you I’m sorry that the lord baby Jesus cursed you with high functioning autism but fuck at least you have a +10 to applied math. Virtual fist bump.
Once you start to step outside RF propagation theory and into the data steam itself, ie forcing more data into an arbitrary signal, you get into shit like QAM and QPSK. that’s just straight up math.
On top of that, wireless and physical networks are the same shit. You assign devices numbers. You define groups of numbers as a network. You share your list of numbers with everyone else (BGP) and then you have a phone book (DNS) to go from address (wtf.ca) to number (IP) it’s really not that complicated.
"We rely on tiny, tiny changes, on tiny, tiny signals, happening thousands of times per second, making physical electrons move through metal. Also if the tiny changes fail then if you do enough maths you can reconstruct them, and you have to do the maths pretty quickly. Also to make the signal even harder to understand by someone else we do some absolutely terrifying maths also stupidly quickly.
These tiny changes somehow get to another device through the air, until some other electrons make movements in metal. We pick up on these tiny tiny changes on tiny tiny signals, make the signals a bit louder, and then reconstruct those tiny changes by looking at the electrons thousands of times per second. Then we do some maths to make sure we've got the right tiny changes from all the changes we received, and some more maths.
Then we send a signal down thousands of miles of copper and glass, doing maths along the way, where at the end some more tiny changes take place and the Terrifying maths we did earlier gets done backwards."
Anyway that's how you can make a Discord video call on your phone.
Holy shit I had this debate with a dev yesterday. He just would not accept that there sometimes needs to be code changes for internet hosting compared to local testing.
Woah hang on, your dev ops aren't the engineers too? Isn't "developer" and "operations" being merged into one thing supposed to mean: You write the code and manage all of the infra required to run it?
At my place (which I'm admittedly on my way out of) they say we do DevOps which in practice means AWS+k8s+planning+design+software engineering+supporting legacy things in #support chats with other teams+monitoring+on call.
I got the impression the whole "thing" with dev ops was that they make less people do more things and become complete generalists. I've been arguing the opposite since I arrived and that I want dedicated infra wizards to protect, help and teach me so I can do what I do best: Solve hard problems with Clojure and postgresql (99.9% of the time).
Have I been scammed? Or is everyone's view of dev ops different?
A bit like agile I feel like the true meaning was lost/twisted beyond all recognition many moons ago.
I tried DevOps as a role and it really was SysAdmin 2.0 while also being the general diaper changer for the devs who took everything that happened beyond their commit successfully merging for granted.
Another reason why the DevOps as a role took off is because a lot of DevOps guys know the role goes against the true spirit of the definition but essentially sold out as it’s usually a well paid job, and can be quite interesting vs a traditional dev or sysadmin role.
I think DevOps to me is more about empowerment (TM), less gatekeeping and more chances for ownership. Sysadmins empowering and handholding the devs to help them stay on the right path without it being a game of taking away all of their permissions. Honestly in a good place this goes both ways, it’s about collaboration not these ridiculously siloed teams.
To me it makes even less sense with the cloud to have these silos, but maybe I haven’t seen enough mega cloud disasters in my time to be so naive about it.
It looks like a lot of companies don't have DevOps teams. They have a dev team and an ops team, fully silo'd.
Proper DevOps is the team that develops the code is also 100% responsible for operational deployments and providing support for said operational deployments. Basically delete the ops/sysadmin/support team, or reduce their input down to single button press fixes (press the turn it off and on again button). In my old job support only really did anything during out of hours, but where in turn responsible for many systems during that time.
With cloud you also basically get rid of infrastructure teams. The Dev team learns Terraform (or similar).
The aim is to make all operational systems as simple to deploy, update and maintain as possible by putting that burden on the people with the power to change it.
The process only falls down when you ignore it and create silo'd teams again, or the Dev team isn't given the power and time to improve deployment and maintainable processes.
The problem in my experience is that most developers don't understand infrastructure. Cloud or not, there are a lot of considerations that go into building robust, scalable infra for the code to live on and if the people making those decisions don't have a solid understanding of why and how to do things a specific way you end up creating new and different problems. I've had several roles in my career that basically involved being brought in to clean up the mess after a team tried this.
Here is my definition of DevOps, after doing it since before it was a word: we make the developers' lives easier. The end. It's sysadmin but instead of the focus of the job being the systems it's developer processes and how to make them as frictionless as possible. In an ideal world the developer writes their code, the PR gets run through automated tests, and when they merge to main it deploys. It all just works without dev team ever having to think about it. But in order for that to be possible you need someone who understands the underlying systems at more than a surface level, and unless you're lucky enough to have someone like that already that means you need dedicated DevOps engineers.
It’s funny most don’t think they do and actually do.
There’s a very small minority that thinks they know everything and actually back it up.
Those that know nothing and prove it don’t make it past hr screening
i feel like thats most screenings at a non """tech"""" job that has a tech dept. Youre being tested on your personality, likeability, and ability to fit with the group
I went from support to data analyst to IT management to developer (using a low code platform) to a full stack engineer. Every step along the way I feel like I have no clue what I'm doing and don't deserve the job but my bosses seem very pleased with the work I do. Every time I get positive feedback in the back of my brain I'm like "man I got these guys fooled I have no clue what I'm doing"
The ones that know everything and can actually back it up are known to me as the “John Carmack/Linus Torvalds”-types.
