HN user
Exactly. Not sure they understand how things work in Canada at all. If anything, average investors in Canada can more easily access investable assets compared to American counterparts. For instance, there is no pattern day trading equivalent.
Also (somewhat related), I don't think its a coincidence that Canada is a haven for financial fraud https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx51CffrBIg.
I definitely have no idea what "free market banking" is. Though, I think your statement is contradictory. Central banks control their money supply, and thus they are in direct control of the S in S&D. So I am not sure what it means to say that they don't think interest rates are subject to S&D.
I am quite certain they have an accurate high level understanding of the relationship between their supply, interest rates and inflation.
I would also like to point out that there are different types of interest rates. I am not sure what rates you suggest would be set by S&D.
Great job! Really cool solution here. I agree with the other comment that tqdm is simpler for iterables. Maybe see if you can abstract some of your logic to provide a wrapper function like tqdm does.
Respectfully, I see this as an oversimplification. Though, I can definitely understand why someone would say this and I do agree to some extent.
The thing is, I think there is a lot of subtlety in most implementations. Those subtleties come from unique requirements outlined by the client/business need/ or existing patterns.
As someone who has implemented a lot of CRUD functionality, I can honestly say there is very little code overlap between any two projects. Sure, the frontend calls the same CRUD endpoints. The backend essentially performs the same DB edits... but there's a lot to be considered before and after this. And no, it has nothing to do with just validation. It's about UX, performance, maintainability, extensibility, etc. All considerations when writing the code. When you're done the CRUD project, it's distinct. I think there's empirical evidence for this in the sense that the most we can abstract CRUD, is through CMSs. I've worked with a lot of clients that have great CMSs but still need to retain developers to support the CRUD ops and everything in between.
Is this the same type of "software engineering" employed as someone writing a custom backend for a electronic stock exchange? Likely not, though that's a whole other discussion.
I don't know much about the other solutions that people are mentioning in the comments, but I have to say... this looks elegant! Great job!
Yes, I can see how it may come across with a certain level of arrogance. Though I would say it's well intentioned based on the "mistakes" the author said he's made. It's been helpful to me for instance, to read about him getting over writing only "to document" and only when he "was told."