252 karma · joined August 31, 2017
I run CommentBox.io, a hosted commenting service.
Day job @cloudflare.
I've also never downloaded a PWA before, but using it for docs actually makes a lot of sense. I like to look things up on my phone as I think about them throughout the day when I'm not at the computer, and a PWA should make this a lot faster and reliable.
I would say on average I encounter these issues 50% of the time. Most of my day is doing Zoom calls and either myself or the other party (using Airpods as well) will spend the first 30-60 seconds either switching out for another pair of headphones or trying to get theirs to connect.
I'm sure most of these issues actually have to do with Bluetooth, but the criticism still stands. Have we just convinced ourselves that they're great for some mysterious reason?
Likewise, the license explicitly says that the software is provided for free, therefore it isn't valid to complain about people not paying for it.
Nobody's on the side of the big corps here, but "why aren't you paying for this thing that I've given to everyone explicitly for free" seems nonsensical.
With the plate there's a sign that says both "take" and "leave". In this case there is also a sign (the license) which only says "take". The intent is clear in both.
It's further not comparable because taking a literal penny deprives the next person of it, whereas here using the software for free costs the other users nothing.
But I'm not trying to nitpick the analogy, I only want to point out the the obligations (both social and contractual) are not the same, neither are the consequences.
Again, if he wanted to make money from his software, he should've put it in the license and charged the big users for it.
I totally understand that billionaire corporations use software like this for free. But the software maintainer has explicitly allowed _anyone_ to use it for free. If you don't want them to use it for free, license it as such.
What am I not seeing here?
The investigation continues.
It never felt quite right to keep him in such a small space, so I bought a 5 gallon tank, and put in a (fake) plant. After the initial shock of the new environment, he seemed to really like his plant and I'd sometimes find him hiding between the leaves. But still to this day he rarely swims around. He still spends most of his time inside his house, though I every so often find him playing up at the top. 95% of the time he's stationary inside his house.
Next I'm going to try introducing some vines that hang down from the top to see if that coaxes him up. But it all makes me wonder if fish can incur long-term trauma or depression. Who knows how long he sat on the shelf of the pet store in a tiny cup? Did it affect his mental health? Or is it simply his "personality" (fishonality?) to be a homebody. I sure am.
I don't know, but this article kind of vindicates my train of thought.
Usually a client retrying a 500 error is the expected behavior, since over time that 500 error will tend to become some other status once the problem is addressed.
Also, the spec is actually pretty readable: http://docs.oasis-open.org/mqtt/mqtt/v3.1.1/os/mqtt-v3.1.1-o...
Note: I'm not affiliated with HiveMQ.
I didn't know OpenCensus was a thing, but I hope this merger means that adoption spreads. A lot of cloud providers provide their own tracing, and it would be nice if they were all compatible.
I wouldn't say I was ever discouraged from entrepreneurship, even at my lowest. But it did make the math a hell of a lot harder. When you're poor, there's always something more you can lose. Choosing between investing in your business or what you eat that week is a difficult decision.
What I would say is that those circumstances give you the motivation to find the clever, efficient solutions, and to make wiser, less risk-adverse decisions. I never wanted a startup that burned money just to get acquired. I wanted one that could make me real money from the very beginning.
Being poor raises the bar on the quality of the business you intend to create, because failure is worse for you than anyone else.
Funnily enough, currently the "twos" subject is "Hacker News", with this article and "What I've Learned from Hacker News" both being present in the front page at the same time.
I really don't see what GraphQL has to do with this problem. What you're describing are issues that pop up with any external datastore. GraphQL is just a protocol. If there are clients that take care of that type of caching, that's an implementation detail. You can also have REST clients that do the same.
> Are you now going to potentially be displaying stale/conflicting info about that user in 2+ different places?
If you knew you needed info about the user as a blog author as well, you could've included that in the users request. Isn't that what you would've done in GraphQL anyway?
I'm not trying to detract from GraphQL's usefulness, but you can accomplish the same things in REST pretty easily too, especially if you control both server and client code.
IMO, GraphQL really shines when you're implementing clients for APIs that you don't already control. In that case, the flexibility is great. But if you're building both the APIs and the clients, REST works (and has worked) pretty easily.
The original Splinter Cell comes to mind. You were supposed to be a stealthy spy, so killing was often counter-productive to your goal. But if you were really careful, you could go beyond that and opt to not commit violence at all, by thinking of the best way to sneak past, trick, and divert your enemies.
Putting aside the morality of it all, from a challenge/fun perspective, games make it all too easy to kill, but so much more difficult to avoid it. But some of the most satisfying experiences can come from thinking about the perfect strategies to not kill your enemies.
It is curious though, why so many games require killing/violence to be fun, when there is arguably a lot of untapped fun and new strategies to be had without those mechanics.
My initial feeling would be that the staff will do their jobs when it convenient for them to do it, regardless of when you would prefer them to do it. How did you manage to convince them to modify their scheduling?
Weren't your assets deployed on Netlify's CDN? Shouldn't that make location roughly irrelevant (assuming enough PoPs)?
This feeling comes from my own experiences that I am at my happiest, best self when I'm alone. And I don't understand how starkly this contrasts from what I hear from others and from studies such as this one.
This isn't a "I'm an introvert" or "people suck" anecdote. This is something that I repeatedly try to objectively access and measure, and almost every time my body responds better to being alone. The less people I have in my life, the better I feel. The more time I spend by myself, the better I feel. The less I speak to anyone, the better I feel.
It might be a bit ironic to ask this, but am I alone in this feeling?
Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated with Gatsby.