nobunaga

Yea you can bring it in house. Can you purchase the existing software? Then rather than do a rewrite, work towards rebuilding/refactoring. Please dont listen to the people here telling you to do a rewrite. It will fail or go way longer than you expect with many issues.

If you can start hiring some devs/UX/infra people and work alongside exiting team. Once they build up knowledge and are ready to take over the project, then they can start taking proper ownership and rebuilding and extending parts of the system. Slowly slowly you will not only build up the expertise and team but be will have a fully functioning dev team owning the system end to end. Focus on hiring good people with a strong focus on senior people and building up knowledge of the software system.

- How does this team with just a lead determine the business and domain rules? It sounds like the application is quite complex. Letting some freelancers go at it is the worst thing you can do for an application that is meant to handle hundreds of millions in revenue - Long term maintenance. Who is going to do the knowledge transfer and maintenance of this application as it grows and the freelancers leave? - Who is interfacing with the clients? With the existing software developers? Do you really think devs are going to be doing this?

So many things wrong with this approach. Please stop telling the guy to adopt this? And top sending him your emails when he is just asking for advice. Just because you want to jump onto this project as you see $$$ signs. Jesus.

Edit: For those who dont read all of the article, you can read the discalimer at the bottom, the author admits he owns BAT tokens. Im sure he is definitely unbiased in his opinion. facepalm

I think everyone's threshold for what constitutes breach of trust is different. If you accept content injection, unreported whitelists and other similar behaviour from a browser which touts privacy as its selling point ok, then thats your call. But this kind of behaviour is unacceptable from my and many other people's perspective. Which other major browser injects any content in to a website without the users request? Do you see people being ok with being impersonated by Brave without their knowledge? Especially when these mistakes just seem to keep happening, at some point you have to question the intention. Again maybe you are ok with it, but people should be informed about these practices and make their own call. To most people, this is not ok. What other browser has had this level of controversy (outside of chrome possibly) and they have been in business longer than brave.

https://securityboulevard.com/2019/02/brave-browser-sacrific...

https://www.computerworld.com/article/3284076/brave-browser-...

https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto...

https://twitter.com/vj_chidambaram/status/107647481470831001...

Why should I research for you a topic which does not negate the shady practices that Brave has been at fault for? If you want to donate money using Brave go for it, the evidence of what Brave has done, and done so consistently on many fronts is out there. If you want to look into it, go for it, I am not your personal researcher, a lot has already been done for you.

https://twitter.com/vj_chidambaram/status/107647481470831001...

Are some examples.

Im not going to get in to the game of finding specific ways to donate to content creators. There are ways to do it. If you want to do it anonymously, I am sure you can do so as well, I have never been interested in doing so. If the reason you want to use brave is to donate money anonymously, more power to you, personally, I would caution people against using it due to their past shady behaviour (The affiliate link is just one of many examples).

Im sure there are more but all the bells and whistles Brave touts you can get elsewhere and you are not using a product from a company that has shady practices

I personally treat all software with a level of distrust. But brave has done things which all point to a certain behaviour in which people should think twice before using the product. You can get the benefits of privacy that Brave touts from other browsers. If you want to donate to content creators, plenty of ways to do so as well.

There are so many better alternatives to brave for those that want to donate to content creators or just browse the web. I have never understood the fascination or usefulness of brave. I would caution people against using it.

It can happen, FB just doesntt want to for either $$$ or for loss of control.

I havent dabbled in mobile developer platform tooling for the last few years now so I cannot comment on the iOS side, all i remember is that back then it was a shitshow :) Mobile is still playing catch up to how backend infra and tooling operates, I suspect its better but probably still got a long way to go.

Problem here with Swift came down to

- Apple not dogfooding its own tech . Hell they did not even help us or other major companies like AirBnB and LihnkedIn (We formed a workforce on this problem with them which then forced the download limit to be upped by apple)

- Engineers deciding to adopt a language which they thought was great (and turned out not to be at the time) because they did not do the right analysis upfront for such a significant project. 'Wow look at this shiny new cool tool, lets use it' (Oversimpiification, swift was more pleasant to write with and you could be more productive which was no doubt a factor here)

Also, while management at the time didnt care for the remote offices much, I think the AMS team played a critical role in the success here. With the recent layoffs that occurred, I heard that they were fired.

Another fun story, we were trying to bring down our build times on our CI builds which were 1hr+ while battling macstadium and their crappy infrastructure with tens/hundreds of patches incoming each day.