wernercd

They weren't using Java, so probably not. ZING!

But seriously... If you want to compare tooling, you shouldn't be comparing a scripting language vs a language like Java... compare Java vs C# and C#'s experience is better than Java's IMO (not REAL experienced with Java but I've done some basic stuff).

While I question the intelligence and timing of taxing cars... taxing tires would stop people from replacing tires more than any other rising cost, how?

I also question whether they would "remove" the gas tax... I also question why people wouldn't cross state lines to save money (depending on tax and/or distances - same as nearby where Delaware has no sales tax but the business taxes are higher so it kinda balances out).

Nothing in your 'Google Bad' diatribe challenges the fact that Safari is substandard, limited and - to your diatribe - safari in no way shape or form "makes ideas" and brings new things to the table... or "makes it easier to enter the market" (opposites of your complaint that google makes it harder).

Google is "Evil"? Okay? What does that have to do with a substandard experience and browser/app-store lock-in from Apple? It's not like Apple is "good" to counter apples "evil"...

To your IE6 point... Safari is the IE6 of Apple - stagnant, tied to the OS and blocks innovation because of company decisions. Its even worse because alternatives aren't allowed on iOS.

But it's not google telling you... it's literally the rank'n'file staff telling you that there's more important things than "money".

I'll not argue that many of the big players are garbage and are "anti-consumer"... but to dismiss how workers feel because you don't like some companies seems like you're missing the trees for the forest...

"fingerprinting" is one interesting counterpoint to the fact that the browser was highlighted as an alternative to the app store. but that browser is still laughably restricted.

And "because chrome" doesn't change the fact that restricting competition doesn't remove the restrictions put into place largely to force people into an overpriced app store.

lack of competition is a big thing... blocking people from better browsers and not fixing the bad browser in iOS isn't an acceptable answer when the tax for doing so is 30% and a subpar environment.

I'm picking on Netflix but the point stands - many companies are able to stand up payment processes. It's not a hard problem and it's not uncommon for companies to have them.

"because apple" isn't a reason to tax a company 30% for things like Netflix that are only tangentally iPhone or when a company can provide a standard level of payment processing.

Apples payment processing isnt THAT good. Definitely not 30% good.

If companies like Google weren't forced to be tied to garbage like Safari, you might have a point...

I know I saw a story recently that talked about how all "alternative" browsers on the iPhone are tied to webkit and how webkit doesn't support basic internet parts and lags in support for stuff like bluetooth, game controllers, etc.

Why remove the browser when Apple purposely hamstrings it to block the benefits you tout?

Am I the only one that finds this backwards? I've always though it should be a "progressive tax" (for lack of a better term)...

game companies that make under, say, $1mil a year shouldn't pay 30% and watch larger companies making 100m+ a year pay 10% (or whatever sweetheart deal).

My other problem is FORCING the use of payment systems... if Apple provides a system? fine... but not letting companies use alternatives is assinine and my large honest complaint. No reason Netflix, Epic or other companies should be forced to pay Apple when they can host their own infrastructure. (same for google/steam/etc)

Could Facebook make it happen and profitable in a way to get around Apples rules? I think so... I think Apple would change the rules shortly after though...

So it's hard to look seriously at those "he incited violence" given his YEARS of similar public gatherings and never having incited violence previously.

Key is that he never called for violence, he called for peaceful protests and he condemned the violence.

I mean... it doesn't get any simpler than that.

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-trump-say-peacefully...

The Ruling Mostly true.

The president did say that the crowd was going to march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol. After the attack, Trump said he does not condone violence.

Yet the people who are most angry about calling for a "fight" are the same ones that defend much worse from the likes of Maxine Waters...

The platform evaluating rules for Trump while allowing worse from others - in power or out - is the problem. Examples exist everywhere of much MUCH worse than Trumps non-calls for violence... yet he's the only one to get banned and have a Crusade/Jihad held against him? Says more about the hypocrites that hold double standards than it does about Trump - who's the same bombastic blowhard he's always been.

IE: Why isn't Maxine Waters banned everywhere? She's ACTUALLY called for more destruction and had it happen... compared to Trumps "call" which specifically said "protest peacefully".

This is all a waste of time and the hypocrisy is astounding... rules for thee but not for me. Wokeness at its deepest levels of hypocrisy.

I don't think you understand that banning people over what the Thought Police find "bad" is LITERALLY working to control what people think.

> facts that your typical karen

and you are the typical ignorant fool who complains of "godwin" then resorts to "karen hates black people" drivel. Ignorant of the same calls "Karen" made a hundred times before but all of a sudden skin color matters to everything (hint: there's a word for people who only care about skin color... the funny little hypocrisy of the Woke Crusaders is the racism that permeates every move they make to fight racism by making EVERYTHING about race even when it's not).

