nilptr

> Why can't we build nice things anymore?

Well.. first start by defining "beautiful", we're waiting. Also, it's a 50 year old structure.. we stopped building "nice" things after WW2 mostly because costs were astronomical and new materials and engineering opened up all kinds of avenues for more modern construction.

I've spent decent amount of time in and around Boston City Hall, the biggest problem with the building are:

1. The plaza in front of it is a damn wasteland. So much could be improved by building over the plaza and reestablishing the street grid here properly.

2. The Congress Street side facing Faneuil Hall is a concrete wall and a garage entrance. You probably can't fix the garage problem easily but the concrete wall with a proper structural engineer could probably reopened up.. of course, it would be expensive.

3. The interior while very interesting architecturally is really quite... I dunno, soul sucking. I kind of love the aesthetic inside but only from a "wow this looks cool" perspective.

I dont know how you can read that quote and come away with anything other than "He thinks the programmers are too stupid"

> If you don’t like it, just use something wise.

The reason this stuff comes up is because many folks are forced to use a language for commercial reasons due to job. It's not as simple as just fscking off to use something else you desire. Good luck selling that rewrite.

Two sides of the same coin!

Use something that solves 1000 use cases of which yours is one. Some would say that's simplicity while others would say that's complexity. When it breaks do you know why? Can you fix it properly or are just layering band-aid on a bigger problem inside the component.

Or... build something that solves exactly your use-case but probably doesn't handle the other 1000 use-cases and needs to be put through trial-by-fire to fix all the little edge-cases you forgot about?

Early in my career I opted for #1 but nowadays I generally reach for #2 and really try to nail the core problem I'm tackling and work around the gotchas I encounter.

While not over they have a tough battle ahead. This was a case brought by the Trump Admin and carried on under Biden. I don't see a conservative Federal judge gutting this ruling any more than I do a liberal one.

Incredibly vague, but what it means is that state AG's in incredibly conservative states will not be as easily able to target LGBTQ+ resources.

The federal bureaucracy is often marginally more sane than the state ones because the politics are less localized.

Well OK, you convinced me I want one but that website sucks. How do I buy it?

Microsoft sees ads as an add-on to existing revenue streams. It's core is software and software services.

They couldn't be more different other than both being tech companies.

I use commit history a little bit more than that, but mostly agree. I had another dev recently give me crap about the mess of "WIP" commits on a feature branch because they review by clicking through the commits and my commits don't tell much of a useful story other than I apparently did some shit and eventually it all worked.

That said, I've also come to the conclusion there's basically two classes of Git users: people who really understand Git and use it fully, and those of us who basically use it as a place to shove source code before quitting for the night.

It'll be interesting to see how well the Cybertruck sells... it's rather niche mostly because it's fucking hideous.

> There's no way an "enterprise grade" cloud vendor like AWS would allow co-tenancy of containers (for ECS, Lambda etc) from different customers within a single VM - it's the reason Firecracker exists.

I won't speak for AWS, but your assumption about what "enterprise grade" cloud vendors do is dead wrong. I know, because I'm working on maintaining one of these systems.

> Solving cultural problems with technology generally doesn't work.

Solving cultural problems is indeed difficult but most of us are not going to be at a company long enough to give a shit. The name of they game is taking money off the table and the best way to do that is to deliver value quickly and then move to the next table.

Won for now. Supreme Court decisions are reversible in time.

Eh... I loved SC4, but the peak of the franchise was 2000 and 3000 (either one is fantastic).

SC4 trended heavily towards unnecessary complexity.