StephenJGL

This is a proven method of market discovery used by companies like Sony. If you watch Sony in early market entry they make a lot of different models. Then they let the market tell them which features sell. Then they collapse the models. Yes, it's expensive. It's also incredibly effective.

The system has actual complexity. Actual complexity can't be abstracted away without reducing functionality. I think git has a poor/opaque command semantics outside the basic functions and the API could use some work. I think that a new review or "most used/useful commands" and an evaluation of whether the API to accomplish them can be simplified.

I've run every one of my companies with some form of everyone participating at a user level regularly. Either through support or using the product. Each type of role gets something out of it. A k8s engineer can achieve more understanding of their mission and connection to how their seemingly siloed activity has a real world impact while more directly product focused roles might gain actual product insight. In my experience employees who genuinely care about what the company is seeking to achieve do gain something from the experience.

Delphi had an IDE and there were others. That's early 90s.

It might be even more jarring when a population two years from now is hit by a flu they didn't get almost any exposure to this year. There is a complexity here that is hard to wrap your head fully around.

It's possible that lockdown didn't reduce deaths. Excess deaths is a tricky stat because it contains so much underlying confounding inputs that all you know is that more people died than what you expected based on historical averages and that is --all-- you can get from it reliably.

These 3x calculations for cloud almost always ignore a real TCO calculation for a real organization and real app deployment and rarely compare capability, flexibility and recovery which have real value, but have tough calculations.

The "along" the spectrum part that most latch on to subconsciously is related to spectrums being a visual measure of energy level. That part does increase along the spectrum. That being said I think her interpretation is much more useful for the actual subject matter and important for people to keep in mind. People with actual diversity will often appear high and low functioning in various ways. It's important to understand that dynamic.

Dorsey is often directionally accurate even if you disagree with his approach, execution and tactics along the way.

News flash: they basically do.

Sounds like Hipsterism via social platform. Not trying to be unecessarily insulting. Just trying to identify the value. Reintroducing fleeting, ephemeral, scarcity of accessibility but but not in an arbitrary formulaic way in large scale tech platforms is interesting. It is inherently the value of "I found the band" and "oh yeah I liked cream cheese avocado salad on macaroni toast" sorts of things though.

It also may not.

It feels marketing driven. Like trying to make a thing. I haven't seen an actual change in consumer interaction with the web, which was a defining aspect of web1 -> web2.

I would recommend a Microsoft Sculpt if you want the split without the hassle.

Eh, back burner plans, or frameworks for years maybe. You undersell the pace of change at companies like Apple when driven by appropriate forces.

Complexity I don't have to deal with doesn't exist. Only if I really don't have to deal with it. We use BigQuery to report on 100s of terabytes of data. Behind the scenes it is massively complex. I don't have to deal with it. It's not meaningfully complex for me.

Very true. You have to understand the actual capabilities and your actual requirements. We work with petabyte size datasets and BigQuery is hard to beat. Our other reporting systems are still all in MySQL though.

Is it GitHub terms compatible?

Define "vulnerable" for children? Please. Using actual data.

Silly as it sounds I find Windows 11 new system sounds especially the console audible prompt when hitting tab in Linux to be one of the biggest improvements. It's no longer harsh, angular and error sounding but mildly melodic and has some soft shape. Sounds weird, but it's a major improvement.

This is true. Someone has to be the architecture person who can separate the actual complexity created by your requirements as they exist from manufactured complexity created by using architecture techniques that don't follow from requirements.

I agree with your disagreement. I've been in involved in web dev for 30 years. There is more moving parts, but IMO they better align with the actual complexity. This is likely only true for professional, production grade apps where the full range of concerns are in play such as security, maintenance, testing, migrations, scaling, etc. Deploying a simple app is more complex. For the apps I built I don't have to plan server purchases months out. I don't have to coordinate multiple apps on one machine. I don't have to worry about swapping out LBs and Firewalls as a nightmare connectivity issue. I don't have to scale file storage regularly. I can scale up service DBs as needed. All of that reduces total complexity.

Beyond that, in some instances even for simple apps there is less complexity once you know the technology. That's not complexity though. That's a buffet of useful options.

Good architecture decision are even more critical today.

I want to talk about code just enough to know you can talk about it. Then, I"m trying to find out if you're curious, knowledge seeking, and refining your craft. I expect everyone I hire to get better over time and on long timespans measured in multiple years these other skills win out over point in time knowledge. Unfortunately, really identifying curiosity and growth mindsets is also hard.

That's been the game in cameras for ages. They use the market to sift product configurations and then apply scaling to the ones that win out.

"morally agreeable in the small" is complex phrasing for "aligns with my bias"? Yes?

The process is the same as anything. Collect opinion and data and goals. Continue when the first two align to goals. Reevaluate when either doesn't.

It's living in the browser and this feature is mostly useful in complex CSS. Most definitely not a premature optimization.

Ahhh, hammer and anvil. The tools are different. They look different. The purpose and effect are different, but basically useless without the other in most circumstances.

The role of the US and Russia are inextricably linked at the end of WWII and to pretend either was irrelevant, or either "really did all the work", is to simply ignore history.

Neither are powerplants and corn fields.

I love the religious overtones on the post. All I can say is that the best option is probably to coexist.