jseban

43 ms·

421.
by jseban 5y ago
> The difference is that in a football game you don't have time to talk to each other during the game. In a software team you do have plenty of time and opportunities to talk as soon as a blocker or issue appears Yes. The other diff
422.
by jseban 5y ago
> If the only time ICs communicate any of that stuff is at a set time each morning, then something is already seriously wrong. Agreed, It's much more productive to simply approach some of your coworkers, or write in a team chat afte
423.
by jseban 5y ago
Almost always the best way to solve an issue or a blocker, is for the person to simply continue to work on the task, alone. Very rarely is it productive to involve other people, and when it is, the person who is closest to this part of the
424.
by jseban 5y ago
Having a daily casual meeting where everyone brings up all of their problems and issues, and anyone in the company is welcome to listen, but not talk, is just a dumb idea. And there are never any recurring (easy) obstacles that the scrum ma
425.
by jseban 5y ago
Yeah which never happens in reality, as it's completely incompatible with a normal (risk averse) corporate environment. And the main premise is that there's recurring daily obstacles that the scrum master somehow can resolve, whic
426.
by jseban 5y ago
It contains all of the essential amino acids.
427.
by jseban 5y ago
They are still not complete proteins like every animal protein is, so you need to figure out combinations that can theoretically make a complete protein. And the protein content is still going to be much lower than meat. Protein is already
428.
by jseban 5y ago
Yeah the fact that valuations of stock prices is flexible, up to the market, and changes over time is definitely a feature and not a bug. I also see it as a good thing to organise the economy increasingly around innovation and less around g
429.
by jseban 5y ago
I agree that it's not significant, it can also just transfer to being privately owned. Companies go in and out of the stock exchange all the time. The point of an IPO really is that you have some kind of growth or development phase tha
430.
by jseban 5y ago
I owned shares in a company that was suddenly acquired and all shareholders cashed out with a nice profit. This company didn't fail, it just succeeded and disappeared.
431.
by jseban 5y ago
It wouldn't transfer money strictly from later shareholders to earlier ones, because that's not fixed as in a pyramid scheme. The people from the failing company should theoretically be doing something even more worthwhile with th
432.
by jseban 5y ago
Yeah it's strange that the market cares so little about profits, and it runs much on emotions, but that still doesn't make it "wrong" in any way, in my point of view, as a ponzi scheme would. Progress is still being made
433.
by jseban 5y ago
Apart from speculative valuation, it's the value of the goods and services produced by the company + it's assets etc.
434.
by jseban 5y ago
If you have a great idea but no resources to realise it, you create a limited liability company, issue stock to the market to raise money to create your business. It's just a way to raise money to create products, inventions etc. Like
435.
by jseban 5y ago
Yeah the company can buy back their own shares, or it can get acquired and taken off the stock exchange. The stock can also become illiquid and you can't sell. But as long as the company keeps doing well, it could also just continue in
436.
by jseban 5y ago
It's not a zero sum game, remember that value is created by inventions and improvements. If 10 people 10 years ago would have bought stocks in amazon and kept them for 1 year each, then sold on to the next person, and the last person j
437.
by jseban 5y ago
Does it seem too good to be true? Is someone else making money off of it? Steer clear
438.
by jseban 5y ago
For sure, but it's better to be open about the fact that it is just for inspiration and entertainment, it can never be a good thing to spread ideas and visions as made up stories about how it actually works.
439.
by jseban 5y ago
> Doing that will make REST zealots judge you for heresy. Yeah but why are people REST zealots I don't understand. Why are developers allowed to have "strong opinions" that align with goals of people outside of the organ
440.
by jseban 5y ago
With RPC you can call any function by arbitrary name. That is by definition the most powerful protocol ever. Any restricted grammar will take away from that.
441.
by jseban 5y ago
> People like to map REST to CRUD because GET looks like a SELECT, POST looks like an INSERT, PUT looks like an UPDATE and DELETE looks like a DELETE. > But there's nothing set in stone about those mappings. People use those mapp
442.
by jseban 5y ago
> This was never the intention of REST. Yeah so REST doesn't support what people are doing or what people want. So let's not use it if we want to succeed.
443.
by jseban 5y ago
I agree, it's too narrow to be used for general remote procedure calls, and an incredibly primitive database compared to the alternatives. Imagine having a web socket directly to an RDBMS being able to call any stored procedure, you wo
444.
by jseban 5y ago
> If you design both the client and server, you don't need to be stateless. And you also don't need to be RESTful.
445.
by jseban 5y ago
> Things like URL Autodiscovery are definitely desirable from an idealistic or academic point of view. However, I have never seriously needed such features. Yeah I'm so tired of this bs from developers who treat their jobs as an ide
446.
by jseban 5y ago
So basically: it doesn't work well if you want to reach every IP on the whole internet. Yeah I suppose that's correct, but we are talking about internal service-to-service communication so why would you have those requirements in
447.
by jseban 5y ago
Got you. I just want to point out the absurdity of it. Java microservices commonly use Javascript Object Notation for their data transfer. How is that the right tool for the job. With all the translations that are needed, why don't t
448.
by jseban 5y ago
Why would service-to-service communication use protocols and formats that are made for browsers?
449.
by jseban 5y ago
Yeah, it's designed for discoverable APIs on the open internet, why use it for internal communication I have no idea. All the time I've wasted making apps slower and worse, and arguing over it, just because it's the "cor
450.
by jseban 5y ago
Just curious, is it possible to take unpaid vacation in the US or is that also unheard of?

More ›