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.
> this high communication method isn't really scalable too
True, from what I've seen the threshold lies somewhere at 10-12 people, assuming a mixed team engineering + marketing + etc.
But while you are small you can take advantage, remove all formalities and be in-place as much as possible. You can move so much faster, having trivial respect and ethics in mind, as in don't talk loudly about sales just next to an engineer who seems to be working on something. And vice versa.
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.
If you don't need that "complexity" (I wouldn't call it that), you can use a pure FP or a pure OOP language that will be simpler, smaller, but more restrictive and less expressive. That's a matter of preference of course.
But Scala's syntax and language features are great when you actually make use of them to accomplish your goals, especially so with Scala 3. The syntax isn't excessive or frivolous or nonintuitive. It's a pretty straightforward encoding of the desired feature set of the language.
> Public-sector media (state-funded) is not to be confused with state media (state-controlled), which is "controlled financially and editorially by the state."[1]
They're talking about East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), it's the Uyghur jihadist organization that's conducted a number of terrorist attacks using bombs and knives.
Very interesting. I had heard about people being stabbed at a bus stop back in 2014 but I hadn’t heard of many of these incidents.
Thanks for posting!
It seems like concerns about radical Islam are mounting in both the east and west (see Swedish burka ban, new French laws about stopping radicalization).
I wonder what avenues of unilateral action can be taken by China, the EU and US.
It's a weak propagandist tactic to deflect, with false accusations of "terrorism", from the real geopolitical importance of xinjiang: https://youtu.be/ZxvYcByv2M8
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.
Well if people like you spread pro ccp talking points then I see absolutely no reason why he shouldn't repeatedly post the evidence dismantling your propaganda. The absurdity is that China's reign is a literal reign of terror and misinformation as we already saw in Hong Kong and throughout history, not only in Xinjiang, but in their own territories (Tiananmen Square for instance) or dystopian surveillance and oppression, so accusing them of "terrorism" is just the pot calling the kettle black.
>I linked an article on Wikipedia in response to someone’s question. It’s hardly Chinese propaganda. Really?
What kind of absurd bait and switch is that? I am talking about your propaganda right above. You are omitting years of oppression and terrorism against the uyghur people by the ccp + their genocide while dishonestly highlighting the resistance as the terrorism. That's like saying "yea but the jews tried to kill hitler with bombs, that's terrorism" while omitting the context of what was happening to the jews.
What kind of childish mind games are you playing, smh...
Same, 2010-era FP in Scala was a disaster and also very angry, but I'd say in about 1-2 years FP Scala will be about at the maturity that they imagined they were at in 2010. Still kind of angry though.
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'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.