cc81

I think the dumping (and re-instating) of wrestling was a good thing for the sport as it forced to innovate in places where it had become insanely passive and boring with very few watching or really caring.

It was advocated, it was not meant to be advocated, but it was.

And Agile has it's fault and it has become filled with consultants, buzzwords and all kinds of things but early days when I built an internal system used in factories for a large company. The old ways of building and documenting software there was pretty much waterfall and there was a lot of middle-management, reporting, architects, documenting etc.

I was a part of a pretty young team + one offshore team in India (that was not great but not bad either) and we had a great boss who fought for us when we wanted to develop using pretty standard Scrum instead and we had a great product owner who immediately got what we were after and had great domain knowledge.

That project went sooo much better than previous ones and even if there were a lot of fighting and escalations in the beginning the whole concept of "Just call into our demo's we have every three weeks and see what we are developing and then give feedback" was like a revelation for some would be users of the system or owners of processes we implemented.

I do sit next to others but do have full sized desk, two large monitors and with a pair of good headphones I think it works pretty well.

I know a software developer who has an unrelated degree but is very good at his job.

And yes SAP is bad but it is also something that will do most stuff you need to do and follow the right laws when you do it.

It is very possible but then that system is not for you. These systems are incredibly complex already and while there will always be some customization you should question yourself if this is where your competitive advantage is?

Is Lidl earning more money than their competitors because they base their inventory management system on purchase prices while others do not? Then build/buy a system that handles that and it could very well be worth it if you look at the business case

But if it is like that because that is how we started out and we cannot quantify how much better it is...then maybe you should just change your process.

There are other alternatives such as Workday: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workday,_Inc.

Never used it but it does not have to be SAP/Oracle at that size. Could still be the best solution though, I'm no expert.

I won't disagree with you when you say they are horrible but there is also a difference between lets say the user interface of something you rarely use and something that is your job. I've never worked in SAP myself but I've seen others do things very quickly in that ugly user interface just because they have learned how to jump around quickly and what fields to fill in.

It might still be bad but for them it works pretty well after they have learned it. As a counter they think my writing commands in a shell as an incredibly bad interface while I think it is very efficient because I've learned it.

When I debate libertarians I've always felt that it has never been really realistic and I think a lot of people feel that way.

I'm not American but as far as I understand Democrats type of freedom is very different from libertarians.

Change your first to "Clean up and look appropriate" then. You don't have to look flashy but I think if you are unhygienic you need to overcome more than if you are not. If you work in finance there are certain expectations on dressing in a certain way and if you are working as an engineer at a hip start up there are others.

But if you decide to deviate too much you are spending weirdness points.

I realized that when I was a software developer when I met client I dressed differently than when I put on a more relaxed hoodie at our casual office. I never put on a suit but at least some business casual as that was how everyone else was dressed.

One thing though is that I have always looked kinda nerdy and I believe just like some women have complained that they are not taken seriously as software developers I think I've been taken more seriously at times just due to my nerdy looks (beard, way I dressed) despite my experience might not have warranted it.

>.prettierrc

Just to take that example. Prettier made the state of modern web development so much better.

Sweden is no longer homogeneous. We have a larger percentage foreign born than the US for example.

I think it is about autonomy and planning as well. You own your API, you plan your features and your backlog will be filled and you will deliver it. You will sunset it and when you on-board new people into the team they only need to learn your part.

This requires quite a big application though for it to be worth it in my opinion.

That is true and when you are at big enough scale it probably works.

But when you have chosen a cool new microservice architecture for your team to implement and you grab that small user story that spans 3-4 different services things suddenly went from. "Hey, easy implementation and refactor and the compiler will tell me if I fucked up" to something much more time consuming and error prone.

In an ideal world that would not happen of course. Just like it in an ideal world a monolith is built correctly as well.

>3. Deploys are very difficult, and as you scale to over 10 developers increasingly becomes difficult to push up (it takes one persons bad commit to hold everyone in the organization from deploying).

I feel that is a way too low number. If don't have good enough engineering practices with branching, pull requests/code reviews, unit/integration tests to handle 10 people then microservices will be painful as well.

I would say like 3+ teams at least to really justify it? You can do it earlier but I don't see it as a necessary benefit.

>7. Microservices can be cheaper when you scale, you don't have the GCD of memory/CPU/disk requirements as you do in a monolith.

Yes, but by default they are more expensive until you reach a certain scale and it needs to be a specific type of scaling.

And the purpose of that gun is no longer valid as it won't take out modern tanks. Also if you are fighting modern tanks you would get shot down by MANPADS.

There is a reason why CIA never seemed to give away anti-aircraft weapons while they throw anti-tank weapons at Syrian rebels. Despite manpads would be so valuable against the old Syrian air force.

No, but the dude works at google and has written that and other books about Kubernetes so obviously he knows about scaling parts of a system and huge organizations working on software together.

That is not what he is commenting on here though. It is that microservice architecture is starting to become the default pattern on how to build applications for a lot of people. Instead it should be an exception when you reach those very specific problems that most people don't have.

>K8S's great. It's just not relevant here.

It is very relevant though as it has become so tightly connected with microservices and if you are one of the most well known people in the Kubernetes world you will see a lot of applications that should not be microservices.

Yes, I had a discussion about a very senior (but not developer) why we he thought we must enforce microservices in our applications from a technical perspective. He thought it was incredibly important to be able to scale parts of it independently and it is a normal CRUD internal application with a couple of thousand users.

Of course he looks at Netflix and Google as best practices but that discussion probably spent more money in salary than our server costs.

Yes, it is a pretty common saying that it forces separation of concerns and avoids the spaghetti that monoliths end up like.

