dyadic

I think that small teams with high throughput communication can work in place and remote. In place the high communication is there by default where the default remote position would probably be lower communication / more isolation. It doesn't have to be this way of course, but it would require the remote high communication model to be put into action intentionally.

It's worth remembering that this high communication method isn't really scalable too, and that larger teams trying to follow it will find themselves dedicating a larger % of their time to noise. It would take some intentional actions to move away from it as the team grows.

It’s a long time since I used scala and none of this was ever a direct problem, but it was all extra complexity. I think there’s a split between people that appreciate sugar and people that find it not worth the additional complexity.

That problem does lessen with familiarity, but knowing a lot of complexity makes me wary of unknown complexities. It adds an overhead which takes energy that could be better utilised elsewhere.

Oh, come on. What is this?

> people like you

I linked an article on Wikipedia in response to someone’s question. It’s hardly Chinese propaganda. Really?

Is that like Russia's version of the BBC?

You've been posting similar comments all over this thread and it's a bit tiring.

You don't have to like or support what China are doing to acknowledge that the terrorism was real. These are real groups and real documented events that you would be calling terrorism if they'd happened in any other country. Be careful when you start making friends with your enemy's enemy.

There are people that used both including me. But I fell squarely on the Clojure side and haven't written Scala for 7-8 years now.

It's been happening since Obama's Pivot to Asia, it's just a lot more noticeable now since Trump has no subtlety.

These obvious studies aren't just for the yes/no answer. It also provides other data.

Like, if I actively wanted to evade facial recognition then I now know that a black mask is better than a blue mask.

Yes, do that then. 2000 = x, 4000 = 2x, 6000 = 3x, 8000 = 4x

I wouldn't count on it. The aversion to WFH always seemed to be the risk, but now they've already been forced into it and mostly handled it quite well, the unknown isn't unknown any more.

Perhaps understanding how things work is leading to the unhappiness.

There are lots of big problems in the world, too big to be fixed by a single person. Dwelling on these can be depressing, they don't say that ignorance is bliss without a reason.

It is free to the person that receives it.

Imagine I bake and give you a cake, it's still a "free cake" even though I've put the work into baking it and other people have put the work into harvesting the ingredients and bringing them to me.

He doesn't appear to be. He's calling for Americans to exercise their freedom in sacrificing themselves to the virus for the profit of the capitalists.

> but they also recognize that if we radically do less under our current paradigm, the people who are barely scraping by now will be crushed.

It sounds like we should change that current paradigm too then.

We're on the conveyor belt to planetary destruction asking how do we slow it down instead of how do we get off. It won't be easy to get off, but it would be much better if we managed it ourselves rather than waiting to be flung off.

> I think it is giving far too much (or too little?) credit to the powerful to say there is "ignorance at the top". There is not ignorance at the top. They have demonstrably understood this looming crisis for a very long time, and what we are seeing is the expansion and fortification of existing power relationships in the face of it. > If ignorance and lies are being spread at other levels of power, again, I think it's worth asking "by what means?" and "for whose benefit?"

I do agree with you on all of this.