YCode

I'm sure it depends heavily on your country, career field, age, income level, etc...

Most people I know were somewhere between surprised and jealous, more or less impressed that we were able to not go bankrupt with just me working and my wife at home.

Mothers especially told me they wished they could have stayed home when their children were young. I was shocked how many people I worked with had to go back to work days or weeks after giving birth.

Then again I'm a guy, so maybe it comes off as being a good provider versus taking the "easy" way.

Yes, it would have been nice if the title explicitly stated that... i.e., "Does anyone know why the TSA is now scanning paper?"

Definitely; I was thinking that earlier while reading this post. On the one hand, you have newcomers who might have an answer no one thought would work, but on the other hand experience nets wisdom that often is more accurate than the newcomer's logic.

It is a tough call to make between what's happened and what's possible.

That's a fair point, I guess it just outlived its set of standards.

Maybe. I don't know OP or his situation. Others had already mentioned taking a vacation so that seemed redundant.

I mentioned that first because it's easy to fall into a lifestyle trap and think the only way to cope is to get a job that makes more. The formula for money is income minus expenses, so you always have two variables you can play with.

It also makes a nice mental segue for people into the topic of getting a new job, a topic which people can be adverse to. It creates a choice that seemingly wasn't there before.

FWIW I wouldn't be so quick to turn your nose up at side gigs.

I have a friend who picked up an old vinyl decal cutter and now makes a significant amount of his income by selling custom decal stickers for cars and windows and such to local businesses.

Similarly my neighbor does lawn aerating in the spring and sprinkler blowouts in the fall and considers it a refreshing break from his work as a PM.

Small persistent holistic steps in the direction you want your life to move.

If you want more money look at where you can save money (not eating out, buying generic products, etc.) and things you might be able to do on the side to earn more.

Or if you rather start applying for jobs and seeing what else is out there. You don't have to find a job today, just start looking.

If you want to have more energy find an exercise routine that works for you and start eating more vegetables and less sugar/bread. Take time to meditate or at least relax and clear your head. It's likely there's something buried in your head that is causing you to be demotivated.

If it's your perspective that needs tuning work on rewiring your brain. Stuff like replacing "this is hard" with "this will take time" or learning to be okay with being wrong/weak and asking for help when you need it.

If your work isn't fulfilling maybe talk with your co-workers or supervisor to see what can be done to make it better. If that's not realistic, maybe your job actually does suck and you need to go back to the first paragraph.

For me personally, I find setting aside time to untangle my brain helps the most. Sitting someplace and working on a posture or breathing exercise and really just putting some distance between me and my problems for a little while.

Usually after that my problems seem much smaller and more manageable.

IANAL but Microsoft's obligations under that expired and I'm not sure if those arguments even hold up anymore or not. Windows isn't what it once was and for example downloading a browser is no longer a burden, it takes all of ten seconds these days. Also they are only limiting your default browser/search.

It was mildly entertaining to read this line in that wiki page:

> Industry pundit Robert X. Cringely believed a breakup was not possible, and that "now the only way Microsoft can die is by suicide."

Ironically as far as browsers are concerned IE6-~IE9 was a fair attempt at suicide.

Seems XKCD was on point this week: https://www.xkcd.com/1831/

It is a little off-putting, but I think it certainly has its place in educating and entertaining people about wildlife.

BBC's Hidden Kingdoms comes to mind, where they make no illusions about the fact that you are watching a film not a camera left out in the woods for ten days.

In fact, after each episode they double down and re-use all their work by showing you just how they got the shots and set up all the scenes.

That, and I think Planet Earth has occasionally been guilty of what you're talking about, but personally I've never felt insulted, more like impressed they managed to make a palatable narrative out of a bunch of wildlife scenes.

It's true traditional databases require you to think through your solution before you go implementing it, but this is not necessarily a bad thing.

NoSQL is great for prototyping and being productive fast, but that productivity comes with a lot of pitfalls. Pitfalls by the way that many devs have been blissfully ignorant of for decades because they have been insulated from them by normalized relational databases.

Unless you are experienced with/aware of those pitfalls, I would almost make a blanket statement that a traditional SQL database should be the default solution for the backend until you can explain why NoSQL is a better fit for a given project.

Also, what makes you think PostgreSQL is slow? What is "slow" to you?

This Atwood fellow seems to know his CS. He should set up some kind of support forum that devs can use to get help with their coding problems.

You say that, but many devs do precisely what you're talking about.

They compete with existing frameworks to solve problems starving devs are having instead of looking around for the problems that small to medium-sized businesses are struggling with and getting little to no help with.

Definitely an example of perspiration over innovation.

So many devs and "idea guys" dismiss flawed ideas and wait around for that one great idea that will launch their career, not realizing most popular libraries/sites/etc. started as a pretty basic and flawed concept that was iterated into a work of art.

Ideas are worthless, execution is everything.

(On the topic of Discord the chat app)

There is at least one reason: to share a code base between the web and "desktop" version of the app.

I don't know about "perfect", it certainly can fit the relational mold though.

I'll take a shot in the dark and say that the advantage of using a NoSQL platform to host a forum is that you can very quickly load all resources relating to a post by storing them in one database document.

