Maybe this is a reflection of modern tools using the version control system to store built artifacts, like npm and "Go get" do. Anyway, depending on the programming language, you can have a monorepo and still bind your modules with artifact dependecy, not necessarily depending on the code itself.
To quote Andrzej Sapkowski, author of the Witcher books, "I don't think different media van converge". Each medium has unique properties that enable a story to be told in a certain way that may not be reproducible in another medium.
Take Dark Souls for example. The game's story and mythology are blended with the game world, hidden in little details and item descriptions. If you take its bits and pieces and assemble them linearly, it's nothing special, it could never serve as the plot for a good movie. However, if you experience it properly, by being immersed in the game world, it gets way better.
When i think about Mass Effect, what comes to mind are these long sequences in the Citadel where you do nothing more than talk, learning about the biology, technology qnd geopolitics of the game's universe. I don't think this kind of content would fit a blockbuster movie, and without it what remains is a bunch of space marines shooting aliens.
This will sound obvious, but this problem is not restricted to web development. Java applications are often plagued by transitive dependencies too. I had to deal with unwanted libraries breaking WebLogic deployments more often than i'd like, up to the point of having to disable transient configurations for some apps and force explicit declaration of each dependency.
If the user was not aware its location was being uploaded, then yes, it is Strava's fault. They should not be using your data, on the assumption that it is not sensitive, without explicit consent (preferably opt-in).
They are only following the "industry standard" though. I bet the military would be surprised on how much location data leaks to Google location history, the only difference being it is not publicly available (yet).
I understand the the benefits of using a fully managed platform like GAE, but wonder if it would be the right choice for most scenarios. Personally, I would prototype with GAE, but go into production with GKE, under the impression that the application would be a little more decoupled from the platform.
I agree with you, to an extent. By the same criteria, some PaaS services could also be considered serverless, but the term does not apply to them.
However, since the term evokes the idea of "less infrastructure to manage" and, consequentially, "lower costs", it works well to draw the attention of executives.
I think they are talking about the tracking capabilities of these ads, which are unexpected by the user and compromise their privacy. Thus, they behave as malware.
Couldn't this kind of problem be mitigated by some form of coordination between vehicles? I think a fully automated fleet would have an overall net positive effect, due to, for example, improving the reaction time to traffic lights (or eliminating them altogether).
I deeply respect and admire Torvalds, but in the corporate world, the hypey/trendy thing helps tech people getting important changes approved by upper management, at least in my experience.
I work in a tech company whose culture is primarily driven to productivity (read: getting business features delivered using the established stack and tools, as quick as possible). There is certainly an upside to it, but it produced a mindset in wich, in the face of a new problem, developers didn't even think of the possibility of bringing another tool to the toolbox. I mean seriously, to the extent of building their own xml parsers.
Only recently we have been able to assemble an architecture team (i know, i hate the concept) to actually find adequate solutions to the bigger issues, and the hype is sometimes a powerful enabler to push things forward.
It's just my opinion, but given the current values of the Western socienties, producing something that greatly improves your knowledge area or industry is perceived as a more noble goal than accumulating wealth. It can get you in a history book at least.
This. Especially the IM thing. Even if it is something unimportant, any ongoing conversation leaves this "ping" on my head, disabling my ability to focus.
But normalizing a developer's performance across an entire organization is no easy feat. If the subject is performing well enough under the role and team he was placed, then he probably deserves a promotion.
True, but when it becomes almost inexpensive, it will pay off even with a low success rate. You would be impressed with how simple some social engineering schemes are.
As xxr said, Squad is how Spotify names their (previously Scrum) teams. Other interesting concepts they use are "Tribes" and "Guilds". Take a look at the Spotify engineering practices, they are really inspiring.