ultimatejs

We need to leave the middle east immediately. It's another vietnam. It doesn't matter whether it was a false flag or not. What matters is what actions they used it to justify. That said so many things don't add up--and no, evidence doesn't add up on either side of the 911 issue--leaves no reason to trust the American government. If you do, you must need something to follow. Or you just can't believe the american government would do any wrong and lie to us.. Do you believe Russia's hacked the DNC? did you read the report they produced. There is absolutely no proof, yet US Intelligence can tell the media it happened and we all believe it. The same is true with basically everything. It's news produced by US Intelligence and the powers that be with no real evidence and you believe it. I read the report by the DNI on the Russian hacking. It covered only possible intent based on news they posted to social media and RT.com.

So yea my friend, all you doubters trust the US Government too much. 911 might not have been a false flag, what matters is what we have done since and what we continue to do. Now we're supposed to believe we have to stay in the middle east because we have to clean up our mess. More lies. They dont want us there. Americans wouldn't want us there if we weren't brainwashed by the fake threat of terrorism on the daily. We have killed hundreds of thousands in the middle east and less than 3k died in 911 and less than that in the 16 years since then in both the US and Europe. For something so big as attacking the entire Middle East for 16 years against everyone's will, I have no choice but to believe there is elite forces at work.

Anyway, the evidence of bits and bytes of wreckage matters not. It's all just too messy and not definitive enough to believe.

Exactly, they might as well just put the whole damn plane stuck right there clearly visible--it wouldn't change a thing. It all could have been a real terrorist attack--all that matters is our disproportionate response ("shock and awe") on an unrelated country to know America and the powers that be have done some horrible egregious things and don't represent the thinking of the people had they not been brainwashed by propaganda. Had the mainstream media been toting a forgive and forget peace party line rather than war mongering propaganda, nobody would want war.

There have always been too many questions about the whole thing. There have always been too many questions about every single one of these things:

- No weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? - We can't see Bin Laden's Body? - No evidence that Russia hacked the DNC and a report released by the DNI solely talking about motives displayed on social media? -A year after Bush Junior is in the presidency we are back in Iraq where his father left off?

To me it's obvious something is up. You can get stuck on various discrepancies in evidence or not. It very well could have been a terrorist attack--that the powers that be were waiting on to counter-punch exactly as they had planned. It doesn't matter. Who actually wants us in the middle east and if we all as citizens wanted to get out, how easy would that actually be, or would the military industrial complex make that something that takes forever to happen. Wasn't Obama meant to have gotten us outa there. It hardly seems so. It seems like we're just using new more focused technology like drones to do the same with less actual boots on the ground.

If you're telling me, you think we belong over there, then you watch too much news by the mainstream media instilling fear in you. How many journalists on CNN are actually wandering around over there compared to how many report it? Exactly, it's a game of telephone with someone triggering the overall direction of their message, based on their own "biases." Perhaps that at their yearly Bilderberg group meetup they agreed to manipulate the public in order to more easily execute their plans of making the Middle East willing client states.

The ONE piece of metal with the serial number on it, and the ONE piece of metal that clearly has part of an American Airlines logo on it (and the partially ruined american flag stuck in the debris) all remind me of that Dave Chapelle sketch where the cops "sprinkle crack" on the suspect they framed.

The one outlier is the Hitachi tractor rather than a John Deere one. Merica, land of false flags and wrongful world domination!

black box?

where's the plane?

Many great open source products have huge commercial backers--the important thing is that there is a community, which is in fact very true with Apollo.

I get what you're saying and I'm sure there is lots of truth to it--that doesn't make what's going on now the best to ever do it (i.e. the fastest way to produce the most meaningful user experiences). If it wasn't the case, we'd be doing remote procedure calls in C or whatever.

Bottom line: ur point is one that should be heard, but there's a way more value could be added in how you present it.

Dawson looks way simpler. That's clearly it's selling point. Dawson looks like what it should be for the modern javascript developer. They nailed the API whereas Serverless is more daunting. Perhaps it's time for a new contender to iterate its way to the top spot.

nanoservices isn't specific enough. serverless has great meaning to initiated web developers. i for one know exactly what they mean by that and always did, whereas nanoservices, to me at least, could mean all sorts of things.

The data loss event that happened--to me--isn't enough to describe the quality of their product. I could go try it, but it's a few hours in (if not a weekend) to really get answers that someone experienced could provide in 3-5 bullet points.

I guess we have one bullet point, do we have more?

I didn't say it was amazing. Perhaps you are the one being reflexive.

I wrote:

"All the things you said could be true, yet their product [could be] amazing."

Grammatically, it's called "elliptical." I then immediately say: "I haven't used it, but I like what I'm seeing"--so what I meant should be quite obvious.

What value are you adding with your criticism of what--in my case--at least has a question:

"What's actually wrong with the product? Why is it not 'well-engineered'?"

My point was extremely clear--his post needed to have evidence of how their processes results in bad product. And I asked that as a question--perhaps you know? Something tells me you even do (perhaps you're a Gitlab user), yet you're choosing to take an unproductive meta route of criticizing my partial criticism with no actual goal. What do you expect to accomplish with that?

I presume you got stuck on one word ("amazing"), made up your mind and didn't read the rest. My bad, i could have been more clear. However, the essence of what I was saying was straightforward, but you chose to see the forrest instead of the trees. A common reason people take that route is because there is something else you wished to express, but didn't--perhaps you have real experience with gitlab in one way or another that resonates more with the person's viewpoint I replied to. I'm not saying he's wrong--I just would like to hear the full reasoning behind that perspective.