That does mean you probably need to polyfill certain functionality, but the traditional case for NoSQL is made by saying a blog can load a given post's comments, media, etc. with one query. Forums are a similar animal.

Kind of impressive how many "cultural" views and traditions are the result of clever and pervasive marketing.

Offhand, examples like putting a diamond in a wedding ring that costs a few month's salary or dressing boys in blue and girls in pink come to mind in that these views are so pervasive because they generate sales.

Is it just me or is there almost no information in this advisory besides telling people to update their firmware?

I don't know what this vulnerability is or how it is exploited and I barely know what systems of mine might be affected by it.

Thanks I'll have to check out that book.

I agree, a public forum really complicates the issue.

> you can never win an argument online

This is true online and it's true in person. As you said even if you "win" by getting the other person to concede, the net result is often that they are more walled into their position than before.

I've come to believe the real issue is that you should not be trying to "win" a discussion in the first place.

Rather, you should assume (or at the very least pretend) for the moment that their position is justified and they are "right". Under that presumption, ask questions and allow them to elaborate on their position. In short, instead of talking, listen without judging until you really, truly understand and have acknowledged and accepted their position.

At that point you have a tool very few people ever acquire in a discussion. You have the ability to frame your argument in their terms.

Now, that doesn't mean you will convince them you are right and they are wrong, but it does mean they are going to be far more likely to listen to you and consider what you've said more fairly than if you had simply bombarded them with facts and figures, i.e. "logic".

I suppose it's in the title, but I was disappointed the article doesn't even attempt to provide some solutions.

The one proposal the article makes is poorly thought out.

It's become clear that in today's political culture ignoring or dismissing bad ideas without properly addressing them with at least feigned respect pushes the on the fence population into echo chambers where the idea can be confirmed as good, e.g. anti-vaxxers, flat world believers, etc...

You can think however you like, the barrier doesn't care.

Isn't there already a middle solution? You can do whatever you want, but you void the warranty.

What's a practical example of this?

Here's a question for the community -- has anyone here ever been in a union? What was it like?

So much of this thread is theoretical concerns, but I'm wondering what the actual on the ground experience is like.

Does that not meet the same end? By strengthening their position they can barter for better benefits for you. Even if those benefits aren't precisely the ones you want, that doesn't negate the fact that they are on your collective side.

On the other hand, the employer wants none of that because they want as much power over employees as they can muster.

How does that make them as worse as each other?

It's somewhat ironic that it seems like a lot of people in this thread are basing their talking points on unions off the anti-union propaganda at hand rather than personal experience or evidence.

That's a fair point; I wonder if some kind of licensing program or systematic training* for bicyclists would be beneficial.

Maybe incentivize it with a tax break or something if you take the (paid) training every x years and bike to work at least x days a month on average.

* I'll draw another inappropriate comparison here and say similar to the Motorcycle Safety Foundation that designs the cirriculum for virtually all motorcycle training

This statement sort of requires an asterisk in that it's entirely dependent on your schedule, city, your location within it and your capacity for recognizing and taking risk.

Some people for example would say the same things of motorcycles, yet there is no shortage of people who recognize and take the risk to ride out there.

Also, many cities have a plethora of bike paths that network through them and lanes set aside for bikes. That combined with high-visibility gear and recognizing those pain points to avoid or tread carefully mitigates a great amount of the risk you take.

It's a factor to weigh in for sure, but it's not as bad as you make it out to be. Anecdotally that's a shame about your co-workers, but for example there are dozens of people who bike to work everyday at my work and none of them have died in the ten years I've been here.

So I suppose you should really phrase that as a factor to consider rather than a blanket statement that it's not worth the risk in the U.S.

They've talked about it so much they got sick of answering fan mail and stood up a site for it:

http://isfiberreadyyet.com/

TL;DR for anyone wandering by:

> We hypothesized that PS would improve UX, which is defined in this study as the emotions that are aroused when a user interacts with a product or technology. The PS website was perceived to be more fun than the no-PS website. With respect to perceived usability, enjoyment, satisfaction, and visual appeal, there were no differences between the PS website and the no-PS website.

Great that someone formally studied it, though I'm a little put off by their subjects demographics as compared with potential customers of any given business. That is, I feel like students at a university are more adept at using interfaces than "the average user" who is going to be your potential customer.

1/5 factors they tested did signal added value, the 1 being "fun". More fun, but not more usable. I'm not yet convinced that fun correlates to sales in this context as much as usability, ESPECIALLY once the initial wow factor wears off.

I assume by "trouble" you mean motion sickness. Two of them had motion sickness, not just run-of-the-mill confusion from the usability of the site.

All that said, the main point I was making was that often designers spend a great deal of time trying to get PS working just right not because they think it will bring in more customers or make their site more usable, but because that's what other designers are showcasing and they want to emulate that trend.

> Sometimes I feel like designers believe x only because other designers believe x, when in reality non in-group behavior might suggest something completely different, that x is irrelevant, unnecessary, or confusing.

Parallax scrolling sites come to mind. They look pretty, but quite often are terribly dysfunctional to navigate and use for a customer who just wants to learn about or buy(!) your product.