> Ridiculous

Considering the other stories about AI dungeon over stepping? I'm more convinced I'm right about the Woke'saders and their march down the same path of others throughout history. It is ridiculous... but that's never stopped the religious in their fervor.

> Child porn

If that's really waht's there? report it to the police and take REAL action... not some half assed Woke'sader steps.

But "think of the childrend" is a close second to "ZOMG THE NAZI'S!" when it comes to justification for overstepping in the Name Of Good. So Sayeth the Wokesaders.

> NATURE OF THE GAME > Especially we are not responsible if you stay awake all night long playing Factorio and can't go to school / work in the morning :)

They warn you ahead of time.

Why would you think that this company needs to Thought Police their gamers when thousands of others are able to host creativity based games without being dystopian?

Or do you agree that peoples lives should be destroyed if they do something you disagree with? Mobs of people calling the friends, family, work places, etc of someone who dares do something you disagree with?

I personally know someone who works in a rescue... someone got a bug in their butt that she did something "wrong". She's been hounded for weeks by The Righteous who have the Holy Word that she did "wrong" - no matter the nuances about what happened.

You can ignore the violence, the mobs, the hounding and the overall shitty attitudes of the SJW Religous... but they are literally the modern day Crusaders who have The Holy Decree to destroy the Heathens.

You want to know how SJWs are worse in the name of good? Open your eyes and look at all the "worse" done on a daily basis. I could list dozens or hundreds of publicly available examples but if you can't ALREADY see them without me pointing them out?

"they have known about climate change" and those who know about it also have said we'll be dead in 1980... 1990... the seas will rise a dozen feet in 2000 and the snowcaps will be gone in 2010. If the "tyrannical" companies are wrong...

https://nypost.com/2020/01/09/glacier-national-park-removes-...

https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-poca...

If you want to go that route that Oil Companies are Robber Barons... that would make the GCC doomsayers the "good" guys who are as bad on the other end - and have no problem being as bad with their lies and happy about it because it matches their conscience.

what does that say about the doomsayers? Exxon knew? When did the doomsayers know that their predictions were bunk? They are the "omnipotent moral busybodies" who have no care that all of their predictions are wrong and the damage - past, present and future - of their lies? Who cares because they are "Saving the Planet"...

The point is that "actual" tyrannical robbers are bad - and there's no denying that... but so are those who are worse in the name of "good".

I'm not sure I'm a fan of Mob programming... as others mention, over a phone/video conference, it seems inadequate. Turns more into an ad-hoc video lesson by the stronger personalities (for better or worse - I happen to be one of those in my small group at work).

Do you have problems with both? 2 vs 3+? or is it one or the other?

Love many of the things MS is doing... but it's hard not to see echo's of the past and wonder if its history repeating.

https://www.wikijob.co.uk/content/interview-advice/competenc...

> Soft skills are the more intangible and non-technical abilities that are sought from candidates. For example:

* Communication * Teamwork * Problem-solving * Leadership * Responsibility

So "interviewing" isn't a soft skill as I've always though it to be but I didn't call CS basics a soft skill - I called interviewing one. I was thinking more "a skill not work related per-se" - ie interviewing - while the expected definition is more... personality and interpersonal skills.

I'd consider interviewing "personality and interpersonal" but I can adjust my terminology.

Interviewing is an important skill for most people and interviewing in the programming realm, unfortunately, relies on CS basics. Generally you don't get one without the other.

I agree that a lot of story around interviewing is broken and that many of the questions don't relate to day to day jobs... like creating a binary tree or "how do you move a mountain" (IE: https://www.amazon.com/How-Would-Move-Mount-Fuji/dp/03167784...) - but they do show that you know CS basics, know how to learn them or have basic problem solving skills.

As much as people bemoan CS interviews... currently? They are a necessary evil to certain segments of the job market. Can you get jobs without them? Sure... just like you can get jobs without degrees - but your resume will get round-filed for a large number of jobs without a degree and you'll not make it past initial filters without knowing "basic" CS trivia like binary trees.

Whether you're okay with a limited job pool or not is on you... I don't have a 4 year... but I have a 2 year with many years of experience and I'm okay with some of the limits until I eventually get a BA. I still make six figures and know I can find a new job if it comes to it - as I've done repeatedly with limits. I've never balanced a binary tree for a job interview but I have "failed" online tests because I wasn't "fast enough" on code tests. I'm still employable and successful.