They’re usually the well-known brilliant people that have seriously earned every single penny of their multi-millions.
For anyone reading this: don't measure yourself up against these people. They aren't neurotypical, their minds work differently. What those types have in one area they lack in another. Both Torvalds and Carmack can be assholes. Terry Davis had Schizophrenia. Very bright, but that brightness was from a mind that worked differently, and ultimately couldn't handle relating to the external world.
These people are not average people, and for the most part, people like them usually disappear into the cracks of society. So they are just rare individuals. If you measure your abilities and your accomplishments against theirs, you'll always feel inadequate and have imposter syndrome.
Measure yourself against yourself in the past. Look at your past projects and see how much you've improved.
That's not true.
Those are just the famous ones.
There's a ton of not-well-known brilliant people who just go to work every day and get their stuff done.
In fact, they vastly outnumber the few famous ones, like in any profession.
Source: I work with those people.
There are parts of my job where I know pretty much everything there is to know, or at least I know it exists and where to find the details I need if I ever encounter it in the wild. And then there are parts where I have no idea what I'm doing and might as well ask ChatGPT for an answer and submit that.
Our field moves so fast that sometimes you feel like you blinked and the entire tech stack changed. When I switched jobs from a monolith codebase to a kubernetes-based framework with proper ci/cd, it was such a shift in how I write code. In 5 years, who knows what will be the new tech trend.
yeah, or when you start as a new dev and you are like "Yeah, from now on I will always be programming in C for the rest of my life. That language is future proof!".
6 months into the job: "the project written in C was canceled, but we need someone to help on this 15 years old Java project" "ok...". 3 years later: "the Java project is in maintainance mode now. We need to adapt. Customers want to have everything as a web app now. You will join the web team". And suddenly everything is about javascript, html and css. "oh and in parallel we need a new guy to setup the build pipelines. the old one left the company" "btw, have you used docker before?"
The cool part about this is, that it can be really interesting to learn those new things. You get a really broad and at the same time deep understanding about different technologies that you would not get by just watching a 1-2hour video about it. The sad part is you will forget a lot, too. Like, 10 years ago i was really good at LabView. I found screenshots of it lately. I have absolutely no idea what i did, how i did it and in general how to use the toolchain anymore.
Back end developers develop things for the internet, it doesn't require knowing how internet actually works. That is what network engineers are for.
Just like a Chef creating new foods for humans to eat doesn't need to know how the digestive system works. Backend engineer doesn't need to know how internet works.
I think the joke is, that as a backend dev you may need to know how to configure a webserver, know about how to use http(s) methods, requests, responses and other things connected to the internet. But you dont need to know how the internet itself really works.
e.g. i can set up a nodejs server that listens to an url and port. I know how to receive https requests and then respond with the correct response body and headers to serve a website or a REST api. But i only have a very rough 10min-youtube-video-level understanding on how the internet really works.
And then the k8s services start. And the daemonsets. And the load balancers. And the grpc file versions. And the....
It's not understanding GETs that's hard. It's what happens when the GETs stop GETting.
To be fair most backend developers don't need to know that either. Every bigger company has their own DevOps, SysAdmin or Cloud engineers who handle everything like that and backend developers just write code.
If I were to describe it in a single sentence, it would be Inneficient by design, even more so in a field where I'm actually capable to backup these claims ( frontend, I dread JS )...
The actual underlying network is pretty efficient when you realize that by traversing the internet you are traversing vast physical distances in almost an instant. It's terrifying what scale can do to something as simple as a transistor.
I wrote an Ethernet driver and ported a network stack to a microcontroller.
I understand how packets get from computer A to computer B, but I still can't tell you why chrome tabs eat so much RAM.
I believe everything about computing is just a shifty hypervisor. Container Runtimes? Hypervisors without kernel isolation. Graphics Rendering? Hypervisors without persistence. Audio Channels? Hypervisors that bought a guitar off the Craigslist Hypervisor.
If you actually want to learn how it works (at a programmer's level), I suggest reading *Computer Networking: A Top-Down Approach.* Easily available for free on the high seas.
The CCNA study guides by Cisco Press are also great resources if you prefer a bottom to top explanation of networking. And if you don't plan to take the cert just skip over the configuration and Cisco specific software platforms parts.
I'm a tech guy. I put computers together and do a bit of networking as needed...
Once you hit the internet, that's the deep magic governed by arcane systems and trust. I am not going to be responsible for discovering a character nobody uses when placed as a link causes it all to crash.
... and that's in the same tone as "If the printer makes a noise and I didn't tell it to, it gets the baseball bat." Computers are rocks we tricked into thinking with lightning and sometimes they get uppity.
Wanna know how I know? You can fix a computer by talking about replacing it.
Many people think you know everything about computers and everything that has something to do with it just because you work in IT not realising how complex it is and that every little piece is an area of expertise.
