NOGDP

Did you read the linked story? How does demonstrate any tech vision or leadership for AWS by Bezos? Do you just blindly believe all of the claims (that don't even relate to AWS vision/tech leadership) made in the story? Do you honestly believe Bezos - the business leader and highest level manager of Amazon, who has an enormous amount on his plate, who has no technical background, is coming up with all of these high level architectural and tech decisions, instead of, say, the highly qualified and experienced engineers at Amazon? You seem to think billionaires are some kind of superheroes from fantasy land instead of actual human beings. You have to be a naive child to believe half of the claims about Bezos made in this story.

1) No it doesn't.

2) 99% of this story is fake.

This uncorroborated story is not 'conventional understanding'. It doesn't even demonstrate any link to AWS vision or architecture. Service oriented architectures existed years before this mythical memo and AWS didn't exist until years later. This memo reads like a Steve Jobs parody - just blatantly attributing all major tech and architectural decisions to Jeff's genius and foresight.

What kind of 'vision' and tech leadership did Bezos bring to AWS? Arguably none whatsoever.

I wonder of the same mechanism that allow mosquitoes to transfer disease also works as a vaccination for animals?

> Attributing stuff to a malicious effort to make the public more manipulable (as if that was necessary) should be dropped in favor of the natural incompetence of the press in framing issues reasonably.

Except we've known for a long time that the mainstream press works, very intentionally, to manipulate public opinion.

You're not saying anything specific about what's wrong with Java. Java is not perfect, but you haven't actually given a single good reason. The type system alone is a huge benefit over languages such as Python/Ruby. Lisp has existed and been taught for a long time, and I like Lisp languages such as Clojure, but the allusion to Clojure being some kind of magic bullet is also pretty baseless.

A big chunk of the issues you're writing that test suite for, and constantly rerunning, are solved, out of the box, by having a decent type system. The type system also gives you superior code completion (with proper IDE support), which already outweighs any potential reload time costs in Java vs Python/Ruby, for me personally.

If your development productivity is entirely reliant on how quickly you can reload your changes, then you're doing something wrong. Though I guess you'd have to write mounds of unit tests and constantly rerun them to prevent common issues that Java's type system solves for free.

> Now, Google comes and creates a whole new UI toolkit from scratch, couples it with a very beautiful SDK and component framework and offers a far better programming language than js could ever be but we're still nagging

All of these things, more or less, already exist in great variety in the JS ecosystem (angular, react, vue, redux, webpack, etc.). Many people have also already adopted other languages such as TypeScript, which is easier to learn for someone coming from JS, and superior to Dart imo.

Does anybody know if there is a filter or something that increases oxygen concentration in the air? Maybe something that pumps air from the outside and only lets oxygen in?

Eh, that's a lot of extra steps and complexity for no apparent reason. Virtual desktops, supported by many linux UXs for a long time, provide essentially all of the same functionality without the extra mental overhead of having to deal with 'mission control' and thinking about monitor vs space vs window, or thinking about 'which state is my window in?'.

> You can't drag a fullscreen window from one monitor to another, because there's no window for you to drag.

But you do get the window bar on hover, which is the same 'control' you use for dragging non-fullscreen windows... the fullscreen window is still a window, except it's controls have been restricted and behaviour modified to prevent it from acting as a window for no apparent reason. The way this concept is implemented in macOS is just ugly imo.

> Haters pointing out a few flaws (which it does indeed have) doesn’t invalidate the fact that it’s still better than Windows or most Linux UIs.

I agree that it's marginally better than Windows, but it's inferior to Linux given the fact that you can have a superior UX on Linux. Obviously this is based on my personal preferences.