all_these_years

The second video seems to have some issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJUk5VDCKbQ

The obvious parallel right now would be the introduction of AI (a known flawed technology, IMHO), replacing jobs of experienced engineers and experts in most fields, in a moment of social and political instability...

From https://x.com/GilKalai/status/1724057865206309266

SHA-3 in Ruby:

    $ gem install sha3
    $ irb
      > require 'sha3'
      > s = SHA3::Digest::SHA224.new
      > s.update("\x00")
      > s.update("\x00" * 4294967295)

    [ Segmentation fault... ]

Tested with Ruby 3.1.2

Gem's code (including C native extension): https://github.com/johanns/sha3

I am not a legal expert at all, but I guess this blurs a bit more the separation between open source and closed source...

It looks like the only remaining issue is the licensing model, which would need to consider the legislation on where the software is acquired or executed.

EULAs will probably be rewritten, lawyers will profit.

It seems to be using Google Analytics and Google fonts...

There is another conclusion: chicken read the mind of humans :) The original article: http://cogprints.org/5272/1/ghirlanda_jansson_enquist2002.pd...

Not true. Not only that the OO is not dead yet. But the main obstacle for Elixir is that there are just not enough stable libraries. You couldn't get the productivity you can easily get on Ruby or JS. That Elixir is something to watch, and it may have some clear user cases (specially where Erlang shines), I would agree... but no much else for now.

I am a math major, so yes, math checked :), it is still lower. My wife has health insurance, so that is not ann issue (for now). It also happens that they said they have a max salary they decided for engineers, which doesn't apply to the business side. This could be just a negotiation tactic to make me to agree to take the lower salary (I am over that max right now), so I think I'll look what is out there...

Anyway, I think that an hourly rate, strangely, has some good things from the employee's point of view, if you have some value to offer and the job market is healthy. You feel that your commitment is to your work, and that to leave is not such a big deal, less attachment to 'the position', more responsibility to your craft.

IMHO all depends on the employee's work ethics, the company's work environment, possibilities to learn, autonomy in your work, feeling you do something interesting, etc, etc.

I can offer my situation as an example: I work as a senior lead dev in Rails in a hourly basis (US East Coast). Interesting job with a lot of autonomy, possibilities to learn (there is a complex mix of technologies here). I know it is not easy to find someone with my skills set and I know they are more than happy with my performance. The job is hourly just because that was the initial deal, a 'contract to hire'.

They've just offered me a fixed salary and benefits, but with a lower pay from what I am doing hourly (even if my hours are cap to 8h/day). You know, business side tries to push down. So I am seriously considering to start sending resumes and just leave if I can't continue hourly, just because of the pay cut.

So I think all depends. Flexibility in the hours, if it's possible, is a good thing, but fixed salary has also some advantages (if the salary is attractive): health insurance, benefits, paid vacations,... and you may get a higher degree of identification with the company.

So again, it all depends.