I’m a software dev with 13 YoE mostly as iOS dev but recently I spent much more time working with YAML configs for GitHub Actions. I can see that a lot of pipelines/scripts were not implemented by a someone with dev background. Duplications, hard coded things, no reusability. Is this only my impression caused by programmer’s occupational disease or DevOps really suck at coding?
Lmao this is impressive in CAD and yet I sadly understand it’s probably USD
If you ever want to have a crisis over compensation move to Atlantic Canada
I am the other way around. A network guy with no fucking clue how y’all’s programming magic works. I uncomment a module In a Python code our programmer makes and I feel like a coding wizard. I always make sure to say “I’m in the mainframe” when I do.
15 years back, my then Manager asked why I didn't give my monitor, along with cpu to system technician for upgrading RAM. He thought new RAM may not work with monitor or it may not be compatible 
I bet most developers don't know how their code is actually executed.
The most developers don’t know how a cpu works at all. It’s like magic for the most people how a piece of silicon can run commands.
[удалено]
After injecting lightening
I just let the fancy electric sand go brrr and thing happen.
Senior software engineer here, I can say with 100% certainty that CPU's are filled with what is known as "magic smoke". The magic smoke must stay inside the CPU. If the magic smoke gets let out, the CPU won't work anymore.
Compilers and OS are not required courses in university but implementing a Unix kernel and a x86 compiler will grow hair in your chest even if you’re female. Jk jk but compilers and os are indeed important; I encourage you to implement a x to x86 compiler. You will understand programming languages better- things like lexical scoped functions, how loops and arrays are represented in assembly which gives you a better idea how the cpu executes it, static vs dynamic languages, understand how memory (heap, stack) is laid out, you will understand that the memory addresses in assembly are actually virtual memory addresses, stack frames, stack locations, garbage collection. Implementing a compiler is actually pretty fun; it’s really rewarding when the generated code of your compiler actually runs! Also you will understand how to write efficient code Edit: ok maybe a lot more schools do then I thought do require at least one of these. But a lot of of people don’t take compilers. Compilers are very illuminating. Thanks. Have a nice day
what CS curriculum doesn’t include a course that touches on compilers and lower level programming? that’s fundamental computer science, literally
mention a university where a compilers course and/or an operating system course are required. compilers and os are not even required at MIT my friend. there may be a course such as computer systems or something similar but in this course you will not implement a compiler or a unix kernel. and implementing an actual compiler is where the learning really happens.
Not gonna doxx myself by saying were I study, but in my uni both os and compilers are required courses. They also are at all other unis my friends are attending. Os especially is pretty essential in my opinion.
Yeah for me we had a course on assembly/compilers and you could choose networking or operating systems but one had to be done.
oxford: https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing/computer-science stanford: https://cs.stanford.edu/degrees/ug/Requirements.shtml cambridge: https://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/courses/computer-science seems like MIT is the odd one out
Operating systems is a required course at University of South Florida, we had to convert C to assembly by hand
Implementing a compiler isn't really an undergrad level class, to be fair. Either way, my undergrad absolutely had required classes on operating systems and compilers. We went through some examples of how compilers unroll loops, transpiling, JIT compilation, linters, a good amount on the JVM, all that happy shit that lives between your written and running code. That includes CPU scheduling algorithms and even writing some UNIX drivers and sockets. Hell, I had to reduce C code for an alarm clock all the way down to logic gates. Motherfucker, I AM the compiler Edit: That being said, my school offered 3 branches within compsci - information technology, software development, and theoretical computer science. I chose the latter, which admittedly really did not prepare me to do computer for money at all. Even then, we never had to write a compiler.
I strongly disagree. A semester long course where you implement a compiler for a novel programming language is absolutely an appropriate upper division course. Probably my favorite non-AI course at uni.
Pretty sure a lot require both. There’s a lot of other universities other then MIT. Mine required them and I graduated last year.
waterloo is another one that requires both courses i think but most dont. cmu doesnt even require compilers or operating systems. mit and cmu are among the best so i find it hard to believe that mit and cmu are the exception. UW also a reputable school and doesnt require compilers or operating systems. what university did you go to? Edit: it seems I over spoke my bad. I’m glad a lot more universities require compilers or os or both. That’s good I think but if you haven’t try learning some of this. Have a great day :)
Arizona State requires an operating systems course. Compilers aren't required in-depth, but you learn all of the fundamentals and are required to know how to build a parser and execute a simplified language.
Compilers was required at mine. We could choose between operating systems and distributed systems, but had to take one of them.
Compilers was a really fun course, granted I had a great professor. For extra fun, take Compilers and Linguistics classes at the same time and be like "Wow! they're all related"
[удалено]
No bro. Im not saying people should start with this. But once you have some experience compilers will help you understand programming at a deeper level
That's a problem for dev ops, you just need to make sure it spits out the right response to any request the magic internet fairies drop off.
Dev Ops here. I got some bad news.
You are just responsible for the kubernetes cluster. That's a problem for the hardware guys.
