I’m a very happy user of Rancher 1.6 for years. Simple, nice GUI, got everything I need, works fast, can deploy as many apps /services as you wish, no new concepts to learn (if you know Docker that is).
Used it in my previous agency to manage clients websites and use it now in my startup to manage multiple envs with few apps (api, front end, workers) and nice and easy deployments via GitLab CI.
I’ve been using Rancher for years. Version 2 is all about K8s, but version 1 is super simple to set up and manage with a nice and clean GUI and pretty much no new concepts.
Unfortunately version 1 is abandoned now (I think) but it’s stable and I haven’t had any problems with it. Give it a go.
This! I feel like everyone forgot about CSS Modules, while I think this is the cleanest and nicest solution to all CSS problems and doesn't make you cringe like CSSinJS or styled components and others.
CSS modules is pretty clean, but disagree that JSS/styled-components are "cringeworthy". They're very powerful, especially when combined with React component props - i.e. let's say when a component has a prop active, that when true we want to change the color on something. A traditional way to handle that would be by toggling some active class, however this creates coupling from the prop to a class, and then the style to that class as well. With styled-components, you can remove one step from that with the classes, one less thing to think about (the developer doesn't need to think what classes are needed with what props, and then what styles apply on those classes).
I have put down the deposit and don't really care until final unveiling. I understand their goals in upselling Model 3 reservation holders.
I don't really mind that the $1000 is holding my position in line at Tesla. Otherwise it would sit useless in my bank account.
It is a bit depressing how they downsell the Model 3, but I'm hoping it's just their weird strategy. If some people pull their deposits then even better, I can get my car sooner :P
But I definitely won't be buying before test driving it.
Problem is none of those traditional car brands are actually doing that. All they do is show off concept cars at $100k+. Maybe a few more realistic ones from VW but they're all planned way beyond 2020. By that time Tesla will be years ahead and at massive production scale.
It baffles me how all these smart people completely don't get Elon or Tesla.
Maybe it's hard to understand for some that money is not the ultimate motivator? I'm pretty sure that Tesla could be a profitable company today if they stopped all investments and just focused on selling amazing Model S (who needs AP2?) (best car ever made in opinion of many reviewers!). But they're a tech company that happens to make cars (among many other things), not a traditional car company. That's why they should be valued at tech company criteria. They're doing what all the tech "unicorns" are doing - burning through cash by investing in stuff that will give them massive advantage in the future. Why profit when you can grow massively? (hello Gigafactory! hello Solar City!)
Sure, I can see how this is not a company to invest in during daily trade. But it's not a company that ever said it's in it for the quick buck. 10 years ago it was failing in delivery of Roadster. 5 years ago it was failing in delivery of Model S and 2 years ago it was failing in Model X. If you ask me, I'd love to fail on the scale Elon and Tesla fail. Unless something really really random happens, Tesla is not going down anytime soon. Sure, M3 is risky, Solar City deal might be iffy, but I think some of the smartest people in the world are running this company, they're not gonna flip it.
I mean, a chat app aims to be valued at $25bn vs a company that delivered almost 200k feats of engineering in the last 10 years and everyone is laughing at their current valuation of $40bn. What is wrong with the world?
If you're planning on holding onto the stock long term, the best advice is to just ignore this and ride it out.
The issue is that mass market auto making is hard, it's intensely regulated, and it has a large potential to cost alot of money to build a factory, acquire the parts you need, and handle any liability issues. Their job is to be skeptical and that makes sense as they're lending out billions of dollars to a company that's going to need tens of billions to get everything working.
As a tech company, Tesla has never delivered a product on time. Worse, it's usually 2-3 years late, not the usual 3-6 months delay for software. At this moment, GM beat the Model 3 to market with its cheaper competitor by at least six months and at industry scale.
Now, bear in mind, I'm an early stage Tesla investor. I bought Tesla at $38 and sold them at $150. I felt they were beyond fairly priced at $150 before they unveiled any self-driving tech. So I've been ignoring financial industry naysayers for years.
My take on Tesla is this: this moment is do or die for the company. It's fine to be six months late or even a year late if they launch the Model 3 with full autonomous driving capability at a price affordable to the upper-middle class. But more could be fatal. Several major competitors are nipping at their heels concerning both EVs and autonomous cars, including GM, Nissan, and BMW among others.
The one best thing going for Tesla is their sterling reputation with consumers. Geeks believe that their cars are magic spaceships and are willing to wait unbelievably long times to own one. Their brand reputation is better than Apple. They must deliver quality and not rush production just to meet the Bolt EV in the market.
> Maybe it's hard to understand for some that money is not the ultimate motivator?
Except that's the whole point of the market. Companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. The company has to be motivated by money and growth. Maybe they'll pump out dividends. Maybe they'll take over the world first like Amazon and then pump out tons of cash. Either way - it still always boils down to money.
If a company doesn't care about money, they can be taken over. Their stock price can suffer. Going public means you've decided to be scrutinized. For better or worse.
People who work for Goldman aren't that smart - they're just greedy career-diggers who just look for a quick buck. Just google the mountain of lies that was Spinvox.
I think it was included because it was consistent across browsers.
There's some weird Rails specific things that I am not too sure make sense (like having the ability to use DELETE as a data method for a hyperlink) but make CRUD apps simple to follow in terms of the Rails way-of-thinking.
I'd have to check the source, but I think it was also used for AJAX forms. I think the safe answer is that Rails is great to create something quick but the built-in helpers aren't always very sane.
It's a full stack framework. You can include JavaScript for your views, probably most commonly used to show, hide, and insert and remove elements from the DOM.
To expand on this, the tool of choice for the frontend part used to be PrototypeJS. In Rails 3.1 the relevant portions were decoupled and became options rather than baked-in, with jQuery as the default but still an option among several: http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2011/4/21/jquery-new-default/
Full stack developer and then some. Believer in making the world a better place through technical advancement and solving important problems.
I've been in the industry commercially for 10+ years (and more as a hobby), working on magnitude of projects both professionally and as part-time hobby work. I have a deep understanding of how the web works and believe that it's our role to hide its complexity from the end user.
My core skills include:
- PHP (many years of experience with various libraries and frameworks, incl. Symfony 2, Doctrine2)
- JavaScript (ES6) in the browser (vanilla, jQuery, Bootstrap, AngularJS 1.x, React, D3.js)
- JavaScript on the server (nodejs, express, knex)
I can see an app from the very first brainstorming session, through prototype, testing, development and deployment to production. I've run projects for clients and my own projects with paying customers.
Waaaat. How can you say Angular is hard? I don't think I ever encountered a framework or a technology that I picked up so quickly. Hell, node.js took me longer (with all the callback hell and workarounds for it). I've built several apps in Angular now (and am close to finishing a very complex one) and I dont think I have ever gone through a tutorial.
Used it in my previous agency to manage clients websites and use it now in my startup to manage multiple envs with few apps (api, front end, workers) and nice and easy deployments via GitLab CI.