entity345

Yes, it is an app. Not a 'microservice'. That's the point.

It was not disingenuous. You complain too much while avoiding the point.

A very long comment that ignores the one it purports to reply to...

Microservices are called that because they reside within an app that itself provides a service. Otherwise, of course you could call everything and anything 'microservice' but then the term would become meaningless.

Authentication is a service that is obviously used by other microservices, otherwise it would have no use.

But with microservices coupling is as loose as possible.

Your authentication microservice provides an interface (REST or whatever) independent on the underlying implementation and it does not matter how it implemented. As long has the interface 'contract' is fulfilled you can re-implement it from Java to Rails, or move it from here to there, if you wish and that is completely transparent to all other microservices.

Banks and actual currencies still have a bright future.

Don't confuse applications and protocols with microservices.

Microservices are services within an application.

It is intellectual terrorism. I am sorry but sometimes things must be called out even if the feelings of thin-skinned people are hurt.

It is only 'inevitable' because no-one has cared about it and, worse because some try to downplay the issue.

I did not accuse you personally, but you also did not say that it was inevitable, you spread the opinion that it was fine.

Those who claim that it is all good are pushing us to the abyss.

Edit: Downvoting the inconvenient truth won't make it go away.

Considering the current environmental issues this is not absurd at all.

Increased urbanisation is at best marginal in Western countries. This is not what is driving prices.

But top places like London now attract from a global pool of billions.

People need to realise that a world with 10 billion does not look like a world with 2 billion.

Lastly, the planet has trouble with us now... It's terrorism to suggest that 10 billion is just fine.

It was 74% in 1970 (50 years ago). It is not a massive change.

The massive change in urbanisation is happening in developing countries. In developed countries it happened earlier and is not really a thing anymore.

In developed countries things haven't changed that much.

If you look at London (since that's essentially the article), population has actually only reached back to its 1950 level.

But attractive cities can now pull people and investment from a global pool of billions of people and thus the market does its thing and prices move accordingly.