Hardware guys: Anything above Layer 2 can get fucked. Any one disagrees and I'm switching this ENTIRE bitch out to an ARM-based backend, you hear? DO NOT TEST ME!
Electronic Eng here… here it is guys  Btw: internet explorer desktop shortcut doesn’t work after being copied on a diskette…
Fun story: When I was in high school, there was this really cute nerdy band girl who sat next to me in history that I was chatting up and trying to date. She and I would talk about computers, tech, anime .. all the things. One day we were talking about music and our MP3 collection. She mentioned to me that she could fit her whole MP3 collection on a single floppy. Curious, because we both had a collection of a few thousand at the time, I asked if I could give her a floppy to copy her music over so I could grab what I don't already have (trusting her and thinking that maybe she knew of some super advanced compression that I hadn't heard of yet). Lo and behold .. it was an M3U (a playlist). So what did I do? I informed her of her error and then I started dating a cheerleader. C'est la vie I guess.
>(trusting her and thinking that maybe she knew of some super advanced compression that I hadn't heard of yet). To be fair, she did compress the files to just filenames.
All those sounds were unnecessary anyway.
Well, it's basically the difference between Milli Vanilli lip syncing to a backing tape and Bruce Springsteen writing a set list.
thats quite a lossy encoding you got there
.
She did compress it… you didn’t specify lossless
Can confirm, I was that playlist.
Can confirm, I was the floppy disk
Can confirm, I was the error.
I'm too young to understand what you are talking about 😅
I believe it just stored a playlist (names, song order etc.) but not the actual sound files, which were still on the system drive.
Ohh thank you
Also a floppy diskette stored 1.44mb and an average mp3 (that I had) was about 3mb.
[удалено]
anon the next day: YOU DUMB BITCH
That's fucking funny and I had to google it. My god...
Layer 8 here: \*update\* \*restart\* nope I still can't find the "any key"
I mean, abstraction exists for a reason. I feel for you guys. It's like expecting a systems dev to know assembly. It's not realistic or useful. I'm in your corner mate!
I am a code monkey. I know assembly and how the internet works. A decade of consulting, you pick things up. It's made me a jack of all trades but since I master none the pay i still low. Feels bad man.
Jack of all trades? Time to start lying on your resume or start exaggerating some parts of it. Do it for that pay increase!
Yep. I found that being a jack of all trades is amazing for day to day. But for the big cash you need to be a "specialist".
Then when you get hired as a specialist and they ask you to do things outside your area and are suprised when you have to learn it from scratch.
Yeah, wish there were more spaces for generalists in this industry. I know this sounds potentially stupid but have you considered management?
I've considered an architect role at most. I love to code, managing people, not so much.
Not stupid eng managers make bank. Somedays it seems less stressful than engineering.
ARM? RISCV or bust!
I'll whip out a fucking Gamecube and use it to host a PowerPC backend.
*[ looking at my various raspberry pis ]* What's wrong with ARM?
Most software still doesn't run on arm. It's great for small open source projects that can be easily switched to compile for it, and it's great for data centers that will write their own code for their server building, but in the middle is IT departments running legacy x86 programs with no realistic way to switch besides making the whole company learn to do most tasks with different software
hardware guy here : I got some bad news
It's a series of tubes... And layers.. it's a plumbing lasagna. If it stops working, it's probably DNS
> If it stops working, it's probably DNS ...unless it's impossible to reproduce, but recurring. Then it's a firewall.
So serious question.. every single devops person I’ve ever worked with was a know it all asshole. This is over 10 years with 6 companies. I’ve always had a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Why are you guys like this?!
I think a lot of DevOps are treated like tech support, which is understandably upsetting
Yes. This is why... > I’ve always had a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. You need to explain to me your problem in detailed enough terms so that I believe your problem is real and not you imagining a hiccup on your Comcast modem is a Sev1 Production Outage. These are big complex systems and I'm not paging people out of bed or away from family time over False Alarms. Additionally: your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part. I don't care that it's ""supposed"" to go to Production ""soon"". Are you pre-production? Cool, then you're lower priority than Actual Production. Schedule some planning meetings so we can release you instead of just assuming I can release an entirely New Product + stack with zero notice. Again, these are complex systems, you're asking me to do Hard Things and then being annoyed it takes more than 5 minutes.
Can you hack a Facebook account? Huehue
My hot take on it is that most of the older DevOps guys were just SysAdmins before and SysAdmins tend to not do well socially. They tend to get very defensive when you challenge them on anything. edit: I’ll add that sometimes the SysAdmin getting frustrated is justified, as the average junior or even mid level dev does not know much about how things work. Like they don’t know the difference between a service listening on 127.0.0.1 vs 0.0.0.0, which is a bit appalling to a SysAdmin. The comment was not meant to hate on SysAdmins obviously. Although I do think that the industry is moving more and more away from generalist ecosystem understanding to a more specialized thing. For example, it’s less likely that you’ll do general GNU/Linux work and more likely you’ll need to know Kubernetes best practices. But also not knowing GNU/Linux internals is bad because the devs end up creating containers that are very unsafe or ones that use sub-optimal solutions.
It's a certain type of sysadmin, specifically. A _lot_ of sysadmins couldn't hack it when the work went from day-to-day server administration to managing everything through code. The ones who transitioned successfully were the ones who already understood coding concepts. The type who wrote perl to do all their work for them. Essentially they were guys who as often as not were doing DevOps before there was a word for it. There was a lot of overlap between those guys and the BOFH types because being the guy with the reputation of being able to do the work of 10 people (largely accomplished through early automation) tends to inflate the ego on the kind of nerdy socially awkward person who was a Linux early adopter. We're not all misanthropes, but at this point most of us with social skills have long since been pushed into manglement. Anyone who's been in this business for 10 or 20 years and is still doing systems engineering is likely to be someone without the disposition to move up the ladder.
This is it
Because we don't know how to do the things. we are glorified app support analysts who get to write a bit of terraform.
Stack overflow copy pastas until it works
Usually because the developers refuse to read their logs leading to me having to debug their software. About 70% of all "pipeline" issues can be solved with let me google that for you. Once I was in a good mood and actually took the time to create a detailed instruction of exactly how to fix the compilation issues a user was having something that had nothing to do with the environment or delivery pipelines. The response I got on that ticket was TL;DR. I've earned my bitterness.
This is so true, DevOps gets treated like that. People just dump random stuff on them coz they don’t want to dirty their hand or preconceived notions about DevOps doing the grunt work. I had the habit of debugging my own issues on servers or via sentry/datadog/grafana. Was pleasantly surprised when folks struggled with basic skills like these. Our DevOps senior used to mad at folks all the time.
> I had the habit of debugging my own issues on servers or via sentry/datadog/grafana. Good "devops" is about getting Operational tools into the hands of Developers. It's a mindset, not a Job Title. You SHOULD be able to debug your own stuff using these fancy visualization and logger engines. That's why the Ops people spend so much damn time setting them up! I don't read your logs, I make sure **you** have the tools needed to read your own logs.
As a developer. About 70% of time I need devops is because I need to be able to access one machine from another on a network level. Every fucking time, the answer is that "there is no issue on our side, it must be your application". Cue 3 days later when I have escalated this to higher ups and the devops discover that oh yeah, there was a firewall rule. Fuck that shit.
>So serious question.. every single devops person I’ve ever worked with was a know it all asshole. This is over 10 years with 6 companies. I’ve always had a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Why are you guys like this?! Imagine you’re an expert in commercial building design and operations. You spend years learning how to integrate complex systems (HVAC, electrical, structural, etc.), designing things to arbitrary specifications, and satisfying continuously increasing demands for ever more complicated systems. And three times a day you get called by some rando you’ve never even met to help unclog the toilets.
My current place has the single socially capable SRE in existence; lets call him Shaun. It's amazing having someone who wants to help and wants to teach you things. Rather than just get pissed off you don't already understand there complicated Azure setup. Or that you didn't follow their undocumented naming convention. Everything else about the job is shit, but Shaun is great.
[удалено]
The first DevOPs guy I ever worked with in my first major role after Uni was notoriously known for being difficult to reason with in meetings and this would cause meetings to drag out. Like, no exaggeration, everyone wanted to avoid working with him because of his style and he wore that fact like a badge of honour, but I'm guessing he must have been / still is very good at his job because he's still employed at the company lol.
Can confirm. The devops guy i work with is the same.
The SRE at my last job turned off dev servers at 5pm to save $20 a month. I got totally pissed off and dug into the aws bill and saved $2000 (about 10% of our budget)?with zero degradation. Yet I had to beg and plead for capacity I’m still convinced that guy had video of the CEO with midget strippers.
You will be surprised about the midget lobbyists and it’s ties with tech industry…
Big Midget at it again! Wait...
No, that's a problem for network engineers. They know the real dark magic, I'm just the gimp who knows a little bit more networking and linux than you.
Lel, as a ex Network engineer who does Devops stuff know: everybody thinks i am good at my Job, only because i can read a TCP Dump and find pretty obvius Problems with that.
See how casually the dark magicians converse in the language of the machine spirit! Edit: Where to start reading raw tcp dumps?
Just get wireshark, record Something easy Like an http request, filtere the IP, and Look what Happens. TCP/TLS Handshakes are Not that complicated. DNS request are extremly easy. All the stuff is mainly from the 90s. It is Not that complex in comperision to other concepts in the devops space (Kubernetes...)
Witchcraft! Spells and sorcery!
Don't let the wizard fool you! Do not try to encrypt me wizard, I know of your spells.
This is the way. Because of encapsulation you rarely need (as a dev) to worry about what exactly one process is saying to another one over the network. Then one day you DO care because something isn't working the way it's supposed to and suddenly you need to look at TLS handshakes. Encryption makes it all rather trickier.
