BlargMcLarg

The software market shows the same issues in regards to expansion. Multilingual support? A pain. Systems? A pain. How do you consolidate the idea that it is 'easy' when market expansion shows the very opposite?

The US and particularly online cultures seem almost obsessed with drugs and I have a hard time believing it is only due to the taboo aspect of it.

>did a subathon where each new sub extended the time he continuously streamed by a little. He ended up streaming for 30 days.

This isn't really an achievement on its own when many big names stream every day anyway, and they draw huge amounts of money playing into psychological factors to do it. Subathons are predominantly just ways to prey on people's weaknesses and use hype to get more money and exposure. The quality of the streamer also suffers massively.

And that really shows the heart of it all: dark patterns, softcore sexual pandering and 'metas' have a strong hold on the market, leaving very little for what streaming used to be 10-15 years ago. Twitch being the biggest and having strong reinforcing mechanics doesn't help, either.

Because whether it is easy is entirely dependent on who you are and what perspective you look at it from.

If you're a nobody with average skills, see you in a few years with sub 10 viewers, maybe. A nobody with some particular skills, still going to take a while. Exploiting a niche as a particularly charismatic nobody, you'll break through maybe in a few months. Happen to strike rich with a few clips, there is your momentum to make it happen. The vast, vast majority falls in the first category.

Oh, you're already a somebody (500+)? Yeah just play the meta, sellout a few times a year and do what you want mostly. At that point you can do the bare minimum and make it work, as long as you don't self-destruct entirely. Or actually try and make it even more difficult for newer streamers while working to 7 figures. Bonus points, all the positivity will reinforce you to do special things. Almost any problem has a solution in the form of hiring a third party, drowning it out or ignoring it at this point.

Looking at the top makes it seem like the easiest job ever, and to a degree, that is true. Looking at it from the bottom, even retail seems better.

Small: having to deal with a long period of absolutely nothing and constant nagging that you may not be good enough / doing something wrong / etc. Most people do very poorly with prolonged periods of almost no feedback.

Large: dealing with managing large amounts of social relationships of a community which, let's just say, likes pushing a lot of fringe demands and just a lot of demands in general. Also having to be 'online' almost all hours, until the point you're big enough to ignore it and take the hit.

That's about it. Small streamers don't have communities big enough to have to worry about everything yet, even if they might. Large streamers have the means to be more akin to bosses of small teams than lone workers, offloading minor tasks and instead handling finances (which many still don't, at most having an editor). Large streamers (500+) are far more 'ingrained' than most commenters give it credit for: as long as your quality doesn't drop, you can coast by on what is a very free and easy job, selling out a few times a year. It's getting there that is the problem.

And for about any of the points mentioned, you could find a parallel with startups, bosses, freelancers, independent contractors, managers, etc. It's more the combination that is unique than anything else.

It's not 'every problem'. People know Windows. People understand most of Windows. They took years to do so, and they still run into problems. Now you ask them 'switch over to Linux, it doesn't have problem X', without understanding the average person doesn't want to invest the time or effort learning anything more complicated than downloading and installing a random .exe (why do you think phishing and malware are so prevalent in their infantile state?).

This is reinforced by most major apps which eventually become cross-platform starting out treating Linux as a 3rd class citizen. For games, Discord and Parsec come to mind, where the former took years, and the latter still doesn't allow hosting from Linux. Nothing about this reinforces the idea of Linux being easier to use. It's the opposite: it reinforces the mentality that Linux is still two decades behind, regardless what the reality may be.

How many complaints form when YouTube pushes a minor UI or UX change? Now multiply that by a few magnitudes of order. That is the problem we're dealing with, and no amount of chastising or belittling Windows users will change that (in fact, it does the opposite). Did people forget how Apple managed to get a foothold in the market despite their ludicrous prices and dev-unfriendly practices?

People keep saying this and then run into minor problems becoming bigger problems because frequently used programs end up being unusable or 3rd class citizen, behind both mobile and Mac users.

Unless Linux is braindead easy to use without frustrations, it won't happen. Gamers pay more for lesser ease of access increases.

So it's driven by men yet women are predominantly the instigators of divorce which causes that fear?

Don't think you can so easily pin one of the two as the drivers.

>GDPR says no.

GDPR isn't infallible. The EU and its individual countries have plenty of controversies.

>ton of challenger new banks.

Ton is a gross overstatement. It's a few that are truly independent from anyone else. The remainder are puppet / daughter banks.

Their existence barely influences the status quo and it certainly doesn't prevent outrage whenever banks used by over half the country's population threaten to fall.

It's not even months. People become incredibly risk-averse, need results, see what they want in 2 weeks and instead of the natural process (gain trust, be left to your own devices more), the reins are kept short and any short term mistake is blown out of proportions.

Worst is, this has nothing to do with short feedback loops and frequent releases. It all has to do with perception and how the method is used.

>after their solution took down the whole system in cascading failures because it was returning 500 due to the non-serverless database not scaling

Why is a single dev able to take down your entire system without intention?

>They can write quicksort but have no idea

So don't use quicksort or identical questions and ask them more.

Your entire anecdote can just as well be held as testament of how a company's process is completely fragile. Which is at least a yellow flag as to what else it is hiding.

You and GP both need to take a step back and consider the context since both of you seem to conveniently forget one very important thing: why would anyone get harrassed by software developers on LinkedIn as just another workerbee? Now multiply that by whatever factor you believe a software developer is a gorgeous woman. Maybe now it makes sense why people are skeptical.

