What's really weird is supposedly the market is on a bull run, the economy is doing great, and technical talent is in demand, yet the tech job market is absolute shit. I'm thinking I might get laid off or fired next year and my top option is probably working some $50k/yr help desk position after about 13 yoe, a masters, certs, etc. Those seem to be the only legitimate tech ads in my area. Of course for $25/hr I could potentially work for Costco or Chick-fil-A and do just as well.

If you are a software dev, have a masters, have DB knowledge and can write scripts, you should look into non-tech companies.

I am a fullstack dev, and can solo support and write software for a mid size company. We plan on getting a junior or another dev soon. We will definitely be paying a junior minimum $60k+ and expect nothing but learning first year. We are in a MCOL area, so this is about average. WLB is good. No on-call.

I would hire someone with more experience, and even with FAANG experience but I would be worried they would leave a job that only pays $100k in the next FAANG hiring cycle.

Maybe we need a job board for devs who are trying to get out of the tech space and work for nontech, trading top salaries for flexibility and relaxed work environment.

I'm already at a non-tech company. That's part of the problem. They say F U IT division since you're a cost center.

This is EXACTLY what I'm looking for after 20 years experience. 100% willing to trade top salary for a life.

If it is, they totally missed the mark as I'm not seeing the electronic components and stuff that are the only reason I ever used Temu in the first place.

Temu is like the most downloaded app on Google play, fair to say most users aren't buying electronic components. They're buying clothes, cutlery and cookware.

I think we need to define the problems.

It sounds like the industry changed. Get business processes or business data requirements first. What do they want to keep, change, get rid of, or add?

Template out your business objects and data structures. On the topic of a single DB... I wouldn't. Unless your clients are sharing data, that's just a huge security risk to keep it all together with website accessible from anywhere.

Then make your changes gradually. I assume you have no tests to look at for requirements, otherwise that would be helpful. It might be possible to migrate some pages or functionality by pulling in the new stuff using some sort of hybrid routing or microfrontend.

Any way you look at this, these sorts of rewrites are painful.

Yep, we have a tech lead who has great code writing abilities. But he has terrible leadership, feedback, etc skills. He would be much better as a senior dev instead of a tech lead. I can't imagine how miserable his team would be if he was a manager.

Each department in my company can designate someone as a "critical man" so they can't change teams. However, those people usually get the highest possible ratings and raises. I've only seen it used maybe one time.

That's wild. If the disability is permanent, he should only need one note that says that.

Social Security says my disability isn't permanent and insists on revisiting the same stuff every 2 years. Oh, and if you live in Texas, the state of Arkansas does disability determinations for federal Social Security.

Usually the opinion is based in metrics and data. This one is not.

I had some meetings with HR before the rating came out. They didn't really address this lack of previously agreed to accommodations. Now I've reached out for further clarity since the rating came down and they have been radio silent for a week or two. As for how reasonable the ask was, it was just to have additonal coaching, like a 1-on-1 every week instead of every two weeks so I can get more pertinent feedback to make any changes. For 5-6 months, I wasn't even given the normal level of coaching eith fewer than one meeting per month. I've been documenting everything for a while now. I don't want to go the lawyer route, but I feel like I have too.

> 1-on-1 every week

That’s just normal to me.

Yeah, here it is every two weeks without accommodations (or supposed to be).

This place is doing other shady stuff. My previous meeting with HR was about expectations around work complexity. Internal postings and the external posting for this role state that this is for intermediate work of moderate complexity. There's another internal document that says medium to high work for this level. However, the grammar that is used suggests the high part is just so they don't have to promote you if you are doing some high complexity work. This is further supported by their example of a medium to high task - resolution of a production issue (I have several examples of this). I have a secondary role for 10% of my time and the guy that runs that says my work is medium to high complexity and is giving me exemplary feedback. Even my manager put that I have high productivity and completing satisfactory work for low and medium complexity work. He also said that we didn't have much high complexity work this year, so there was limited opportunity for it. None of it makes sense to me.

There's another guy on the team that is my level that was promised a promotion if he stuck around, but they reneged. Even my manager told me if I were on another team, I'd probably be promoted, but the department head was targeting me for a PIP earlier in the year for some unknown reason. So even without the disability part, what they are telling me isn't matching the policies.

I think it's burnout. A temporary solution is to switch teams within the same company. That can give you a change from your old scenery and problems, for maybe 6 months in my experience. Two weeks of PTO before the switch can help hit the reset too.

Can't you request a separate patent if you're making substantial improvements to it? No idea if that's what happened here, but I'm just saying it's not surprising that a new patent would reference old patents.

I assume that for most things the current tech is durable enough. If it needs to be more durable, going with cast, forged, or even mim metal instead of geometry changes would be better. If you really want geometry stuff, just design one yourself. Use three nozzles - a primary vertical down, two trailing secondaries opposing each other on slightly doward angles and slightly above the primary. Put all the nozzles on the same head but with steppers driving eccentrics to adjust height for each nozzle for areas where only a combination or single nozzle can be used. You'll effectively build a three layered wall with offset layers. Simultaneous printing allows better adhesion by row, and the staggered design provides increased interconnectivity between each strand.

The purpose of mentioning the older patents is to argue that they are not relevant as prior art. Whether that is true is another story.