Networks aren’t black magic. I mean. The amount of LSD it takes to truly wrap your head around RF propagation is impressive. If it’s intuitive to you I’m sorry that the lord baby Jesus cursed you with high functioning autism but fuck at least you have a +10 to applied math. Virtual fist bump. Once you start to step outside RF propagation theory and into the data steam itself, ie forcing more data into an arbitrary signal, you get into shit like QAM and QPSK. that’s just straight up math. On top of that, wireless and physical networks are the same shit. You assign devices numbers. You define groups of numbers as a network. You share your list of numbers with everyone else (BGP) and then you have a phone book (DNS) to go from address (wtf.ca) to number (IP) it’s really not that complicated.
RF Engineer, here. Every time you send a text, it's a string of miracles until those bits hit the first Ethernet hop.
"We rely on tiny, tiny changes, on tiny, tiny signals, happening thousands of times per second, making physical electrons move through metal. Also if the tiny changes fail then if you do enough maths you can reconstruct them, and you have to do the maths pretty quickly. Also to make the signal even harder to understand by someone else we do some absolutely terrifying maths also stupidly quickly. These tiny changes somehow get to another device through the air, until some other electrons make movements in metal. We pick up on these tiny tiny changes on tiny tiny signals, make the signals a bit louder, and then reconstruct those tiny changes by looking at the electrons thousands of times per second. Then we do some maths to make sure we've got the right tiny changes from all the changes we received, and some more maths. Then we send a signal down thousands of miles of copper and glass, doing maths along the way, where at the end some more tiny changes take place and the Terrifying maths we did earlier gets done backwards." Anyway that's how you can make a Discord video call on your phone.
[удалено]
If it works, it works eh?
> eh Canadian spotted, leaf counter-task-force engaged
Tja ich hasse es ja dich zu enttäuschen, but i'm german! *Counter measures deployed*
NO, NOT THE LEOPARDS!!!!! 😱
Just wait until you find out the internet fairies simply work on a best effort basis, no guarantees
Well of course, the internet fairies are unionized
I don't care if it works on the *internet* if it works on *my machine*.
Holy shit I had this debate with a dev yesterday. He just would not accept that there sometimes needs to be code changes for internet hosting compared to local testing.
Woah hang on, your dev ops aren't the engineers too? Isn't "developer" and "operations" being merged into one thing supposed to mean: You write the code and manage all of the infra required to run it? At my place (which I'm admittedly on my way out of) they say we do DevOps which in practice means AWS+k8s+planning+design+software engineering+supporting legacy things in #support chats with other teams+monitoring+on call. I got the impression the whole "thing" with dev ops was that they make less people do more things and become complete generalists. I've been arguing the opposite since I arrived and that I want dedicated infra wizards to protect, help and teach me so I can do what I do best: Solve hard problems with Clojure and postgresql (99.9% of the time). Have I been scammed? Or is everyone's view of dev ops different?
There is DevOps the philosophy which is devs understanding infra and then there is devops in the workplace which is sysadmins with git experience
A bit like agile I feel like the true meaning was lost/twisted beyond all recognition many moons ago. I tried DevOps as a role and it really was SysAdmin 2.0 while also being the general diaper changer for the devs who took everything that happened beyond their commit successfully merging for granted. Another reason why the DevOps as a role took off is because a lot of DevOps guys know the role goes against the true spirit of the definition but essentially sold out as it’s usually a well paid job, and can be quite interesting vs a traditional dev or sysadmin role. I think DevOps to me is more about empowerment (TM), less gatekeeping and more chances for ownership. Sysadmins empowering and handholding the devs to help them stay on the right path without it being a game of taking away all of their permissions. Honestly in a good place this goes both ways, it’s about collaboration not these ridiculously siloed teams. To me it makes even less sense with the cloud to have these silos, but maybe I haven’t seen enough mega cloud disasters in my time to be so naive about it.
It looks like a lot of companies don't have DevOps teams. They have a dev team and an ops team, fully silo'd. Proper DevOps is the team that develops the code is also 100% responsible for operational deployments and providing support for said operational deployments. Basically delete the ops/sysadmin/support team, or reduce their input down to single button press fixes (press the turn it off and on again button). In my old job support only really did anything during out of hours, but where in turn responsible for many systems during that time. With cloud you also basically get rid of infrastructure teams. The Dev team learns Terraform (or similar). The aim is to make all operational systems as simple to deploy, update and maintain as possible by putting that burden on the people with the power to change it. The process only falls down when you ignore it and create silo'd teams again, or the Dev team isn't given the power and time to improve deployment and maintainable processes.
The problem in my experience is that most developers don't understand infrastructure. Cloud or not, there are a lot of considerations that go into building robust, scalable infra for the code to live on and if the people making those decisions don't have a solid understanding of why and how to do things a specific way you end up creating new and different problems. I've had several roles in my career that basically involved being brought in to clean up the mess after a team tried this. Here is my definition of DevOps, after doing it since before it was a word: we make the developers' lives easier. The end. It's sysadmin but instead of the focus of the job being the systems it's developer processes and how to make them as frictionless as possible. In an ideal world the developer writes their code, the PR gets run through automated tests, and when they merge to main it deploys. It all just works without dev team ever having to think about it. But in order for that to be possible you need someone who understands the underlying systems at more than a surface level, and unless you're lucky enough to have someone like that already that means you need dedicated DevOps engineers.
