Sergei Volodin

Staff Software Engineer at Indeed (Tokyo)

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

В условиях, когда в России принимаются всё новые и новые репрессивные законы, считаю важным делится частными историями релокейта, прохождения интервью и т.д.

https://t.co/UadaHFZ7Ir

#faang #собеседование #переезд #интервью

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

@Mirn_21 Элемент удачи всегда присутствует, но всё таки прохождение интервью в бигтех это скил и вопрос подготовки.

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

@Mirn_21 Ещё Woven by Toyota нанимает и tc довольно часто 20м+

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

@Mirn_21 Ну я тоже, стало конечно в среднем грустно, но даже с последними изменениями 30м+ в Indeed вполне обычно для senior+ должностей.

Плюс для high performer очень много исключений)

[David K 🎹 @DavidKPiano]

Everyone hyping loops right now is going to absolutely lose their minds once they learn about state machines

[Timur Shemsedinov @tshemsedinov]

Сейчас каждая неделя приносит новый инцидент со взломом с применением нейросетей. Выделите время, проверьте:
- все `dependencies` они точно нужны?
- в CI использовать только `npm ci`
- поднимайте свои dependency registry
- используйте npm install --min-release-age=7
- в pnpm делайте minimumReleaseAge: 10080 (тоже 7 дней)
- lockfile обязателен
- изменения зависимостей только через review
- добавьте `npm audit`, Dependabot и Dependency Review на PR
- npm scripts: `postinstall`, `prepare`, `preinstall`
- включите 2FA (двухфакторку) для GitHub/GitLab/npm/cloud
- включите secret scanning, push protection
- защитите ветки main/release: required reviews, no force push
- ограничьте Actions/CI permissions до минимальных
- не публикуемся из Actions/CI
- не давайте secrets в PR из форкнутых реп
- Deploy только из protected branches/tags
- включить backups и регулярно проверять restore
- AI-generated code проходит review/tests/scans
- AI tools не получают prod secrets/write access

[Grady Booch @Grady_Booch]

I am one of those whose research points to the conclusion that the mind is computable.

Sentience is an exquisite consequence of the laws of physics. I see no evidence that requires the supernatural; I find panpsychism to be a god-of-the-gaps fantasy; I see no requirement for any quantum pixie dust.

What I do see is that evolution has led the cosmos through billions of years of experiments and mistakes and failures, eventually bringing forth artifacts with intelligence, with consciousness, with sentience, with life itself, by growing and combining very simple things then morphing them into extraordinarily complex ones. An underlying challenge in all this discourse, of course, is that these words represent ineffable concepts that human language strains at and fails to define crisply, and so we end up talking past one another, with emotion rather than rational and informed dialog.

That notwithstanding, it is the ultimate hubris to conclude that only we humans can be conscious or sentient: a multitude of creatures living among us possess those properties to varying degrees (and we already treat multitudes of them with questionable ethical consideration). It is hubris to demand that the intelligence and consciousness and sentience we experience is its only form. It is hubris for we humans to assert that at this moment are at the cusp of building sentient artifacts. My understanding and experience suggests that while some individual elements are within our understanding, there are many others we do not know that we even know we need to know. Moreover, there exists a problem of systems architecture at extreme scale, and that we are a long way from understanding how to engineer that.

But I predict that some day we shall.

This is not that day, nor is it a day in the lives of any of this present generation.

I expect that embodiment will be necessary (all contemporary approaches are deeply impoverished with regard to building things in and of this world, with sensing and acting now only a tiny fraction of what organics experience in all its noise and ambiguity). I posit that in this journey, we will co-evolve, compelled to reconsider what it means to be human.

I know that we will find value from the things we create, but I also know that there exist fundamental and unavoidable risks that will harm us. I fear most the wealthy and privileged few who assert they alone know the way and should be trusted to bring humanity to this new digital promised land; I fear the organizations and nations who seek to use these things for greater power and control.

I suspect that some strive to build artificial super intelligence (because they want to be gods) while others reject the possibility (because they cherish our uniqueness).

And yet, I am hopeful, and confident in the resilience of the human sprit to endure, and in the end, be better for the journey.

What an extraordinary time to be alive.

[David K 🎹 @DavidKPiano]

@housecor Not language, but executable behavior specification (state machines, statecharts, formal models, etc)

Code is a lossy/noisy artifact of intended behavior

[colinhacks @colinhacks]

woke up happy, crashed out immediately because I remembered there's still no database that supports discriminated unions

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

Это вообще не про "систему", а про людей

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

Поработав в больших корпорациях, начинаешь понимать: микросервисы решают не столько архитектурную проблему, сколько организационную.

Их главная задача — не сделать систему “правильнее”, а дать сотням разработчиков и десяткам команд работать независимо друг от друга и ownership.

[Артём В @Vrklvch]

Системный дизайн надо начинать со слов - сделайте монолит, когда дойдёте хотя бы до 50% капасити производительности начинайте думать о том как будете оптимизировать монолит не изменяя архитектуру.
Большинству сервисов мешают криворукие разработчики и аналитики а не системный дизайн

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

@Vrklvch Возможно, не так понял, что имелось ввиду под "производительность" в исходном посте. Подумал, что речь про performance системы

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

@Vrklvch Это не про код вообще короче

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

@Vrklvch Поработав в больших корпорациях, начинаешь понимать: микросервисы решают не столько архитектурную проблему, сколько организационную.

Их главная задача — не сделать систему “правильнее”, а дать сотням разработчиков и десяткам команд работать независимо друг от друга и ownership.

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

@DavidKPiano I love this direction! The composition of machines and parent-child relation is a bit tricky and requires a lot of non-intuitive knowledge of xstate to wire it all together

[David K 🎹 @DavidKPiano]

Ironically this is probably the first time that actual humans are carefully & thoroughly reviewing the Claude Code codebase

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

Agents being agents

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

Неожиданный бонус жизни в Токио: смотришь аниме и видишь СВОЙ ДОМ

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

Отличная мысль, у меня наконец-то выстроился пазл (скорее правильно сформулировался), за счёт чего у некоторых людей конкурентное преимущество в жизни, при казалось бы равном или более низком IQ

[Andrej Karpathy @karpathy]

Agency > Intelligence

I had this intuitively wrong for decades, I think due to a pervasive cultural veneration of intelligence, various entertainment/media, obsession with IQ etc. Agency is significantly more powerful and significantly more scarce. Are you hiring for agency? Are we educating for agency? Are you acting as if you had 10X agency?

Grok explanation is ~close:

“Agency, as a personality trait, refers to an individual's capacity to take initiative, make decisions, and exert control over their actions and environment. It’s about being proactive rather than reactive—someone with high agency doesn’t just let life happen to them; they shape it. Think of it as a blend of self-efficacy, determination, and a sense of ownership over one’s path.

People with strong agency tend to set goals and pursue them with confidence, even in the face of obstacles. They’re the type to say, “I’ll figure it out,” and then actually do it. On the flip side, someone low in agency might feel more like a passenger in their own life, waiting for external forces—like luck, other people, or circumstances—to dictate what happens next.

It’s not quite the same as assertiveness or ambition, though it can overlap. Agency is quieter, more internal—it’s the belief that you *can* act, paired with the will to follow through. Psychologists often tie it to concepts like locus of control: high-agency folks lean toward an internal locus, feeling they steer their fate, while low-agency folks might lean external, seeing life as something that happens *to* them.”

[Sergei Volodin @vileven11]

Сейчас читаю, как Достоевский в «Записках из Мёртвого дома» описывает, как вино проносили в тюрьму, и понимаю, что схема с закладками существовала как минимум с XIX века.