Not a designer, but for me it would help if breaks were distinguished visually from exercises–both types of screens look the same.
A different background color, font, or something visual in addition to text clues would go a long way for me. I definitely paid more attention to the timer & beeps on break screens than the text.
Not wanting to help juniors so they're left to struggle the way you did seems incredibly devoid of empathy. I could describe my career the same way you have, but mentoring juniors is now my favorite part of the job. When you were a junior, would you have been satisfied regurgitating a senior's answer without understanding it, or would you have wanted to learn? If you were into learning, why assume nobody else will be?
When pairing with juniors, I avoid directly solving problems for them as much as possible–lessons tend to stick better when you ask leading questions and let them discover solutions for themselves. Perhaps this technique would also work to filter out "lazy" questions.
Working with a mix of super competent developers at all levels has really driven home for me that everyone is better at something, and worse at something, than you are. I've learned lots of new things from developers with less experience than me. I've also worked with many devs with senior titles who were worse off than most juniors.
Ultimately it's okay to find mentoring unenjoyable, but if this describes you, please stick to teams with most/all seniors and don't agree to mentor even if pressured. Attitudes like this can really exacerbate imposter syndrome for juniors, and I've seen it damage several careers.
I'm not sure how not wanting to deal with juniors is devoid of empathy, much like not wanting to look after children isn't either. In either case, I don't see how a high degree of empathy is a prerequisite for technical excellence at any level. Leave the feelings at home.
When I was a junior, I would have been greatly satisfied by more time and attention from seniors, as I would be today grateful for more time and attention from people in differing specialities, where I am quite junior. We do however live in the real world, where these people's time is extremely valuable, and I wouldn't dare disrespect it by asking them trivial questions. I would value 10mins of their time and the context switch they pay to help me on the order of days of my own. And if I do resort to bothering them, I do so with an attitude of utmost humility, akin to digital dogeza.
I get frustrated when folks fail to do any of this. I regard is a breach of professional etiquette that unfortunately seems all too common. I've found myself responding "Try harder" or "LMGTFY" to these sorts of inquiries, which is about as polite as I can muster.
> everyone is better at something
It seems that this would be trivially easy to prove false, and very difficult to prove true. I've certainly met developers with nothing uniquely useful to contribute, in spite of best attempts at coaching them.
> imposter syndrome
I'd like to note that I'm actually extremely forgiving of mistakes, even very expensive ones, so long as they're honest. We all make them, and it's really on me to ensure that processes are in place and enforced to prevent the most critical sorts of them. But you don't know what you don't know. It's more the "I'm a baby, please hold my hand" attitude that I'm frankly somewhat disgusted by. If that describes (hypothetical) you, then perhaps some imposter syndrome is in good order.
I wouldn’t want to work on a team with someone who has such an attitude. I’m very grateful to work in an environment where we all want to help one another. This really reminds me how good I’ve got it.
I hope they revert this; the columns visualized decidedly different metrics (personal projects vs community contribution) and each was useful in its own right. Pinning each section separately would have made more sense.
Ditto—I feel like this is more optimized for the use case where people don't have 'personal' repos and want to give more weight to contributions to other projects.
But what it does (imo) is make it look like someone who's only ever submitted one patch to any project be able to put that project as one of their primary 'pinned' projects. So now it's harder for people to tell if something like whether I am a primary contributor to the `ansible/ansible` project, or if I'm just sticking it in my pinned list for vanity reasons.
Same, the 2-column layout shows twice as much info and separates your personal repo's with the repo's you're a major contributor to - hope they provide an option where we can out-out of this change, showing most popular personal repo's and repo's you contribute to was just fine the way it was.
Depends, IMO. I got a few projects which I for various reasons (simplify collaboration, or have a neutral home, amidst multiple parties (me, research group, few virtual orgs etc)) forked off into separate github orgs, but still was the main developer for. Then, the separation didn't feel optimal.