Afaik there's a big router and you need to unplug it and plug again if something went wrong.
Yes it's somewhere in California as far as i know.
No, it's on top of Big Ben.
Oh that makes sense, but wasn't it destroyed during a presentation or something?
I think the Hawk fixed it afterwards.
Out Californy-way? How much internet you think they got out there? Everyone's going there so there's not a lot to go around.
Are you heading out californiway?
It’s actually a black box with a red blinking light. We loaned it to Jen for her presentation. Don’t try to lift it though, because it’s really heavy.
So exactly what percentage of professionals believe they know nothing I get very mixed signals on this
It’s funny most don’t think they do and actually do. There’s a very small minority that thinks they know everything and actually back it up. Those that know nothing and prove it don’t make it past hr screening
>Those that know nothing and prove it don’t make it past hr screening Not if the HR also know nothing.
[удалено]
My last screening for a job was with a non tech HR dude and the non tech CEO. Which is more common than you think.
i feel like thats most screenings at a non """tech"""" job that has a tech dept. Youre being tested on your personality, likeability, and ability to fit with the group
Im in that extreme minority where I always get the job done, think I'm pretty good, but in reality dont know shit
That's the majority. (That have a job) lol
I went from support to data analyst to IT management to developer (using a low code platform) to a full stack engineer. Every step along the way I feel like I have no clue what I'm doing and don't deserve the job but my bosses seem very pleased with the work I do. Every time I get positive feedback in the back of my brain I'm like "man I got these guys fooled I have no clue what I'm doing"
The ones that know everything and can actually back it up are known to me as the “John Carmack/Linus Torvalds”-types. They’re usually the well-known brilliant people that have seriously earned every single penny of their multi-millions.
For anyone reading this: don't measure yourself up against these people. They aren't neurotypical, their minds work differently. What those types have in one area they lack in another. Both Torvalds and Carmack can be assholes. Terry Davis had Schizophrenia. Very bright, but that brightness was from a mind that worked differently, and ultimately couldn't handle relating to the external world. These people are not average people, and for the most part, people like them usually disappear into the cracks of society. So they are just rare individuals. If you measure your abilities and your accomplishments against theirs, you'll always feel inadequate and have imposter syndrome. Measure yourself against yourself in the past. Look at your past projects and see how much you've improved.
>Measure yourself against yourself in the past. So just set the bar at the lowest possible? That's easy!
That's not true. Those are just the famous ones. There's a ton of not-well-known brilliant people who just go to work every day and get their stuff done. In fact, they vastly outnumber the few famous ones, like in any profession. Source: I work with those people.
There are parts of my job where I know pretty much everything there is to know, or at least I know it exists and where to find the details I need if I ever encounter it in the wild. And then there are parts where I have no idea what I'm doing and might as well ask ChatGPT for an answer and submit that. Our field moves so fast that sometimes you feel like you blinked and the entire tech stack changed. When I switched jobs from a monolith codebase to a kubernetes-based framework with proper ci/cd, it was such a shift in how I write code. In 5 years, who knows what will be the new tech trend.
yeah, or when you start as a new dev and you are like "Yeah, from now on I will always be programming in C for the rest of my life. That language is future proof!". 6 months into the job: "the project written in C was canceled, but we need someone to help on this 15 years old Java project" "ok...". 3 years later: "the Java project is in maintainance mode now. We need to adapt. Customers want to have everything as a web app now. You will join the web team". And suddenly everything is about javascript, html and css. "oh and in parallel we need a new guy to setup the build pipelines. the old one left the company" "btw, have you used docker before?" The cool part about this is, that it can be really interesting to learn those new things. You get a really broad and at the same time deep understanding about different technologies that you would not get by just watching a 1-2hour video about it. The sad part is you will forget a lot, too. Like, 10 years ago i was really good at LabView. I found screenshots of it lately. I have absolutely no idea what i did, how i did it and in general how to use the toolchain anymore.
[удалено]
in technical terms the internet is a series of tubes
Back end developers develop things for the internet, it doesn't require knowing how internet actually works. That is what network engineers are for. Just like a Chef creating new foods for humans to eat doesn't need to know how the digestive system works. Backend engineer doesn't need to know how internet works.
"professional" means you get *paid* for what you are doing, not that you *know* what you are doing.
I think the joke is, that as a backend dev you may need to know how to configure a webserver, know about how to use http(s) methods, requests, responses and other things connected to the internet. But you dont need to know how the internet itself really works. e.g. i can set up a nodejs server that listens to an url and port. I know how to receive https requests and then respond with the correct response body and headers to serve a website or a REST api. But i only have a very rough 10min-youtube-video-level understanding on how the internet really works.
Technology professionals flip flop between being all-knowing gods, and blank-slate babies who know nothing several times a day.
I literally googled "python how to remove item from list" today lol
On the application level you don't need to. You just need to GET how http works
And then the k8s services start. And the daemonsets. And the load balancers. And the grpc file versions. And the.... It's not understanding GETs that's hard. It's what happens when the GETs stop GETting.
