So, instead of finishing (or attempting to finish) the feature alone, and then working together, you work together initially, and finish the feature alone.

I prefer to turn this completely upside down with an initial burst of pair programming.

* You start the work with feedback
* Further work and polish builds on initial braintrust
* You sit together and synchronously ensure you think about the same problem

We solve for this with iteration velocity. We're not bogged down with tech dept mudballs, and are able to keep moving forward fast.

But there's a limit to how smoooooth we need something to be. Spending hours to polish something we'll later throw away will kill us for sure.

There was no real reason to have this as a repetable, so now we add the `create trigger` statement alongside the `create table` statement in our versioned migrations.

Very Plato dualism pilled

can't tell if it makes more internal or external. I think more external. It's "my" but it's also a separate outside thing that's not really you. "My brain" also ticks me off, as if that's some kind of atomic stand-alone entity

I also have a problem with things that is too much a thing. "My ADHD", or generally any "my" and a diagnosis, ticks me off. Like it has a spiritual life of its own.

XKCD 10k people every day etc. But clearly this team was heavily exposed to the issues with cross system comms over a network. They just didn't seem to care about the edge cases and the 1 of every 1000 operations that got botched.

Not sure what the sensible trade-off was in that situation.

reminds me of the good old Knuth saying about why he doesn't use e-mail:

> E-mail is a wonderful thing for people whose role in life is to be on top of things. But not for me; my role is to be on the bottom of things