meddlepal

Love it. Also love how triggered the very serious cloud native HN weenies are about this in the comments.

Lighten up folks.

You're not letting city governments get away with anything, the voters, the ones that actually show up, support these measures.

> I never quite understood how to square that view with the desire to keep housing affordable.

It is easy, there is no absolutely no desire to keep housing "affordable" by anyone that owns property in SF.

This is a problem through the US. Property owners vote and do things that are in their favor while renters and people that are trying to enter the market scream it is too expensive.

I somewhat agree, but Java grew up in a different era when communication about these things wasn't as easy. It's hard to change the direction of something as large and widely deployed as Java. It's happening but it will take time and its always going to dealing with its legacy as there just so much of it out there.

> More seriously, what are you missing in Go that is well-done in Java?

1. Generics. And yea, I know Go is getting generics "Real Soon Now" (tm), but it is incredibly annoying to write the same collection code over and over and there's some third-party libs that would really benefit from generics (looking at you Azure Go SDK).

2. Error handling... with the big caveat that I actually like Go's error handling mechanism at small scale but wish there was a good way to chain several operations together and return an error to the top if any failed... I find myself writing a lot of `err != nil` checks in sequence and I've found baking my own abstractions around this to be leaky or difficult to grow as the program requirements change.

3. Diverse collections API.

4. Iterators.

5. Not Java-the-language but the JVM has amazing monitoring tools.

> I assume verbosity of the code is still the defining characteristic of Java?

Pound for pound... I think Go and Java have about the same verbosity. I'm honestly never quite sure what people mean by "verbosity" in Java. Generally I interpret this as "frameworks" but I predicated my OP on the idea that legacy framework bloat is where most of people's frustration with Java lies... not the language itself.

Java gets a bad rap from people that used it late 90's through early 2000's and got burned out by XML and design pattern heavy frameworks but its a lovely language that with a little discipline can be used to create very lean looking code.

Go is one of the HN darling languages and I work in Go everyday for work (and generally like it), but I really wish I could reach for Java most days.

You don't really need to hold out hope for this... it is coming and soon. It's been in active progress for years now (its a huge undertaking).

Thats why he said many not all.

Azures blob service supports the first one. Its strongly consistent and has a lease/lock API. Ive seen leader election and coordination stuff built on top of it.

Dont worry we will all eventually just be working for the military-industrial complex in some form eventually, directly or indirectly. That’s basically the end state.

It's not a threat. It literally has to be mandatory since the decision will have large impacts on the current employees and the company. Employees need to know what they are voting on. It's not as simple as union good, company bad and you're being disingenuous painting it as such.

The union has access to the employees out of work hours.

Why should the union get compensated time to express their position. If the Union wants to comp Amazon access to their employees and lost productivity then sure maybe, but I don't see that being proposed. It's always Amazon who must "give" something.

> This practice really should be banned, IMO. The employer is taking advantage of the fact that the employee typically needs the job to survive.

I assume Amazon is paying for the time these employees have to spend in the mandatory information sessions? I don't see the problem.

Amazon MUST get the opportunity to present its case even if anti-union is not a popular stance. If the deal offered by Amazon is so bad then what is the harm? We should not be shielding people from information because we don't believe they're smart enough to see through it... that reeks of elitist paternalistic thinking.

And Tesla should be allowed every opportunity to stop them.

I guess Tesla broke the law in this case, but I do not really agree with the ruling and the law. Musk should be allowed to present the possible downsides.

Engineers circling the wagons for one of their own. If this was a CEO, politician, broadcaster, or anyone else with an ounce of notability they would probably be calling for their head.