When I raced mountain bikes I always found the feel of aluminium frames to deaden after a few years. They would be super responsive at first and then slowly lose that snappiness and with it trail feel as the years went by.
You get downvoted because the question is redundant. It's like asking who is paying for the next gen iPhone or whatever. You buy the product as is and when a new better generation of the same product comes out you don't get a free upgrade because you bought the old version.
It pretty obvious police protect capital not people. Sure many of the police officers didn't realise this until it was too late and they had committed but I think that would have a bigger detriment on their mental health than being vilified by fringe groups.
I’m not sure this applies to companies like Apple. Plenty of people will jump at the chance to replace those who quit Apple over a wfh stalemate. If you don’t have Faang on your cv you’d be foolish not to bite the commute bullet and take the role.
There should be a global rule that non-residents can't buy property. Homes should be prioritised for living not investments. It's a drag on the global economy with so much money being tied up in unproductive assets which in turn soak up even more money through rent seeking.
There is no space for that without radical rezoning and densification. The alternative is every city turning into massive urban sprawl which is entirely undesirable. If you are suggesting forcing private investors to make their properties available to public housing stock then I’m not sure why that would be an improvement without serious rent caps in place.
A colleague told me about the setup in their home country some weeks ago, I _think_ that was the Dutch one, excuse my fuzzy memory... Once your €1500 tenant leaves, you have 3 or 6 months to find the next one. If not, the city will offer your place in parallel as social housing and you'll get €400 (flat rate for the whole municipality per size band) if that gets filled first. On a three year contract. Makes for a very good incentive to meet the market.
It's good and I wouldn't complain if this was an outcome however better yet would be a system that allows people to buy their own homes. One of the major pitfalls and imo systemic national security risks in Europe are the high income tax rates. This coupled with foreign investment in the property market means that regular Europeans are effectively priced out of the market with no way back in. Long term this is a crazy risk to run for the sake of maintaining inefficient bureaucracies that don't remotely cater to the pressing needs of citizens.
I'm afraid that even without the foreign investment one can't win this. Europe still sees a minor population growth. More importantly, there are large migration flows between countries, regions and to cities in general. This means that even in places with no/very low foreign ownership and virtually no vacancies, you still have runaway markets. Dublin is a good example of that. Same stands for almost every place where I lived. With the exception of the French Riviera, where the runaway market is indeed fuelled by vacancies, likely foreign-owned.
I'm from Dublin and Dublin's problem is two fold. First of all, many of the politicians are landlords so have a massive conflict of interest. Second is zoning laws are outrageously bad. Urban sprawl is the name of the game.
I think in general writing code based on hypothetical requirements that never materialize is just wasteful. And leads to bad code.
You can ship good code fast.
Shipping slow is not a guarantee of good code.
I think the pathology here is defending "sloppy" or "negligent" code by the need to ship fast, when in fact you probably could ship as fast with cleaner code, but the coder just could not care enough.
This isn’t about knowing what changes will be made just that change is inevitable. Technical debt arises because it’s faster to write brittle code.
The problem with brittle code is it makes any change more difficult. The most obvious example is variable names without semantic meaning. The compiler doesn’t care if you’re using “asdf” but such choices collects its pound of flesh every time anyone messes with that section.
Yes, I 100% agree and would like to add to your argument.
Another example of technical debt is when you write code without tests. You’ll probably finish much faster in the first week or two and then the manual testing will take more and more time. But how often did we see code bases without tests? All the time! And the managers don’t realize how much money they could save by focusing more on quality instead of features.
If you think you‘ll just implement this one thing and then never touch the code again, chances are high you‘ll just hack up the thing and copy paste some code everywhere until it kind of works. This is increasing technical debt, you take out a loan and someone in the future has to pay it back IF they want to make a change. But this is almost always the case, even if you don’t know it now.
My definition of technical debt I wrote down before reading the article: technical debt is the inability to make changes due to not making changes (on a conceptual layer) before.
>You'd be the employee we're trying to get rid of. If you're lying about participation in things, saying you attended meetings when you didn't, I'd fire you.
You have it backwards. If this was happening in my team I would look at why there is a misalignment between company expectations and employee behaviour. If an employee needs to create a script to pretend to do something then there is most likely a deep cultural issue coming top down from management. It highlights an opportunity to refine and improve work practices and culture. The fact that an employee would lie is already a huge red flag that there is something wrong with the culture. Sure 5% of the time the employee is actually not fulfilling their duties but you will know this without the call logs because you would miss them on the call.
I think nocode won't compete with code but more with internal workflow and non-public apps. Basically what we do in Google Sheets to track internal company stuff atm.
I just looked through there website and I fail to see how it would be quicker or better than spinning up a quick rails app with a bootstrap template. Most of my time developing is thinking about the domain model and workflows. Once I've decided on that it takes a matter of minutes to code features and then you are not restricted in your ability to adjust and enhance after the fact.
I think there's a lot here that even as an experienced engineer I hate to start doing from scratch. Now combine that with time to focus on the business
* Where to deploy?
* Where to store the code?
* Which library to send emails with?
* Which 3rd service to send emails with?
A long time ago I spent 2-3 weeks building something to do all the above. After completion, I started going to customers and realised those 2/3wks were basically wasted time because I could have just put a google form and would've done just as good a job. Except now you get something a bit better than that.
If you can solve your issues with a google form then use a google form. I would never start a simple project as an app. All my coded projects are more complex than that. Some might be able to be done with no code tools but it would definitely be a pita to execute.
Your approach requires learning HTML, CSS, Bootstrap and Rails documentation in order to create a prototype.
You may as well be saying that getting furniture from IKEA isn't any simpler than buying lumber, saws, wax and paint from Home Depot and building your own.
I already know all those things and learned them for pleasure. Once you know it, nocode vs code is like the difference between using a GUI with a mouse or learning the keyboard shortcuts and using the command line. GUI with mouse just slows you down and is less flexible in general. Fine for lots of things but it's hardly a substitute for complex apps. Nocode apps are basically approximations.
I use nocode tools all the time, just not for building products. They’re great but they are also limited. If you hit any kind of success with your prototype you have to be ready to do it for real.
Having that background is what trained me to be able to think logically like you do to build systems which is the hard part. I wasn't born knowning this stuff either. In fact I only learned it properly in my late 20's.
My kid goes through phases. We don't restrict or give any special attention to the device and he is free to use it as he wishes apart from just before bedtime. He will go through phases of using it more or less or sometimes not at all. There have been months where he never turned it on once. Given that computing is such a massive tool for life I'm not sure why you think your kids using a computer is a negative thing?
