berkay

It's not clear to me why they booed him. you think for only asserting predictions that benefit him? Not because they agree on those predictions and don't want that future, blame him for this role in it?

I really thought that this was unintentional. It's hard to believe that you think this is fine to do because one can opt out. Take it for whatever it's worth, this is not OK. It is really bad. You want people's data to help you make your product better? Make it opt in and ask for their help.

I like the separation of planning and execution. I think the right set of artifacts to pass on to the execution will evolve but may be it's different for different types of work.

From the project: "The plugin enqueues the input and a daemon picks it up - planning, building, reviewing, and validating autonomously."

The part that is not clear to me (and causes most problems for me) is the "validating". It makes a mistake, or decides mocking an interface is fine, etc. declares success and moves on to the next. The bigger the project the more small mistakes compound. It sounds like the agent is doing the validation. What's the approach here for validation?

In Great Automatic Grammatizator by Roald Dahl was one of the stories that stayed with me through the years. In the story, there is a machine that can write stories, replacing authors but they were at least paying real authors to use their names. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Automatic_Grammatiza...

Foresight does this if you're using github actions for CI. https://www.runforesight.com/test-gap-analysis (disclaimer: one of the founders)

@cebert Have you looked at us serverless specific solutions like Thundra (my company), Serverless.com, etc.? I think the cost for use case may be order of magnitude lower since the pricing is only based on number of invocations.

What if it was easy to see why a test is flaky, compare failed/successful test runs like a code diff? Would that be useful? This is what we're building at Thundra (foresight product), instrument the tests as well as backend services to enable devs to quickly diagnose failing/flaky tests. Would appreciate any feedback you may have, here or privately.

This happened to me as well. I wanted to share how we dealt with it was it was different from most comments here and may be useful to you. We paid. My company was sued along with few multi-billion dollar companies. I only found out because one of their lawyers called me as they were planning to fight back and wanted to check whether I wanted to join forces.

I found a good patent attorney and explained the situation. After learning that we were a small company with less that $500K revenue that year, bootstrapped and only had couple hundred thousand dollars in the bank, he suggested that I talked to the patent trolls lawyers by myself without a lawyer first. His rational was that they were not really after us as we were small, and once they learned that, they would either drop it or ask for a small amount to settle.

I followed his advice and had a call with them and it went exactly as he predicted. Upon learning that our US revenue was only few hundred thousand dollars, they asked $30K to settle and sent me an agreement. He reviewed the agreement for us, and recommended that we settle. We did. It was a ridiculous patent yet all of the companies that were sued settled as well. The experience was traumatic and was one the main reasons I decided to raise money from investors later. I slept better knowing that we had the funds to fight lawsuits if need be. Patent lawyer was happy to take the case if we needed to, but warned us about how expensive it would be.

Given that you're a single person company, you're likely small fish for patent troll. The best option for you may be to let them know that and see what they do. Best of luck!

Good point. There are also some software solutions (picus security, etc.) that tests your validates whether your environment is exposed due to specific CVEs. It's a good way to prioritize which vulnerabilities that you should tackle first.

"Apache 2.0 with Commons Clause"

They are free to choose whatever license works for them but this reference to Apache 2.0 is problematic.

Analogy does not work here and is misleading. You cannot do much if anything with 20 most representative pixels (if there is such a thing) but you can infer highly valuable characteristics about the person. Yes, you cannot recreate the original data but what you end up is potentially much worse (sensitive/private) than the original data.

Yes it's very common to rent from a company rather than individual landlords. Some of these companies are massive managing hundreds of thousands apartments. Many of the building are specifically built as rentals and all units are for rent hence there is often a leasing office somewhere in the building.

You can select a method and see the logs generated for that method. Idea is to have all the information - request parameters, return values, logs, metrics all in one place to make it easier to troubleshoot problems.

"I think all of the above features can be implemented in a few weeks by a small team. " how to trust the rest of the article after reading this?

multiple is highly dependent on the growth rate, and makes no sense to talk about it without knowing how fast the company is growing. $100k/year growing 100% is very different than growing 10%.