People are selling it as easy. You can deploy them independently, each service is small with low complexity.

That it is not that easy in reality and that the total complexity increase is so big is not told as often. There is a team at my work with 6 developers developing something that processes a couple of gigs of data each day and has a front end serving maybe a hundred users total, I would guess 20 would be logged in at the same time.

Kubernetes, 10 microservices, 2 different types of databases.

That is true and that was a pretty big shift and together with embracing open source more, going all in on Azure, supporting Linux etc. there has been changes and that has reflected somewhat in the community as well.

I also think people being used to npm in the frontend will make them more likely to start looking around nuget for things that can support their use case better than what exists by Microsoft.

I don't think it is necessarily about being fair it is just that the philosophy of developers in the .NET world has always been if MS has something then that is the thing we use. I've felt that within Java there are usually more competing products and flavors.

Often the product MS provides is good enough but I remember in the tail end of the web forms disaster there were some good open source MVC libraries inspired by the Java ecosystem but they never really got traction and people kept building things with shitty web forms. This is until MS came with ASP.NET MVC and people started to switch.

I don't think Microsoft wants to kill alternatives. I think they really want a healthy ecosystem to get more developers using .NET but they also want to be able to create a complete developer experience and that sometimes clashes and kills other products due to the culture.

Sorry, not following. I don't have any deep knowledge about the subject more than I historically been interested in fitness and bodybuilding and with that comes some knowledge about hormones.

Not saying "roid rage" is not impossible but the studies I saw was that the idea mainly came from people in criminal circles who often used a multitude of drugs who wanted to be bigger and more intimidating and then drank some alcohol, popped some benzo or did pcp and started fights. Thus "roid rage" became a thing.

But when they looked at people who were just in the fitness industry with normal jobs and families that used testosterone they did not find the connection. This was a time ago and maybe there are newer studies. However there are much stronger anabolic steroids than testosterone and those I suspect can cause real roid rage; some people seem to get odd rages on for example trenbolone.

Hormones do affect how you feel though and like I said I do only have experience with Prednisone for inflammatory bowel disease flares and while I get noticeable more irritated (I can control it, so I know that I'm pissed that my colleague is humming because of the medicine and I can just ignore it) but I've read in forums about the disease that one decided to stop driving when he was on high dose Prednisone just because he got such insane road rage and was afraid that he would do something stupid. That is rarely something doctors tell you.

About your other questions I don't know I'm afraid. I have very little knowledge about the subject more than these specifics.

I heard something like: "The second system you design will be the most over engineered piece of shit ever"

I don't know who said it but it has been very true for me and my close friends who work in software development. I remember first starting software development and I started to read up on "how to do it right" in the Java/C# world back when XML was everywhere.

I had first started to expand my skills after university by building my own blog (who didn't at that time?) but thought I should rebuild it according to "best practices".

Hoooooly shit that was a poorly architected and designed piece of software. The example in the blog was of course not as poor of an example as my creation but I feel that many end up in this trap after they have some experience that they need to do everything "right" and they don't have the experience to evaluate if it is worth it.

However I also think a good workplace have a healthy mix because those youngsters will also push the old guard to learn new things and introduce new technology. Just need a balance between using 0.1-alpha libraries and things that were released 10 years ago.

It depends on context. Ideally you have an automatic code review system that would remove a lot of these discussions and create sense that everyone is involved in the code bases.

In this context however it is pretty special because it it was a single commit that that he immediately refactored. In that case the more reasonable approach in my opinion is to take a post-commit code review where you talk to the dude about your thoughts how one can improve the code. It was also a pretty significant change when it comes to coding philosophy, so if you think you know more it is also a potential opportunity to mentor your colleague (or learn something yourself)

If it would have been a bug fix or an added feature it is no problem. Or if some time passes and most code is written in style X but this was not and then you rewrite it, also fine.

It could be but I used to look at studies about roid rage and found back then that there was not that much support for increased aggression, at least not when using testosterone and in moderate dosages for bodybuilding (which are very large dosages compared to replacement therapy).

On the other hand I'm pretty sure when we are talking really strong AAS such trendbolone there is so much anecdotal evidence that people get aggressive that I have no problem buying it in that case.

Never done any AAS but been prescribed corticosteroids (prednisone) which is an anti-inflammatory and that sure as hell changes the mood for me and many others. It is on the side-effects list as well I think and personally can get more irritated on it. Not always but it is noticable.

It is quite different than MDMA in practice though I think and even despite its name it does not bind to GABA I would still more liken it to the positive/social feelings of alcohol than mdma (don't mix alcohol and gabapentin though, it can be dangerous).

False positives could just be us not being able to detect that they are just false positives while more advanced methods and technologies might be able to differ.

Depending on what the cause is it might be different. If someone makes a reasonable mistake, like pushes something to production that they should not, then you could argue that there are not enough checks and it is not something you should get fired for. You should change the process.

If someone deliberately goes around those checks to push something anyway then it could be a fire-able offense.

Sure, but as a whole they have had a few rough years.

https://features.propublica.org/navy-accidents/us-navy-crash...

The thing is when you write:

>The problem is you have two types of people, you have the guy that sees his kid get blown up and is like F'it I am going to detonate myself. I get it, I could be that guy under the right circumstances. The problem is the world is just as full of people ready and willing to exploit that guy and that is what happens. The situation is a lot more complicated than the American imperialist kills babies meme. The problem is though when you go after the other guys, who need going after, some good people get killed and it creates a newly exploitable class based on that anger and resentment.

That is also the exact motivation that China uses for its re-education camps. It is because of terrorism that they need to go after.