I'd love to hear what that actual perspective is. Gitlab is an interesting product I haven't spent much time reviewing until today. Maybe you can provide the evidence to back up the original poster's point??

Um ok. What's actually wrong with the product? Why is it not "well-engineered"? All the things you said could be true, yet their product is amazing. I haven't used it, but I like what I'm seeing.

So what if a smart experienced developer (their CTO) is able to get good prices on what he/she wants done through remote work? The point you're making is negativity for no reason without evidence on how it's not working, i.e. what's wrong with their product.

"rural campfires and urban watering holes" lol...I too have had similar experience. Basically it boils down to the media severely downplaying it and avoiding the topic. Because that's what the powers that be tell them to do. The same way US Intelligence was able to tell them, "look Russia without a doubt did it [the DNC hack]" and they repeated that without question and without proof ad nauseum, the media by and large does what they're told. It's ultimately a recipe for the sort of revolutions that took over Russia 100 years ago. People in those watering holes are getting fed up and have no outlet and feel like nobody is listening to them--cuz nobody is listening to them.

Also, older generations are less concerned. They understand technology less, so my assessment is they kinda throw in the towel. Maybe 10-20 more years of those 20-30 year olds at those watering holes and we'll be the majority of the country--at that point they'll have no choice but to hear us, because we'll be working at and running those media companies, congress as well. That's my hope. Otherwise, it means violent revolution. The state can't be trusted anymore.

Glitch is GoMix from the looks of it. Go to GoMix.com. I happened to be there just 3 days ago. Now it redirects to Glitch.com lol.

I agree. I'm simply saying for many it makes a lot of sense to learn the theory as it actually becomes relevant to what you're already doing.

The more important thing though is that it's a line of thinking that enables people and gives them confidence to get going earlier, rather than wait until they've checked a bunch of checkboxes and have been cosigned by an institution. I think all the fears and ego-issues around not knowing enough before you get started are a bad thing, an inhibitor.

That said, I now wish I had done those 4 years. It would be amazing to be able to take 4 years off just for school at 31 than to have to struggle to find time to learn in the middle of projects. But it just was never gonna be any other way for me than diving in. And after all, a mindset of continual learning is what it's all about.

I think diving in and building something--regardless if you start out early with a CS degree--should be the primary focus.

If you jump straight to a CS degree before even building a simple website or simple whatever, it's a mistake. And ideally develop a minor level proficiency and achieve some wins where you start feeling yourself for your growing skillset. If you jump into a CS degree without at least having that, ur making a huge bet on something you know nothing about, that you might not even enjoy.

something tells me in this era the majority of us are not CS/theory-first developers. And that's a good thing. It's the natural thing. And it means we have true inspiration to learn CS when it naturally comes time, rather than artificially enforced training before you have anything to do with all the theory, which also means a harder time learning it.

Ultimately it depends on the individual's scenario. Both sides are extremely challenging. Without more info, it's up to them to decide which best suits their situation. They're already thinking of going the consulting route, so I'm providing an argument for a different way so they can fully weigh as many possibilities as possible

So, the downside of consulting for one is that he's just going back to freelancing, just now with his buddy. But more importantly, the downside is simply that projects are always under-estimated, you'll grow your business ponzi-scheme style (new projects paying for old), eventually have more engineers, and be responsible for them, etc. Typical scene. They will have severely complicated their lives, whereas what a startup/product needs is simplicity and space to focus (i.e. not a plethora of projects distracting you and occupying more time than hoped). So it may very well be a long while before they truly create the space to do their own product whole-heartedly. I'm not saying it can't be done. They need to weigh whether they want to go through all that.

VERSUS:

a year from now (presumably after demanding a raise) taking 6-12 months off to work on their own product, and if it fails, simply going and getting another job (they'll be better engineers, and it will therefore be easier to get jobs).

At the end of the day, the biggest--and perhaps hidden--factor is whether you have kids. If you don't have kids (or people other than yourself to take care of), and you can't create this environment for yourself, you have other problems. But more than likely while at this stage of your life, you have options. So the trick is not to get yourself into trouble with large under-estimated projects for other people, and to do whatever it takes to create time for yourself and your own projects. That's the name of the game. That's what it's all about. I.e. keeping it simple. Don't get yourself into trouble with too many projects, projects that are too big, working for too much potential that doesn't pan out. Get short low responsibility projects, and make your #1 focus creating time for your own projects.

That's why my suggestion to these guys is to save every penny at their current job so they can skip to a product business.

Forget the sales, soft skills, and making products for other people that will never truly appreciate the craftsmanship that went into it. Just stick to your guns and create the situation where you can just work on your own product.

If you guys are kicking ass at your current firm, you should be being paid for it, i.e. making enough to save some some money. There's your ticket. Be patient and wait it out while saving money. Plan out your upcoming product, and do all the preparation that doesn't require deep immersion, so from day one after quitting you can deeply immerse yourself.

ps. how's 7 years as a remote freelancer so different from a consulting firm? It's not. Just more developers, bigger projects. You already know what that life is all about. Do you really want to go back to that, now with the burden of supporting more engineers? Keep it simple. If you have the skills and confidence, your product idea will work out. Just create the space and time to do it.