Thankfully, most of us quit writing centuries in Roman numerals, it's about time we quit centuries as well :) Sadly, however, the regnal numbers continue to persist
I think that's right. I was thinking about that as I composed my own reply to this thread: it's got many of the hallmarks of J2EE.
That is to say, it's got features that a thoughtful CTO in a very large organisation somewhere, somehow has a well-articulated and nuanced use-case for, but it's not you and it's not anyone you know. And there are a lot of such features.
Not for being Russians, but for active participation in censorship by tweaking their news aggregation to show only hand picked government approved sources
Just read about Yandex.News which display censored news sources on Yandex frontpage that millions of people visit. There is really no hidden censorship here - they just follow Russian law that literally whitelist exclusively press controlled by the state.
They show Kremlin propoganda on their front page which makes Yandex part of Kremlin propoganda machine. They could have shut down news agregator, but they choose not to.
They are complying with russian censorship laws and it's gotten so bad that they are planning to sell the news service altogether to VK which is far worse than Yandex when it to how eager they are to enforce these laws and to work with cops.
> Generally, the major foot-gun that got a lot of places in trouble was the premature move to microservices, architectures that relied on distributed computing, and messaging-heavy designs.
It is interesting, I've been at a company for a few years now and we've been slowing trying to break apart the two monoliths that most of the revenue generating traffic passes through. I am on board with the move to microservices. It's been a lot of fun but also a crazy amount of work and time and effort has been spent to do this.
I've pondered both sides of this argument. On one hand if this move had been done earlier it might not have been as difficult a multi-year project. On the other hand, when I look at the Rails application in particular, it was coded SO poorly that I if it was just written better, initially, it wouldn't even need to be deconstructed at this point. Also, if the same engineers that wrote that Rails app tried to write a bunch of distributed, even-driven microservices instead of the Rails app, we would probably be in even worse shape. (ᵔ́∀ᵔ̀)
Usually a link to a humorous YT video would be inappropriately uninteresting on HN, but this classic and brief satire of microservices is actually quite on point about precisely what is so dangerous about a microservices architecture run amok
Summary: really trivial sounding feature requests like displaying a single new field on a page can become extremely difficult to implement and worse, hard to explain to stakeholders why.
This was 100% true for that startup I worked for as a side job. They would have been so much better off just building a standard java, PHP or .NET back end and calling it a day.
The head engineer (who had known the guy funding the thing since childhood) had no clue how node, stateless architecture, or asynchronous code worked. He had somehow figured out how to get access to one particular worker of a node instance, through some internal ID or something, and used that to make stateful exchanges where one worker in some microservice was pinned to another. Which goes against everything node and microservices is about.
I tried to talk some sense into them but they didn’t want to hear it. So for the last six months I just did my part and drained the big guy’s money like everyone else. I hate doing that - way more stressful than working your ass off.
The first time, a while ago, when I tried Ruby, coming from Java, it was pure joy of freedom :) I really liked the duck typing approach and the dynamic feel of the language. It's rather sad to see static "Java" creeping into it.
I meant that no one pays attention that, for example, a teapot is "he", there's no meaning behind it.
>Generally, nouns ending with an "a" are feminine, with an "o" are neuter, the rest are masculine.
It's a rule of thumb, but it's incomplete.
"Starosta" & Co. are masculine, neuter nouns also end in -e (except for "kofe"); nouns which end in a palatalized consonant can be either feminine or masculine; there are words like "sudia" or "umnica" which can be masc. or fem.; some words like "nozhnicy" only have plural form and don't have gender.
When you live long enough it becomes evident that scale in tech is a pandemic. At a certain point greed inevitably takes over. I believe there's some kind of a threshold beyond which a company has no choice, but to turn evil.
It is not necessarily evil, but corporate interest led.
When it was created, gitlab core value was to be the open source alternative to GitHub.
Then, it started to add light premium features.
Now, free versions have a lot of frustratingly limited features with nag screens to push you to subscribe.
The free core is less and less a priority and less and less sufficient.
After the ipo, things will get even worse. Most of new shareholders (Ie owners) are just profit led. It's an investment for them and they will want the net result to grow at whatever cost.
Management has no choice else than to follow what shareholders require.
So, if it is economically viable, nothing prevent gitlab to stop new versions to be open source if they think that will make them more profitable.
