exacube

IIUC:

OP is set to own roughly 40% in 4yrs -- 10% at the end of the 1st year (i.e the "cliff"), and the rest of the 30% across the remaining 3 years (probably more often than once a year). the "reverse vesting" means that everytime OP vests, OP's cofounder has the right to buy off the newly vested shares. this means that OP would get money but lose ownership if their cofounder chose to bought off the shares.

OP has been working 11 months so far and is approaching the 1 year cliff (so set to own 10%), so now their cofounder wants OP to leave the company and take only 3% ownership, and is threatening to leave and abandon the company risking any value at all. Presumably, cofounder also has the right to fire OP though OP hasn't stated anything about this.

how much of storage on macs is actually used up by code though?

trust

Maybe Apple users are more honest :P

or maybe there are 4x more Androids than iPhones

Maybe you're talking about indie developers. I don't think studios worry about spending $2000/machine for porting. And a lot of studios also outsource porting

One of those topics which hits the right balance of sufficiently useful, interesting and understandable without too much training.

for distributed systems, the assignments from https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/6.824/ are fantastic. reading material tool, if you want to study and not just do

Friend, they are using data and research to improve their UI. Thinking that "other products didnt do it well so you shouldn't try" is extremely unproductive.

It's also not productive to argue for a vastly more difficult and different area, like their data model, during a topic of refreshing UI..

I think for a package versioning system to work, the ecosystem has to adhere to its principles. This is true for any package system.

I think this post is an example of a package not adhereing to its principle; a major revision implies breaking changes, so it doesn't make sense to have a tool "automatically update" things for you, because theres no garuntee that it'll work.

I feel like the issue is that this post doesn't totally understand how the package versioning is meant to work in the first place; if you're changing your struct names and it has no external effects, i don't see why you /want/ to semver, because you're exactly getting much value from semver'ing other than the vanity of pretty numbers. Maybe I'm missing something?

Im curious if an ideal package system that would work for this particular project, but I don't think one does.

"People disgard laws. Whats the point of laws? Laws are for police making money."

The problem is the law enforcement, not the laws.

Consider that browser share usage could shift around as device usage shifts around during a pandemic.

You could say that about any company doing good. "But we don't know how much of this is politically motivated". For example, they run ad campaigns for voting/saving public lands.

Yes, they are spending their profits on it. And people like companies that do good things, so i'm sure it earns them some trust & brand loyalty. Does that mean it's ill intended?

the article goes on to explain that, with a shared authority present, you are required to work it out with the other tech lead amicable. if you do a poor job doing that in front of the authority, presumably the authority will decide, and also scrutinize both of the leads for not being able to cooperate / be successful at their job.

I'm curious to hear how restaurant delivery services are meant to make profit; is it really through service fees (or a monthly subscription model), and tips?

Cost per meal seems way too high for people to use it often. Maybe it make economical sense for larger party orders, but how often do those kinds of orders happen during considering the COVID situation?

> Personal experience/preference, but the thing that has (almost) never led me wrong was doing a walkthrough of the domain of the application, and then thinking about what the client-side pages and functionality are going to look like (page-by-page, user stories), and then implementing the backend. Finally, wire up the backend to the frontend mockups/design.

I'm not totally clear on what you disagree with. it seems like you're suggesting roughly what the article is saying -- figure out the front-end and then implement the backend.

what is the diff between what this article is saying and what you're saying?

Key points:

* Learn to be ruthless about throwing away work

* Reduce your scope

* Use patterns and keep your code organized

* Build what people are asking for

You might be misinformed; according to https://medium.com/flutter/hummingbird-building-flutter-for-... Flutter for Web uses HTML & CSS where it can, and falls back to Canvas where it can't.

Flutter for Web is still on Beta, so lets see where it lands. Today, it seems to implement some PWA practices and lazyloading to try and get some performance.

that seems odd; what is the performance impact of turning on Hyper-V for the root/host windows instance?

Even at ~$360k/year using Spanner, I wonder if Spanner is cheaper than the amortized cost of dedicating engineers to develop and maintain a custom MySQL sharding solution, on top of the AWS bill.

spanner is strongly consistent

I upgraded an iPhone 6S for this reason.

