Don't get me wrong Gooveshark had possibly the best UI of all the streaming services but it was largely successful because all the content was pirated.
I know. I wish they had been able to go legit. As someone who went to UF (for CS) soon after they closed, I missed having a company like that in the area.
I have a Fitbit Versa that reminds me to walk 250 steps every hour. So, I usually take at work when it sends me a reminder so I can step away from the computer and relax. I've noticed that work has become more enjoyable, and I've been more successful.
I started my 9-5 coding job back in 2014, i quickly realized my body was going to shit. Now a days i take two decently long walks, halfway thru morning and halfway thru afternoon. Anywhere from 5-20 minutes depending on weather and how busy of a day it is.
I build up so much crap at my office, mainly mental crap. After a couple hours of slack/code/etc i lose my focus and it helps to turn off everything and reset. "Ok , now what do i _really_ need to accomplish in the next two hours, for myself. Not for co-worker that needs help that I have been helping"
Apart from the 'reset', i do tend to think of different solutions for various problems that are floating about my brain while walking as well. Different data structures, process flows, refactors etc.
I don't know about general F# adoption, but I've used it for personal projects and I quite like it. I'm trying to convince work to let us use it in production.
Great to hear that you're working to convince people to use it in the workplace. Not sure what your approach is, but a few things have worked for people very well:
* F# for unit testing
* F# + Giraffe or Saturn deployed to Docker containers on .NET Core (people tend to love the succinct routing and that it all runs on ASP.NET Core in Docker)
* F# for internal tools to ingest and manipulate data, then put it into another place in a much more sane format
* F# with FAKE for a right proper build script
* F# with Azure Functions to perform some scheduled task or something like that (it also helps that Functions is dirt cheap)
If only my workplace used Azure for some stuff. We're moving to serverless architecture for a lot of our apps, but it's all on AWS so no F# :(. The other .NET guy at my company (wpf) and I have been singing the praises of Azure and using .NET core for future developments. I think that they'll eventually throw us a bone since they don't want to be dependent on a single cloud provider.
However, I have messed around with data manipulation in F# for sports betting, and it's been exceptionally pleasant.
F# actually rusn _very_ well on AWS. There is some official scaffolding tooling you can use[0], and performance with .NET Core is more than sufficient for what your business likely needs[1]. Love this quote: "Both C# and F# on .Net Core 2.0 exceeds all expectations and outperforms all other runtimes in average duration".
Thanks for the compliment! And I hope that it all goes well with you.
I'm in the same boat, coming from Python. I like it a lot -- it lets me write things that are hard to express in Python. (Sum types and exhaustive pattern matching in particular.) My Python had been moving in this direction anyway -- less OO, more procedural, more pure functions, limited mutation.
Exactly. We're doing the same thing with my C# project at work. It's becoming more "functional" as we refactor and fix bugs. The project has been much easier to work with.
I’d imagine even a moderately engaged gym user would lose the gym money on every visit, in staffing costs alone. The marginal cost of each user rises too, as people that are unable to get on machine are more likely to churn. It is however usually outweighed by the huge numbers of people who simply do nothing with their subscription.
> I’d imagine even a moderately engaged gym user would lose the gym money on every visit, in staffing costs alone.
A gym user attending a gym doesn't incur significant additional staffing costs. The work required to clean the gym may increase a bit but that'd be nowhere near the price of even the cheapest gym memberships.
> The marginal cost of each user rises too, as people that are unable to get on machine are more likely to churn.
That's not a cost, it's a factor for the overall churn rate and marginal cost for acquiring a new user. It'd limit the max profitability of a gym (i.e. getting to churn = growth equilibrium) but it's not an operational cost.
>A gym user attending a gym doesn't incur significant additional staffing costs. The work required to clean the gym may increase a bit but that'd be nowhere near the price of even the cheapest gym memberships.
But that's not the right way to gauge "cost per member-usage". If you get a lot more usages, you will have to pay noticeably more for staff, maintenance, replacement, etc.
For comparison, how would you gauge the actual cost of sending a letter in the mail? Naively, you would say "well, you can't detect the cost of sending it in labor or fuel costs, so it's zero".
But that would be wrong. The right way is to say "how much would it cost to send a million more letters? The cost of one letter should be treated as one millionth of that" because, in the large, your marginal costs will scale that way as letter transmission goes up and down.
So yeah, the gym is, for all relevant purposes, bearing a small cost each time you use the gym.[1] It's just that, for the vast majority of members, all those usages cost them much less than the membership fee.
[1] I've heard figures of $1/visit but can't find at the moment.
In my professional experience with gyms, the most expensive thing you can do, is use the treadmills a lot. They are the most expensive machinery, and most prone to breaking down.
I go to the gym and I interact with 1, sometimes 2 staff members. The people at the front who check my card and sometimes the guy who works in the locker room if I can't get mine open.
They are on staff anyways. It costs them nothing extra.
What is true is that they can understaff (and have less equipment) than if they had 100% regular participation.
The gym I went to before was 24/7 and completely unstaffed outside of daytime hours. When the place was unstaffed, a fingerprint reader was used to verify you were the owner of the card.
Careless weight lifters can cause significant damage to a facility. Some users indeed can cost more than their membership. Especially if it causes the gym's landlord to raise the rates, or force an additional damage deposit, on the next lease renewal.
I've been a subscriber for a few years. They waive online ticketing fees and you get $5 vouchers for every $100 spent (among other perks). It's been worth it for me.