You can use snagit from techsmith for this. It supports saving as an animated gif and can upload to number of places like screencast.com directly from the product which generates a URL that you can share.

It's not that we should not do what you're suggesting but clearly we're not able to due to political differences. I'm suggesting that we may need to take a different approach to tackle the problem that considers political realities. Trying to reduce the carbon emissions is not the only way to address the climate change, many people argue that it may no longer be sufficient anyway. Suggestion is to focus on the fact that it's happening and try to find ways to reverse it, mitigate it's impact etc.

Is it really? Would it not be easier to find consensus (hence more productive) if we were to focus on whether the climate is changing (and not why)? Determine what the impact of the climate change will be and how we should address this problem?

I feel most of the discussions on this topic miss the fact that the most critical challenge is not what will happen when machines will be able to do all the work, rather it's whether we'll survive the transition. Even a small increase in unemployment can cause significant social unrest, all kinds of dangerous politics, trigger wars, etc.

This is exactly how we use the chat and have few dozen conversations per day. Most (not all) initial conversations are pre-set but if you reply, you'd get a real person, including one of the founders. The email is asked when no one is available to engage within few minutes so that we can get back to the person.

Forget about whether IRC can do everything that Slack does. I can give you number of reasons (many already have in this thread and others) but it does not matter. Millions have decided that it is better for them. We can either decide they are all dumb or choose to throughly understand why they choose it.

I think that understanding why people prefer Slack over IRC is an excellent exercise for developers. I am highly doubtful that one can build software for non-developers without understanding this.

"Like lambdas, it can be a complicated concept to learn, but once you unlock this in you code, you write less code and accomplish more"

With the caveat that anyone who may be maintaining/using/enhancing your code will also need to be able to "unlock" this. Keeping the language simpler has benefits beyond the initial code development.

Well articulated. Clear description of what pushes us to become more and more cynical. I find it far easier to empathize with you than the author. It did not feel justified (based on the article).

I hope that it does not have to be this way. I hope we can create companies that strive to be better. Culture does not have to mean one has to put the company above everything else. Making the environment that we spent most of our lives better requires more than nerf guns and ping pong tables. Having meaning and identity outside works in essential. I just don't want to give up the working hours. May be I have not been fooled enough times ...

Cynicism is fairly easy, defining the alternative is harder. For example based on what you describe the characteristics of what makes the startup culture "like hell", it sounds like you prefer that work should be nothing more than an exchange of your labor for money, you don't interact with your colleagues other than work, company to not have a defined mission and values other than making money. A hired gun to do whatever we're paid to do. That's also definition of hell for many of us. I don't know whether the author has anything constructive in his book but judging what's in the article, looks like it's pure snark.

You can get a self hosted HipChat for the group chat.

We chose not to do so, but I can tell you why you'd move to non-public pricing (at least have a non public pricing tier).

As much as people love to blame vendors, this is mostly due to dysfunctional nature of the large enterprise buyers. They are addicted to discounts. First the buyer contacts you asks for one then after everything gets said and done done, procurement gets involved and ask for more discounts (seen as their job). Having listed pricing becomes a problem when going through such process, so most vendors either choose not to publish their prices, or have a tier for the enterprise that is not published.

You may be right in theory but way off in practice. MS for example accepts the emails and dumps them. It does not even make it to users' spam folders. So they don't know and we don't know. We only send emails that customers pay us to receive yet email no longer works. This is not how internet supposed to work. Spam is a major problem and as it is often the case the defensive measures cause just as much, if not more, problems.

It's still a problem even if it's not the internal monitoring system. Customers use CloudWatch to detect problems with DynamoDB and get notified. This dependency means customers may not get notified if CloudWatch does not work as expected due to a DynamoDB problem.

Can't agree more. I can't figure out why this is possibly the case. Similarly I have lots of that I have seen (and rated in Netflix) presented on my home page. Why? I don't even have an hypothesis. Netflix also don't have trailers, which means I have to go to IMDB or Youtube to see a trailer.

It would be useful to search across companies for a job title