I wouldn't so arrogantly claim to know how consumers spend their money on technology.

Ad-hoc basis. Usually comes out of studying the most common classes of computation and optimizing for it. For example, the "summing a series" probably falls out of loop optimizations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_optimization

Presumably because Chromium and related technologies (e.g. V8) have far more investment by the community than Gecko and SpiderMonkey. MS already uses Chromium/v8 in some of their products like VS Code.

I feel they entered the business because they AWS showed the industry that it actually has pretty good margins.

However, I think the sentiment is probably true that selling VPS is low-margin over the long-term, but i think the margins come from the other bits: global economies of scale, good infrastructure management & practices, and providing their proven internal technologies (ML/AI, managed distributed services). Long-term, it seems like Google could come out the winner, but only if the other aspects of business are also done well (like sales). It seems like Google Cloud is picking up market share, but still far away from the 3 As (AWS, Azure, Alibaba)

I've been told Chromium saw some measurable benefits from reducing binary size over code-inlining. (sorry, I'm not able to provide a citing).

> It's often as readable as a scripting language IMO only if you're using doing simple things the standard library provides utilities for. i haven't found it to be very readable once code grows in complexity, but i'm also not very experienced.

security researchers

the issue would now be that you're investing in everything else in that fund.. i'd have to believe in the fund, not just SpaceX.

Only one team needs to sync with another in this scenario.

It's also assuming that the Flutter team wouldn't consider do that considering they have that kind of information available to them -- it's in their best interest, after all.

These seem like valid concerns at first glance, but I feel these are not really issues in practice (only in theory).

>> - They inevitably don’t look or work like native apps in ways both big and small, frustrating and annoying users. (... the spell-checker doesn’t work right or text selection is janky or unavailable where it should be, certain short-cuts work differently or have different gestures or keys, etc.)

as `coldtea` points out below, this is not really an issue in today's ecosystem. Branding themes are more prevelant on most apps people are using than not.

>> they don’t get updates to native controls... e.g. if the OS adds some new drag-and-drop capability to text fields the framework doesn’t get it unless and until the framework is updated (and the app is updated to use the newer version of the framework). Of course, some things are never deemed important enough to be adopted by the framework.

If people are writing cross-platform apps and want to use new platform-specific features, wouldn't they have to write platform-specific code anyway if they were native? I'm not sure this is a newly introduced problem in any sense.

>> - Ambitious frameworks that really try to minimize the gaps between apps build with the framework vs native app grow to be very large. They take on the role of the entire app-facing OS API, which is truely massive in today’s systems. This leads to slow-loading/building, resource-hungry apps. Each app becomes a mini-OS unto itself.

I guess that's valid; but I'm curious about cases where code-heavy app sizes have actually hindered app downloads. I don't really know, but I haven't heard that this has been a big problem? For reference, a hello world flutter apk clocks in at 5 MB.

>> - there are cross-platform issues, like fonts that fit on one host OS get cut off in another, or differences in volume control etc.

Flutter renders all of its fonts itself natively, using the same way Chrome does it. Has this been a problem?

>> - dealing with the cross-platform issues the framework doesn’t solve becomes very difficult for the app developer. They’ve got to find a way in, through, or around the framework (in an area it already isn’t handling well).

>> - many potential third-party tools will have native support and bindings but most won’t make accommodations for your framework, so you end up having to support that yourself, or do without.

Is this a remark on an incomplete cross platform framework (i.e., flutter needs more features) and that it hasn't reached enough popular usage, or that cross platform frameworks have this problem? If not, it feels like the alternative to not using a cross platform framework is to write everything for each platform in a platform-specific way, which might be considered much worse. What's the issue at hand here?

>> - devs have yet another set of tech and tools they have to master. And I mean devs in the wide sense here, designers, coders, testers, etc. Some also have to become masters of how the framework and each host OS interact, in order to debug the inevitable problems.

This feels like an emotional assessment of having to learn something new. If this technology is meant to simplify/remove problems that people have today, then isn't it worth learning? I guess you might feel this way if you felt that flutter isn't adding anything of value to other popular solutions today.