sbt is one of the worst engineering mistakes I've ever witnessed. It was a constant source of esoteric ergonomics and frustration for no clear reason other than being the pet project of someone who really loved implicits.
Give developers an alternative to classes that favors a higher performance ceiling and statically analyzability over flexbility.
Is an entirely reasonable goal. Object shape in JS tends to go through a fixed pattern of mutation immediately after construction and although that can sometimes be analysed away by the JIT there are a lot of edge cases that can make that tricky.
You may not care, but I bet almost everybody who has actually worked on a JS engine does, and has good reasons for doing so.
Everything is decided to be an 'abstraction' and it's someone else down the line that has to be concerned. Over the last 30 years of starting as a developer I've really lost faith that the majority are actually concerned with solving anything vs just indulging conceptual whims.
I think you're mixing up stuff that's unrelated to your concern.
The concerns you're expressing only apply to operations and financial transactions. That's not handled by spreadsheets, browsers, or databases. In fact, the primary concern of a browser is to provide views over data fed by servers.
In addition, it sounds like you're confusing minor conveniences with something being somehow broken by design. The reason why no one bothered to standardize a money type is the fact that there isn't a technical requirements for it at all.
I live in rural Scotland. Every power outage in the last 10 years has been caused by land developers not reading the local utilities plans and accidentally cutting through cables.
To be fair, the UK's "dial before you dig"-type services are next to useless.
I've tried to get plans for my house before digging, and UK Power Networks refused my request as I'm not authorised to see the plans apparently.
National Grid sent me a blank page with an empty square on it.
SGN were the only one that actually sent me a sensible map with what appeared to be accurate contents (insofar as they match where I thought they would be), but even they had a disclaimer on the document they sent me saying they can't be held liable for errors on the map and all digging should be performed by hand to confirm whether a pipe exists.
A lot of the major underground infrastructure owners (including Thames Water, BT, Sky, Virgin) just aren't signed up to the asset search services and you have to contact them manually to even find out if they have assets in your area.
Of those, only Thames Water actually replied to my email, and they said I'd either have to sling them several hundred pounds or drive down to their office in Reading and look at the archives in person. I did the latter, and the plans were just entirely wrong.
Ground Penetrating Radar isn't even an option in my area due to the soil composition. Seems like you just make your best guess and then hope for the best.
They want huge tax credits for data centers that then won't employ many people or will employ visa'd migrants, but that can of worms can be kicked down the road to another administration.
Because at the early stages it’s really important to talk to customers.
This also helps find users for whom this is a huge pain point - metrics costs are so high that they’d love to talk to someone and complain about the problem.
we leverage serverless and s3 based architecture for much lower costs. However, it's applies for any application, not just for serverless applications.
Your costs and deployment pattern are your problem, customers don’t care about them.
Saying it is serverless means nothing to customers unless the serverless aspect applies to them, which in this case it doesn’t. If you’re only selling access to your product for a fee, then whether it’s serverless or not, customers couldn’t care less.
We actually started with "reduce your costs by 3-10x with infinite scalability" without talking about storing in s3 and serverless (along the lines of your thinking - only talk about benefits + what you do). But our users, engineers by their very nature, were skeptical about how Oodle works, so we ended up settling on a combination of why, what and how. This resonated better with our early customers and prospects.
I literally never want to hear other people's words as voices, or have my voice casually dumped on the Internet along with probably, over time, far too much reconstructable info about me.
Radio and podcasts only work with a small group of people who are good at creating that type of content. They either write a good script or have a clear plan (and talent) for unscripted content.
That's far different from "Hey it's Bob, ehm, so, yeah about tomorrow, we need a place to grab beers with John and Alex. I was thinking it could be SomePlace at X street. What do you think?" which costs the listener much more time than just reading a text message.
But I think this site might be on to something with the voting and all. That should bring out the content that's worth listening to.
Right? I had a couple of friends switch over to voice messages on FB messenger when the feature was introduced. I don't talk to them anymore because I just never could be bothered to listen to that crap when they could have just as easily used the text messaging like a normal person.
However if one doesn't speak the language natively, text is far preferable because I can quickly translate. Can’t translate some long voice message.
I am in multiple group chats: Spanish, Catalan, English. And with quick translators, we can all communicate with each other. With voice, it would be impossible.
Actually it isn't. I struggle with auditory processing, and routinely mishear things.
If I want to refer to something from an audio message a second time while I'm responding, audio messages are impossible to easily reference. Asynchronous audio messages are awful.
Empathy is also understanding that different people have different preferences, often driven by physiological differences. If my friends were dyslexic or blind or struggled to type, I would be open to voice memos for that reason, but they are all very proficient typists.
A written document inherently allows you to process it at your own pace. A voice memo cannot do that.
Sure. But it's less invasive for both. I can send a text on the bus without bothering anyone. I can read a text on the bus without bothering anyone. Time isn't the only reason that many people don't like voice messages.
Huh, I didn't mean to submit, I didn't finish the comment. It was supposed to say "...in Asia, and there's a button that transcribes to text for the reader".
This was a constant source of confusion for me with Akka. They seemed almost proud of how much boilerplate and how many weird implicit conversions were exposed to the developer.
