You might want to brush up on business speak, that's the real reason for writing the vast majority of all software ever written or that will be written in this century.
The point is that it is possible to be able to pitch a technology to management without being overly opaque and sounding like a bag of buzzwords.
Also, keep in mind that different industries are accustomed to different sets of terminology. Engineers at tech companies don't usually use terms such as "product delivery" and "Continuous Application Lifecycle Management." To us, "multi-cloud orchestrator" is a much clearer way to describe this technology.
It's odd, I am an engineer at a tech company that works on the Salesforce stack so I use the phrase "product delivery" all the time and "continuous application lifecycle management" is a perfectly normal phrase to me. It's really all about different industries, even within "tech".
Not only that, this is coming out of "Walmart Labs @ Walmart Global eCommerce". Sounds like a tech company.... This is more just big company PR people than tech or non-tech.
Agreed, there are no 10x engineers, we all have 10x moments in time once in a while. We all have moments when we feel we can't tie our own shoelaces without help.
Of course there are outliers. Nobody disputes that Jordan was a 10x basketball player (probably closer to 100x when compared against the true mean and not just among professional players). Nobody disputes that Coltrane was a 10x jazz musician. Why would software be unique among all fields by not having any outliers?
You're talking about exceptional geniuses, of which there are maybe a few dozen in a given field across an entire generation of people.
Every two-bit company is demanding "10x engineers". That is what doesn't exist. There are not tens of thousands of genius software developers in the world.
I think this is the problem, and my main concern with the overuse of "10x engineer": they don't live in a vacuum.
If you hire a 10x engineer and get him to move a button two pixels left, and then tomorrow someone else tell him to move the button two pixels right, he won't be a 10x engineer, he'll be a 0x engineer. There's a lot more involved and it compounds. An engineer knowing what to do and what not do (a skill often overlooked) can help immensely, but everyone needs plenty of support to be at their 10x.
For me they are tools for work and they are the web apps that I use the most every day (I work remotely). Trello is a task management system where you organize tasks as drag-n-drop "cards" and Slack/Gitter are chat apps (Slack is for company chat and Gitter is for my open source project community).
I do use Youtube/Facebook/Twitter etc as well, but I use them primarily for content consumption for entertainment, so my usage patterns of those services wouldn't be affected much if they were written without using javascript at all. In contrast, drag-n-drop and the ability for real-time collaboration are the killer feature of Trello (for me), and obviously there's no way web chat would ever work smoothly without js.
>> ignorants who probably did some $(...).show() and call it javascript
So was that a dig against jQuery?
>> People just don't appreciate how wonderful this language is.
Ever try adding a string and an integer in JavaScript?
I think developers who think JavaScript is great, love it because it's forgiving. Do what you want, the JavaScript siren says, it might work, it might not but at least you won't have an ugly all stop. I'll try to make it do something, anything, sings the siren.
No way I would disrespect jQuery in any way. I learnt a lot of JS by digging into jQuery code and from this book from its author "Secrets of the JavaScript Ninja"
But I hate it when people who have done some simple basic programming and used jQuery think that they know JS
Like the parent, this seems odd that just now in 2016 we find there might be another planet in our own solar system when planets are being discovered in other solar systems and galaxies all the time.
There's this from the article:
"For the first time in over 150 years, there is solid evidence that the solar system's planetary census is incomplete."
It's our _own_ solar system and we just now found this massive thing?
One of the main methods we use for finding planets in other systems is watching for them to cross our view of the star -- basically, looking for a star to slightly dim in a periodic fashion, something akin to an eclipse.
With objects in our own system that don't emit light of their own and are much farther away from the sun than we are, they'll never block the light from the sun. If by sheer luck they happen to pass in front of another star and temporarily block it, it's still difficult to figure out what the object was, how fast it was moving, and so on and therefore difficult to correlate with "something in our own system".
Keep in mind, the solar system is REALLY big. "Planet Nine" is proposed to be some 55+ billion miles away, or about six hundred times as far away from the Sun as Earth is.
Well, we've not yet found it. There is just a very good case for it's existence.
Also, it's arguably easier to find planets in other solar systems because from our vantage point we can observe the stars and measures the dips in light as the planet transits the star (from our perspective). We can't do that without our own solar system given we too are orbiting the same star as the planet we would want to detect.
Also, remember this planet has an orbital period of about 10,000 - 20,000 years, according to the article. It would have just barely completed one orbit since humans started farming.
I prefer to overlap and manage my windows as I need to. I'd like to see a desktop from Google based on Android but with overlapping windows, not the confining a phone is required to use.
