ebbv

186 ms·

1921.
by ebbv 15y ago
I would agree that there are competent developers who want to stick with a single thing and aren't interested in changing languages. The distinction for me is that competent is not necessarily good. For me, good is a higher bar than compete
1922.
by ebbv 15y ago
Google naming a language Go was also a terrible idea.
1923.
by ebbv 15y ago
Just go ahead and assume there's an unwritten "within reason" on any assertion I make. I really don't want to have to type it every time. Of course a developer refusing to switch to Cobol or Brainfuck is completely justified. But switching
1924.
by ebbv 15y ago
The title is misleading, you only get to the 80% level once your application is fairly successful ($25k in sales.) Below that it's 70/30 just like others. Whether this is something worth pursuing or not is hard to judge at this point as we
1925.
by ebbv 15y ago
That comes pretty close to describing me. I had instant streaming + 2 discs + blu ray and I would usually only send back 1-2 discs per month, if that. One time I went 6 months without sending a disc back. Then they hiked the price of my pla
1926.
by ebbv 15y ago
1 - You shouldn't re-use a name that already exists. Elm is a long existing mail client. Pick a different name. 2 - Is writing JavaScript really that hard to people that we need so many of these CoffeeScript like languages? JavaScript is re
1927.
by ebbv 15y ago
If your developers are either incapable of pivoting to a new language or flat out refuse to, then they are terrible developers. Regardless, Digg v4 was clearly the problem. I still haven't seen him outright admit that the fact that at launc
1928.
by ebbv 15y ago
I don't know what your pace was or whether "for miles" means 2 miles or 10. But there are plenty of apps for iOS and Android that will tell you how many calories you burned on your runs, and if it was multiple miles and you were maintaining
1929.
by ebbv 15y ago
You are right that either is better than nothing. But the bad advice that "lifting is the way to go, cardio doesn't work" is very common and it needs to be corrected.
1930.
by ebbv 15y ago
While this is true it also applies to cardio workouts as well. They also build muscle and increase your metabolism. It's a myth that this is an advantage of weight lifting over cardio. It really comes down to personal preference. Do the wor
1931.
by ebbv 15y ago
What a shock that a body building website would say that. I can't believe it. Let me ask Microsoft if I should use Linux for my servers or not, hold on BRB. The reality is that an hour of cardio is going to burn many, many more calories tha
1932.
by ebbv 15y ago
Your advice to workout hard and short instead of cardio is wrong. Working out at all is better than not working out. But cardio exercise (e.g. running and/or biking) for sustained periods of time will burn much more calories. And that's wha
1933.
by ebbv 15y ago
TechCrunch is a rag and everybody knows it. It's the TMZ of the tech world. The response to this blog post by TC is even more indicative of the journalistic rot going on over there than this blog post.
1934.
by ebbv 15y ago
You are lauding HyperCard and calling JS/CSS/HTML a swamp? Seriously? JS/CSS/HTML all have flaws -- some more vexing than others -- but they (and the browsers that put them to use) are infinitely superior to HyperCard.
1935.
by ebbv 15y ago
If the author loves HyperCard so much why doesn't he re-create it? Honestly, it would not take that long. The answer is because he'd rather write some link bait trashing Apple and Steve Jobs. And because he knows perfectly well that making