With your line of reasoning, people would be defending phishing emails because "some representatives have bad grammar skills". Think of how lubricous that would be in a discussion on phishing.

I don't think intelligence or lack thereof is the problem. Rather, it seems people are paralyzing themselves by enjoying the endless discussions, stakeholder indecision, or boredom. All leading to these grotesque things which lack words in the right places, but have plenty in the wrong places.

The average web dev CRUD job isn't interesting enough to warrant that much intelligence.

I wish it was a meme. The things people complained about decades ago are still happening today, and the practitioners are all too eager to turn a 100 line program into a 1000 line one, while taking weeks to test if it does what it should.

The average loud dev is a GoF fanatic in love with inaccessible reflection. Double points if their tools are still stuck in a time where stack traces weren't extended to deal with such practices better.

And with everything being sliced into pieces: the fun has only just begun

The equivalent of our behavior in chimp world would be layoffs turning to execution, not removal from a job.

I'm sure someone educated enough to use the internet can argue in good faith and relativate what the human world equivalent of chimp behavior would be.

"Remember kids, discrimination is wrong, unless X" ~ practically every society in history believing they can determine X and would scoff at both their ancestors and predecessors.

Vice just having a little slip of the tongue and showing what's really up.

The average woman is fairly well treated and not at all like the average LinkedIn stalker, let alone a model. You're trying to bridge two related but different contexts

Yes and yes. We've done it in the past for millennia now, and we recognize some will not heed advice regardless. It's a battle between recognizing women are individual agents who can make mistakes and bear responsibility doing so, or seeing them more akin to children.

Frankly, it's a necessity given the opposite is either stripping away rights (no humanitarian person is in favor of that) or somehow squashing every would-be predator (good luck doing that without a massive false positive population). We already see the latter happening today and many are unhappy about it.

The same is answered to people in similar situations the moment they become adults. Either we revisit all of that or keep the status quo.

These reactions are primarily a kneejerk because frankly, Western mentality is much too eager to present their methods as 'the cure', presenting women primarily as victims and men primarily as perpetrators, without ever introspecting on the damage they do with their supposed methods.

Your reaction is almost synonymous to this, mainly showing fear women have, statistics for women, etc. Regardless if perpetrators are primarily men, men tend to be victims far more often than women, and far more often than they are perpetrators. For almost every country. Yet the narrative never reveals this, and goes as far as to make it sound like men are predominantly perpetrators (which is a vastly different statement than 'perpetrators are predominantly men').

Even writers who recognize this will quickly dismiss any notion that the West is introducing other problems through the methods used. That statement of 'men need much more civilizing'? That happened, and now boys are walking around thinking they are the problem before they even had a chance to prove themselves while girls are told they can do everything, even get way with (sometimes literal) murder. Western media is arrogant enough to denounce counterculture to boot.

Whether that be better than what is the current state in LA is irrelevant to those preoccupied with looking at the West alone. Doubly so since the situation is LA is generally irrelevant to them and won't ever affect them directly.

>it’s much more transactional anyway, which is what we want

We have an entire subpopulation of primarily men associated with a certain slur which suggests the opposite.

Correlated. Just like squares are correlated to rectangles.

Proof that T causes high aggression in isolation, in humans, thus far, has not been decisive. There is no consensus on this. Looking at the absence of the inverse (low T decreases aggression) would tip a few things.

Low T is associated with depression in men.

High T has not been proven to be higher aggression. Conversely, frustrated men are more likely to be aggressive, and frustrated men tend to have lower levels.

Bar chicken most meat consumption has gone down since the 70s, not up. Despite that, levels are still falling.

EVs are barely making a dent into the problem, even coupled with everyone going fully vegan (a pipedream). The economy still continues to occupy any new room available under "we must grow" incentive.

You'll die out with the others at this rate of token changes.

There is token research that creatine supplements are especially beneficial for vegans, and creatine isn't the only thing mostly found in animal-based foods. Given nutritional sciences has a history of being a rollercoaster ride, maybe it isn't the best idea to make wild claims which don't mirror how the world behaves at large.

Water and land usage is also A: grossly overstated (you can't grow anything except grass on most land) and B: cited as something against all meat when chickens, goats, ducks, geese and pigs use far less of both. At that point, substantiate or correct your statement to 'beef'.

Kind of sad "retail workers have it much worse" is what prevents people from taking action, though.

Your solution to a dumpster fire is to play a very risky game of hero, navigating an environment where at any point you could step on someone's toes, in hopes of salvaging a project for which there is absolutely no guarantee you'll get credit, let alone a sizeable reward, while the market is rife with opportunities. For a bunch of capitalists, not some noble goal.

Forgive me, but playing hero (really just martyr) sounds like the absolute least logical thing to do.

Your entire point revolves around the idea of coworkers ratting out and being smart enough to know. Not every place is so cutthroat and pro-employer this is a given.

The idea the manager would call out individuals is laughable too. Most managers barely know how to code themselves. Give it another few decades before your manager looking through commits is a standard, you're more likely to see alert tools be prevalent before that.

I cannot tell if you are aware you're setting devs up for failure or not. Half your mentioned metrics are tackled by hard forcing your devs to run branch CI prior to merging and giving them a slap on the wrist for not running CI checks locally pre-push.

If they are important enough to measure, why not hard force them and focus on the remaining metrics instead?