Sounds like the CTO is right though? Why prioritize this? Surely there are way more important things to do. You are judging him for not thinking it’s important because you said so, that’s not strong argument.

No he was not.

The fix was a few hours, the customer called him regularly. The CTO had no understanding that a basic SQL Insert shouldn't take a second.

This fix smoothed all response times on all queries and that customer never called aabout this issue again.

That's how you chase efficiency/quality which is one of the CTOs responsibility. Small effort for huge gains are the most optimal changes.

Huge gains? What was the impact of this change, considering the only context that we have is that it was not important to the customer? Answer should be expressed in terms of cost, revenue, profit.

I don’t doubt the CTO was exercising poor judgement, but I do doubt that op was communicating his concerns in a way that was tailored to the audience

If the CTO was right about the premise it'd be fine, but much more likely he pulled the "everyone is happy with 1s" out of his arse and then used his position/authority to bully the team.

I agree that they should control for this, but I’m not sure if this correlation would hold. I suspect people who are healthy weight are commonly staying there partly by their diet containing low calorie versions of some items. Some things like soda are very hard to enjoy in their non-diet form without drinking a huge amount of calories, so I could see an argument for artificial sweeteners potentially being consumed more in weight conscious people.

I don't think there's anything wrong with asking for things that can be prompted. You still need to understand the why behind things, being able to reason about them and choose between options. How will you teach this level of understanding or certify them without exams?

Of course, not all testing is good, but the written exam has survived and proven useful despite the internet age, I'm not sure an even better search engine really changes that.

The company, not the individual

And who in the company do you propose should fix it

someone hired by the company to understand the application and fix the bug

ive inherited a lot of code

Fixing bugs is a great activity for new hires. Gets them familiar with the codebase.

This very much depends on the place and the level of maturity in how you share the negativity. Good managers will try to understand and help you, that's a large part of their job.

Also, if you are a high performer then being an attrition risk isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's in the companies best interest to try keep people who are important.

I entered a prompt, was then asked to sign in, signed in using Google, then had to choose a completely different prompt which I couldn't scroll through on mobile, for it to tell me I have no credits. I then opened a tab to Gemini and entered my prompt to get an image for free.

Thank you very much for trying the product and for pointing out the issues with the website. As a token of our appreciation, I have credited a certain amount of coins to the accounts of all trial users, including yours.

You’re welcome to come back and try it again anytime.

This is exactly the point OP is making, fans of pure stealth games don’t want you to be able to muscle your way through, that cheapens the experience.

It doesn’t matter that you think you only have time to mindlessly mash buttons, and it’s not about being realistic, it’s about a game doing one thing very well and not making it optional, it’s a particular type of puzzle to figure out.

> fans of pure stealth games don’t want you to be able to muscle your way through

Those fans don't want me to be able to muscle through, or don't want themselves to be able? The former is questionable logic at best so I'll assume the latter. The fan of stealth who plays a game that gives them the option to muscle through and chooses to muscle through is responsible for their choice. Don't blame games for giving you a choice, especially when they usually support and motivate one style or another with achievements, specialization trees, or meaningful choice-based narrative.

Stealth fans aren't upset the game gives them the option of violence, as most stealth games involve quite a bit of killing and disabling. So this is a pretentious distinction and arbitrary line coming from a very small but vocal minority, like complaining you can lower the difficulty in a game.

> It doesn’t matter that you think

See this here? This is the problem. You insist that it doesn't matter what I think in the same breath as telling me it matters what you think. The market is telling us both which opinion mattered. People overwhelmingly chose the games that are fun and give freedom of choice, not the ones that "do one thing very well". There's room for these too but there's a reason they're not super popular or common.

Your rule is describing this Friday, not next Friday.

Except on Friday's, when "this Friday" means today. On other days, many people indeed use "this" and "next" synonymously.

Perhaps this is regional? I would identify this Friday as the 15th, and next Friday as the 22nd. Next Friday always means the Friday after the next one, which I notice is insane as a matter of logic, but is the local usage I am familiar with.

> Next Friday always means the Friday after the next one

You're using "the next one" i.e. the next Friday, to refer to the first one after today.

Yes, next Friday is not the next Friday, those two phrases are very different despite that being weird.

Not endorsing this, just reporting from usage.

I suppose smart people can’t optimize for pure discussion? One of the most popular and easy to use messaging platforms seems like a reasonable choice.

If only they were as good at their job as you are.