Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I found your remarks about succession planning at around the 5:50 mark of the linked video:

[The software that makes the Internet work] is maintained almost entirely by volunteers, and those volunteers are aging. Most of them are older than my father, and we're not seeing a new cadre of people stepping up and taking over their projects, so what we're seeing is ones and twos of volunteers who are hanging on and either burning out while trying to do this in addition to a full-time job, or are doing it instead of a full-time job, or should be retired, or are retired, and it's just not getting the care it needs. And in addition to this, these people aren't always up to date on the latest techniques and security concerns of the day, and the next generation isn't coming up.

In context "should be retired" sounds awfully prescriptive, but I can see how that could mean something like "these volunteers want to retire but feel obligated to continue their maintenance duties".

Then at the 7:00 mark, you say:

It's a really tough thing because there's a certain amount of what I call functional arrogance involved... There's a certain point where you just have to say, "I'm going to decide that I'm in charge of this"...

I dunno. I can see where that's going to rub people the wrong way while at the same time seeing the value in having some moxie. I get the impression, though, that Stenn wasn't too happy with this approach.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: