cmmartin

I worked closely with Accenture for a few years. They are not a development company. They outsource the development work and get huge margins on these kinds of projects by paying cheap wages to developing countries. They are an extremely expensive middle man. They sell people on their "process" (agile, etc) but those of us on HN know how much that's really worth (hint: not $33M).

They could read your text, provide their service and then discard it. Instead, they store it indefinitely. He states this explicitly right here https://twitter.com/sebmck/status/1104132997110878208

Defects and flaws will be repaired for free though

Which it's not. iOS uses JavaScriptCore https://developer.apple.com/documentation/javascriptcore

NCC is a good tool for this too https://github.com/zeit/ncc

They don't need everyone to train their AI to detect aging. They don't even need a substantial sample size. All humans age in relatively similar ways.

A major part of the success of open source has been the fact that companies have the option to fork/tweak/sell the code. MongoDB has benefited from this as much as anyone. They gained the adoption levels they have now by advertising these exact benefits. Only later did they decide you need a commercial license to provide it as a service. How many companies would have thought twice about using MongoDB had they thought they would eventually have to pay for it and/or couldn't monetize it themselves?

Also, it's not like Amazon is not giving back to the open source community (https://aws.amazon.com/opensource/)

You are the messiah. Money is the god.

Amen to this... "You will get many ups and downs on your way — A new feature might have a significant bug you haven’t noticed and it would cause some customers to quit. I recently experienced that but I would think it was a necessary process to make the app more reliable. You are not perfect. So is your product. Finish your work and see how it goes. Don’t be afraid."

Seriously misleading headline. They didn't vote to replace him at all. They voted to add another executive (A COO). He would have remained CEO. Also, the vote failed.

The best editor is the one you are most comfortable using. When I hear someone argue that editor x, or even language y, is superior, I remind myself that what they are probably saying is they know that one the best.

More like elm than Dart, but elm also compiles (transpiles?) to javascript and Grain compiles to web assembly

I imagine the result here would be the same as in Javascript. This is not an error in Javascript. It would concatenate them and convert to a string. So, you would get the string "3a string". I do see your point though and now agree there should be more documentation covering these cases

Why are Javascript and Node.js different here? Especially considering this is back-end only. Who is using Javascript on the server without Node.js and how? I think they should probably be combined and if so, you would see absolute dominance by Node.js

Are you asking how they are implemented? You'll have to read the compiler code for that. But the documentation does tell you... "No runtime type errors, ever. Every bit of Grain you write is thoroughly sifted for type errors, with no need for any type annotations." So you never write them, but you get all the benefits as if you did.

Well if you are worried about those 2 characters, you should be stoked about Grain, because it gives you type safety without ever defining types. Think how many characters you will save in an application by never defining a type and at no cost.

Grain is quite different. Grain is more functional (no classes or context, tuples). Dart compiles to Javascript. Grain compiles to web assembly. Dart requires you to define types. Grain provides type safety and zero runtime errors without ever defining types manually.

The guy told him to shove the submarine "where it hurts". He definitely "started it" if that matters