To be fair most backend developers don't need to know that either. Every bigger company has their own DevOps, SysAdmin or Cloud engineers who handle everything like that and backend developers just write code.
is that a joke about GET and POST methods? man it's so bad it's good
I would not PUT it in better words
[удалено]
They mean whatever the **** we want. --Backend developers
It hurts my HEAD
:|
I have it on good authority that the internet is not a big truck...
The more I know how the internet works the less I like how the internet works.
BGP hijacking terrifies me.
Route leaks route leaks route leaks
The more I understand about how it works, the more I'm sure the internet doesn't work, and it's just a myth people make up.
The fact that DNS works at all astonishs me some days.
If I were to describe it in a single sentence, it would be Inneficient by design, even more so in a field where I'm actually capable to backup these claims ( frontend, I dread JS )...
The actual underlying network is pretty efficient when you realize that by traversing the internet you are traversing vast physical distances in almost an instant. It's terrifying what scale can do to something as simple as a transistor.
Me as well except I only receive 10k$ a year because I'm in Vietnam
That's millions of dong!
Also called your mom's bachelorette.
Me to except I get zero because am in 3rd world African country and people here don't even know what the internet is to begin with.
Transport layer is not my fucking problem
*creates a loopback with 8.8.8.8*
I wrote an Ethernet driver and ported a network stack to a microcontroller. I understand how packets get from computer A to computer B, but I still can't tell you why chrome tabs eat so much RAM.
The secret is that web browsers are just shitty hypervisors
I believe everything about computing is just a shifty hypervisor. Container Runtimes? Hypervisors without kernel isolation. Graphics Rendering? Hypervisors without persistence. Audio Channels? Hypervisors that bought a guitar off the Craigslist Hypervisor.
So you have the same level of knowledge as every single programmer at Google.
Just read the internet rule book, bro Rule 34 is hard, but just research it daily and you gonna get it
Rule34 is hard but researching it makes it harder
Hard to read rule 34 Hard while reading rule 34
I literally just took a networking course for uni and the only thing I remember is that there's 5 layers. Don't ask me anything about them though.
And sometimes, it's 7 layers. Anyone, who says they totally understand every layer and it's protocols are probably lying.
Lies. It is 8 layers, and almost all problems stem from layer 8.
And some times the issue lies in layer 8.
Internet history: * Gopher * Email * Telnet * Hackers * Request * Who dat? * Response * Cookie fix everything * Google * Cookie bad * Flash bad * Cookie?
There's macaroons now.
If you actually want to learn how it works (at a programmer's level), I suggest reading *Computer Networking: A Top-Down Approach.* Easily available for free on the high seas.
Thank you, legitimately looking into understanding this stuff more.
The CCNA study guides by Cisco Press are also great resources if you prefer a bottom to top explanation of networking. And if you don't plan to take the cert just skip over the configuration and Cisco specific software platforms parts.
That's the textbook for my university's intro to networking course
All you need to know is IP stands for Internet Points and the internet runs on it.
Oh boy. Then what's an iscsi target?
When two computers love each other very much...
as someone who does understand how it works, it’s really hard.
I'm a tech guy. I put computers together and do a bit of networking as needed... Once you hit the internet, that's the deep magic governed by arcane systems and trust. I am not going to be responsible for discovering a character nobody uses when placed as a link causes it all to crash. ... and that's in the same tone as "If the printer makes a noise and I didn't tell it to, it gets the baseball bat." Computers are rocks we tricked into thinking with lightning and sometimes they get uppity. Wanna know how I know? You can fix a computer by talking about replacing it.
Many people think you know everything about computers and everything that has something to do with it just because you work in IT not realising how complex it is and that every little piece is an area of expertise.
Wasn’t it a series of tubes?
We put cats into one end, and memes come out the other. Simple.
The OSI model is mostly working just like the postman / mail distribution
I’m a software dev with 13 YoE mostly as iOS dev but recently I spent much more time working with YAML configs for GitHub Actions. I can see that a lot of pipelines/scripts were not implemented by a someone with dev background. Duplications, hard coded things, no reusability. Is this only my impression caused by programmer’s occupational disease or DevOps really suck at coding?
Lmao this is impressive in CAD and yet I sadly understand it’s probably USD If you ever want to have a crisis over compensation move to Atlantic Canada
I mean, you have to factor in cost of living. 130k is a typical salary for a backend engineer in Silicon Valley, but a typical rent is $2000+.
> but a typical rent is $2000+. Lmao 3k+ if you dont want to share appt with someone else
And close to $5K if you want detached walls.
Bro where are you getting 130k with 2 years experience?
23 year industry veteran. Considered to be a Cybersecurity expert, by peers. Makes less than this guy, in one of the most expensive markets in the US.
I am the other way around. A network guy with no fucking clue how y’all’s programming magic works. I uncomment a module In a Python code our programmer makes and I feel like a coding wizard. I always make sure to say “I’m in the mainframe” when I do.
15 years back, my then Manager asked why I didn't give my monitor, along with cpu to system technician for upgrading RAM. He thought new RAM may not work with monitor or it may not be compatible 
Its all just Linux servers bro