【Hacker News搬运】小心旋钮

[hackernews]

Title: The carefulness knob

小心旋钮

Text:

hn link

Url: https://surfingcomplexity.blog/2024/10/29/the-carefulness-knob/

很抱歉，由于我无法直接访问外部链接，我无法直接抓取和分析该网页的内容。不过，我可以提供一个基于该链接标题和一般文章内容的推测性总结。

标题：“The Carefulness Knob”可能指的是关于“细致程度”或“细心程度”的比喻，这可能是一篇关于个人成长、工作方法或心理学主题的文章。

以下是一个基于标题的推测性总结：

---

在《The Carefulness Knob》这篇文章中，作者探讨了细心程度在个人生活和职业生涯中的重要性。通过一个有趣的比喻——“细致程度旋钮”，文章可能说明了如何在日常决策和任务执行中调整我们的关注细节的程度。作者可能提出，适当的细心可以提升工作效率，增强解决问题的能力，同时也能提高个人生活质量。文章还可能讨论了如何培养和保持细心，以及过度关注细节可能带来的负面影响。通过实例和心理学研究，作者鼓励读者认识到细心是一种可以通过练习和意识提升的技能。

请注意，这只是一个基于标题的推测性总结，实际文章的内容可能会有所不同。

---

如果您需要对该链接指向的具体文章进行翻译和分析，您可以使用在线翻译工具将内容翻译成中文，然后再进行阅读和分析。

Post by: azhenley

Comments:

hinkley: I’ve been in this industry a long time. I’ve read Lying with Statistics, and a bunch of Tufte. I don’t think it would be too much hyperbole to say I’ve spent almost a half a year of cumulative professional time (2-3 hours a month) arguing with people about bad graphs. And it’s always about the same half dozen things or variants on them.<p>The starting slope of the line in your carefulness graph has no slope. Which means you’re basically telling X that we can turn carefulness to 6 with no real change in delivery date. Are you sure that’s the message you’re trying to send?<p>Managers go through the five stages of grief every time they ask for a pony and you counteroffer with a donkey. And the charts often offer them a pony instead of a donkey. Doing the denial, anger and bargaining in a room full of people becomes toxic, over time. It’s a self goal but bouncing it off the other team’s head. Don’t do that.

hinkley: 我在这个行业工作了很长时间。我读过《用统计学撒谎》和一堆塔夫脱的书。我认为，说我花了近半年的累计专业时间（每月2-3小时）与人们争论糟糕的图表，这并不夸张。而且，它们总是有六种相同的东西或变体<p> 细心图中直线的起始斜率没有斜率。这意味着你基本上是在告诉X，我们可以把细心变成6，交货日期没有真正的变化。你确定这就是你要发送的信息吗<p> 每次经理们要求一匹小马，而你却用一头驴还价，他们都会经历五个悲伤阶段。图表上经常给他们一匹小马，而不是一头驴。随着时间的推移，在一个满是人的房间里否认、愤怒和讨价还价会变得有毒。这是一个自己的进球，但却从对方的头上反弹了出来。不要那样做。

PlunderBunny: I like the idea of having an actual 'carefulness knob' prop and making the manager asking for faster delivery/more checks actually turn the knob themselves, to emphasise that they're the one responsible for the decision.

PlunderBunny: 我喜欢拥有一个真正的；小心旋钮；支持并让经理要求更快的交付；更多的检查实际上是自己转动旋钮，以强调它们；你对这个决定负责吗。

AnotherGoodName: Fwiw in a real world scenario it'd be more helpful to hear "the timeline has risks" alongside a statement of a concrete process you might not be doing given that timeline. Everyone already knows about diminishing returns, we don't need a lesson on that.

AnotherGoodName: 在现实世界场景中；d听到会更有帮助&quot；时间表有风险&quot；同时陈述一个具体的过程，考虑到这个时间表，你可能不会这样做。每个人都知道收益递减，我们不知道；这方面不需要教训。

klabb3: It’s not the right approach. Structural engineers shouldn’t let management fiddle with their safety standards to increase speed. They will still blame you when things fail. In software, you can’t just throw in yolo projects with much lower “carefulness” than the rest of the product, everything has maintenance. The TL in this case needs to establish a certain set of standards and practices. That’s not a choice you give away to another team on a per-feature basis.<p>It’s also a ridiculous low bar for <i>engineering</i> managers to not even understand the most fundamental of tradeoffs in software. Of course they want things done faster, but then they can go escalate to the common boss/director and argue about <i>prioritization</i> against other things on the agenda. Not just “work faster”. Then they can go manage those whose work output is proportional to stress, not programmers.

klabb3: 这不是正确的方法。结构工程师不应该让管理层为了提高速度而篡改他们的安全标准。当事情失败时，他们仍然会责怪你。在软件中，你不能只是以比产品其他部分低得多的“细心”投入yolo项目，一切都有维护。在这种情况下，TL需要建立一套特定的标准和实践。这不是你在每个功能的基础上给另一个团队的选择<p> 对于<i>工程</i>经理来说，甚至不了解软件中最基本的权衡，这也是一个荒谬的低门槛。当然，他们希望事情做得更快，但之后他们可以升级到普通老板；董事，并就<i>优先级</i>与议程上的其他事情进行争论。不仅仅是“更快地工作”。然后，他们可以去管理那些工作产出与压力成正比的人，而不是程序员。

lcuff: I did a lot of the work in my 40 year software career as an individual, which meant it was on me to estimate the time of the task. My first estimate was almost always an "If nothing goes wrong" estimate. I would attempt to make a more accurate estimate by asking myself "is there a 50% chance I could finish early?". I considered that a 'true' estimate, and could rarely bring myself to offer that estimate 'up the chain' (I'm a wimp ...). When I hear "it's going to be tight for Q2", in the contexts I worked in, that meant "there's no hope". None of this invalidates the notion of a carefulness knob, but I do kinda laugh at the tenor of the imagined conversations that attribute a lot more accuracy to the original estimate that I ever found in reality in my career. Retired 5 years now, maybe some magic has happened while I wasn't looking.

lcuff: 作为个人，我在40年的软件职业生涯中做了很多工作，这意味着我有责任估计任务的时间。我的第一个估计几乎总是&quot；如果一切顺利&quot；估计。我试着通过问自己&quot；来作出更准确的估计；我有50%的机会提前完成吗&“；。我认为a；true；估计，我很少能给出这个估计；沿着链条向上；（我是个懦夫…）。当我听到&quot；它；第二季度将会很紧张”；，在我工作的背景下，这意味着&quot；那里；没有希望&quot；。所有这些都没有使谨慎旋钮的概念无效，但我确实有点嘲笑想象中的对话的基调，这些对话使我在职业生涯中在现实中发现的原始估计更加准确。退休5年了，也许在我不在的时候发生了一些神奇的事情；我不看。